Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

[NotfooledbyW]

Look, the woman, as long as it wAS consensual PUT HERSELF IN THE SPECIAL SITUATION.

NFBW: This is a Constitutional and human rights question that was already settled by the Supreme Court based upon “viability” and “privacy” fifty years ago. That institution is where woman right to control her own body should have stayed protected.

You sound like you want women to go to church and forget about having liberty in a country founded by white males.

 

[HeyNorm]

NFBW: This is a Constitutional and human rights question that was already settled by the Supreme Court based upon “viability” and “privacy” fifty years ago. That institution is where woman right to control her own body should have stayed protected.

You sound like you want women to go to church and forget about having liberty in a country founded by white males.

I could care less if anyone goes to church. My worry is your arbitrary use of viability, and the potential discriminatory reasoning behind it.

If two individuals are similarly situated, both must be given equal rights.

Your argument is that they do not. Such arguments were used to enslave people.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

If two individuals are similarly situated, both must be given equal rights.

NFBW: The Supreme Court justices with their great legal and constitutional minds had no issue with your stupid “similarly situated” malarkey because it’s not about assigning personhood to fetuses at whatever exact moment an individual fetus crosses a line able to breathe from the earth’s atmosphere and potentially survive.

So why must I take word your word over great legal minds that “similarly situated” means anything at all to a discussion about women’s reproductive rights and Roe v Wade being overturned.

BTW They did not rule against privacy or that in favor of a fetus’s personhood or fetal right to life. They decided states could regulate the access to a safe place to have an abortion but that’s it. Alito also said this:

“For our part, we do not question the motives of either those who have supported and those who have opposed laws restricting abortion,” Sam Alito..

END2301272253

 

[HeyNorm]

NFBW: The Supreme Court justices with their great legal and constitutional minds had no issue with your stupid “similarly situated” malarkey because it’s not about assigning personhood to fetuses at whatever exact moment an individual fetus crosses a line able to breathe from the earth’s atmosphere and potentially survive.

So why must I take word your word over great legal minds that “similarly situated” means anything at all to a discussion about women’s reproductive rights and Roe v Wade being overturned.

BTW They did not rule against privacy or that in favor of a fetus’s personhood or fetal right to life. They decided states could regulate the access to a safe place to have an abortion but that’s it. Alito also said this:

“For our part, we do not question the motives of either those who have supported and those who have opposed laws restricting abortion,” Sam Alito..

END2301272253

We already know you care nothing about discriminating against minorities.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

We already know you care nothing about discriminating against minorities.

NFBW: Nonsense. I brought this up
almost a year ago. You still want to kill black women more than white by restricting abortion and forcing child birth against women’s will.

From the AFP link in my post 810 below:

Limiting access to abortion -- as conservative-led states have increasingly done in recent years -- is also linked to worse maternal health outcomes a 2021 study in the American Journal of Public Health found.​

NFBW220223-#810 We cannot expect Mashmont and Trump voters here to read this but it’s here for the record of Trumpisms low and non-existent morality on issues of race and health.

US maternal mortality soars amid widening racial disparities Agence France-Presse​

February 23, 2022​

​

The US maternal mortality rate -- already the worst in the industrialized world -- rose in 2020 to its highest level in half a century, with Black women three times more likely to die than white women, data showed Wednesday. A National Center for Health Statistics report showed the rate was 23.8...​

END2301280039

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Cplus6230127-#346 “A state legislature could absolutely at their next session pass a bill and then these human beings would be people, at least in one civilized state. “
^^
Blues Man230227-#347 • Blues Man “A single cell is not a person PERIOD.”

NFBW: No Cplus6 There is no Santa Clause or Easter Bunny or that single cell for twelve hours of its existence is not a person and will never be legislated into becoming a separate person while it exists inside a 30 trillion cell person’s body.

No state legislators can pass a law to make Santa Claus a real person with it’s own biologically functioning brain, a heart, and actusk lungs operating in the profound atmosphere of our beloved planet.

The Christian Taliban religious right can vote for Confederate traitors as lawmakers until they are blue in the face with religious zealotry anger but they will never vote for this

to become anything more than what scientists refer to as a living human organism.

As an atheist @Cplus6 you should have known better to marry your scientific mind into the Christian fundamentalist ‘Easter Bunny rose from the dead’ political mobocracy because fundamentalist religion and scientific gasoline can become a very dangerous mix in a self governing experiment such as our own.

When Christian fundamentalists start passing laws and a Catholic dominated Supreme Court endorses this brainless heartless lungless skinless one-cell as an equal person to it’s mother our Democratic Republic will be doomed because half our population will be reduced to reproduction machines in order to please the one and only true God of the American Christian Taliban. FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE WILL BE NO MORE.

END2301280752

 

[NotfooledbyW]

HeyNorm230127-#6,940 You keep making this absurd 24 week exception as though a 23 week fetus may have actually progressed beyond many 24 week fetuses.

It’s not an exception to the status of the actual functional development of a particular fetus. It is an exception to the right of privacy and bodily autonomy of the mother that ends based on practical reasonableness of when the woman’s right to elective abortion cones to a reasonable expectation of being denied.

END2301280821

 

[beagle9]

Is that scumbag seriously denying that he regards human beings as property when he believes mothers own their unborn kid and can dispose of them on a whim?

Patently ridiculous.

Eggboy over here is just the most disingenuous trash imaginable on a political debate forum, and he mixes it in with so much noise. He’s an infinite time sink of self-contradictions, blatant ignorance, disinformation, and other such bullshit.

You are exactly right, that he seems to think (just like other leftist), that a human being that is developing in a mother's womb (notice I didn't say birthing person's womb ), is basically "property" that she can just dispose of on a whim. So he is in support of an uncivilized SOCIETY just like we see going on in Leftist world big time these days.

 

[HeyNorm]

NFBW: Nonsense. I brought this up
almost a year ago. You still want to kill black women more than white by restricting abortion and forcing child birth against women’s will.

From the AFP link in my post 810 below:

Limiting access to abortion -- as conservative-led states have increasingly done in recent years -- is also linked to worse maternal health outcomes a 2021 study in the American Journal of Public Health found.​

NFBW220223-#810 We cannot expect Mashmont and Trump voters here to read this but it’s here for the record of Trumpisms low and non-existent morality on issues of race and health.

US maternal mortality soars amid widening racial disparities Agence France-Presse​

February 23, 2022​

​

The US maternal mortality rate -- already the worst in the industrialized world -- rose in 2020 to its highest level in half a century, with Black women three times more likely to die than white women, data showed Wednesday. A National Center for Health Statistics report showed the rate was 23.8...​

END2301280039

You are the one who sat an arbitrary time frame. Won’t stand up to to legal scrutiny.

 

[beagle9]

You are the one who sat an arbitrary time frame. Won’t stand up to to legal scrutiny.

He's trying everything he can.. lol

 

[NotfooledbyW]

You are the one who sat an arbitrary time frame. Won’t stand up to to legal scrutiny.

NFBW: Not me. It was Justice Harry Blackmun back in 1973. Viability has stood up to legal scrutiny Post-Dobbs as well


NFBW230121-#6,815 Nixon appointee to the Supreme Court in 1970…. Justice Harry Blackmun, writing the majority opinion for Roe, defined viability as the point where a fetus “has the capability of meaningful life outside the mother’s womb”:

With respect to the State’s important and legitimate interest in potential life, the “compelling” point is at viability. This is so because the fetus then presumably has the capability of meaningful life outside the mother’s womb. State regulation protective of fetal life after viability thus has both logical and biological justifications. If the State is interested in protecting fetal life after viability, it may go so far as to proscribe abortion during that period, except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.​

•
BluesMan230119-#238 Blues Man • Again you fixate on late term abortion when I already told you I have always thought fetal viability should be the line and in fact abortions occurring after 21 weeks is the exception not the rule. I'll repeat myself yet again 93% of all abortions occur before week 13. •••• And you always resort to name calling which tells me you have nothing intelligent to contribute to this discussion
^
^
HeyNorm230119-#239 •••• Not fixated on late term abortions at all. I’m fixated on the legal standard of similarly situated persons.
^
^
BluesMan230120-#246 That has nothing to do with the subject. •••• And fetuses do not have any civil rights. And they never should because IF you want a fetus to have the full compliment of rights you then have to say that the rights of the unborn supersede the rights of the pregnant woman
^
^
HeyNorm230120-#249 • It is the pregnant woman that consented to the creation of the being that are afforded these rights.

NFBW: How it happens has no bearing on this

Having personhood along with the rights that come with being born.

END2301280954

 

[hadit]

when one kills a human being because one drove too fast, lost control and slammed into their car would the dead person be “viable outside the womb” in order for one to kill them.

Your condition would be more correct if stated according to reality I am “willing to destroy a not viable human life just so that not viable human life does not make my body fat for 9 months and have a potential to kill me.”

The viability argument goes out the window when you remember that there are many people who are not viable without constant support and care by machines and other people, just like an unborn child. If you had taken a saw and cut Chris Reeve into pieces after his head hit that rock, you would have gone to prison for a long time. Heck, if his wife had unplugged his respirator, saying she should not be forced to keep him alive because he was unviable, she would have been charged in his death.

 

[HeyNorm]

The viability argument goes out the window when you remember that there are many people who are not viable without constant support and care by machines and other people, just like an unborn child. If you had taken a saw and cut Chris Reeve into pieces after his head hit that rock, you would have gone to prison for a long time.

Indeed, and the viability goal post changes with scientific advancements as well. And therefor is arbitrary

At one time blacks were subhuman. 3/5th the value of whites. We’ve advanced past that, although it appears that some would prefer we regress.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

NFBW230127-#6,933 • “Your condition would be more correct if stated according to reality I am “willing to destroy a not viable human life just so that not viable human life does not make my body fat for 9 months and have a potential to kill me.”
^^
Hadit230128-#6,952 • The viability argument goes out the window when you remember that there are many people who are not viable without constant support and care by machines and other people, just like an unborn child.

NFBW: Actually hadit “viability” cannot go out the window because the fact that you and HeyNorm each exist in a biological human body on the human lifespan continuum from the moment conception to the moment of death. You yourself are physically past the moment as a fetus while in your mother’s womb when your physiological development at around 24 weeks hath become sufficient to survive in the atmosphere of planet earth with a whole lot of human beings with machines working their asses off to keep you alive. Steve Reeves passed that once in a lifetime moment too. Your point is not viable hadit.

END2391281018

 

[beagle9]

The viability argument goes out the window when you remember that there are many people who are not viable without constant support and care by machines and other people, just like an unborn child. If you had taken a saw and cut Chris Reeve into pieces after his head hit that rock, you would have gone to prison for a long time. Heck, if his wife had unplugged his respirator, saying she should not be forced to keep him alive because he was unviable, she would have been charged in his death.

Great points... Now he'll go to "they weren't threaten by having a health related connection" (other than stress etc), otherwise to the one's they are caretaking for.

So we could say or add that "yes", their live's we're threatened by health related issues arising from the care taking chores of caring for an Alzheimer's patient etc.

So would he then say that because of those health issues, that the caretaker or family member should be relieved of their positions by the state possibly acquiring the services of a doctor Kevorkian, and does he think Kevorkian's practices should have been legalized as well ?? Let's see what he says in response, because that's his other angle on the reasoning for the mother to abort her perfectly fine pregnancy if she feels threatened by it.

 

[HeyNorm]

NFBW230127-#6,933 • “Your condition would be more correct if stated according to reality I am “willing to destroy a not viable human life just so that not viable human life does not make my body fat for 9 months and have a potential to kill me.”
^^
Hadit230128-#6,952 • The viability argument goes out the window when you remember that there are many people who are not viable without constant support and care by machines and other people, just like an unborn child.

NFBW: Actually hadit “viability” cannot go out the window because the fact that you and HeyNorm each exist in a biological human body on the human lifespan continuum from the moment conception to the moment of death. You yourself are physically past the moment as a fetus while in your mother’s womb when your physiological development at around 24 weeks hath become sufficient to survive in the atmosphere of planet earth with a whole lot of human beings with machines working their asses off to keep you alive. Steve Reeves passed that once in a lifetime moment too. Your point is not viable hadit.

END2391281018

Oh it certainly is as viable, maybe more so, as yours. As has been pointed out before, a newborn, while still connected to the cord is similarly situated to a fetus moments before birth. The newborn, according to you, is granted all civil rights. Therefore the pre birth fetus must be granted same.

That is consistent with current legal standards.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

The newborn, according to you, is granted all civil rights. Therefore the pre birth fetus must be granted same.

NFBW: The newborn baby becomes a person at birth just like Jesus and all the rest of us. The pre birth fetus is not similarly situated to the newborn child until it breathes the oxygen infused air into its lungs and begins oxygenating his/her own blood.

If a fetus after the cord is cut cannot oxygenate its own blood it dies. That is not similar in any way to a fetus after cutting the cord who lives.

END2301281044

 

[NotfooledbyW]

So we could say or add that "yes", their live's we're threatened by health related issues arising from the care taking chores of caring for an Alzheimer's patient

I must ask you is the Alzheimer’s patient inside of the caretakers body?

 

[beagle9]

NFBW: The newborn baby becomes a person at birth just like Jesus and all the rest of us. The pre birth fetus is not similarly situated to the newborn child until it breathes the oxygen infused air into its lungs and begins oxygenating his/her own blood.

If a fetus after the cord is cut cannot oxygenate its own blood it dies. That is not similar in any way to a fetus after cutting the cord who lives.

END2301281044

A fetus/baby born into the world after cutting the cord could definitely die if can't oxygenate it's own blood, but that doesn't make that fetus/baby any less alive as a human until that heart stops beating.

 

[beagle9]

I must ask you is the Alzheimer’s patient inside of the caretakers body?

Makes no difference..