Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

[Independent thinker]

93 percent of abortions on demand are done before sixteen weeks - they are no one’s business but the woman’s. The rest are mostly by women who wanted to give birth but something changed Still none of my business. DEFINITELY NOT A STATE GOVERNMENT’s BUSINESS TO Force women when they do not want it to take the risk of pregnancy including the later stages when it’s enough of a crisis to add a prosecutor and a sheriff to the medical team

Can you say that women do not have the right to choose after 15 weeks?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Can you say that women do not have the right to choose after 15 weeks?

No. It’s nobody’s business but hers.

 

[Independent thinker]

No. It’s nobody’s business but hers.

So, then you are ok with a woman's right to choose to abort a nine month old fetus and you're argument about 15 weeks is nothing but a pile of shit.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

No. It’s nobody’s business but hers.

Learn to mind your business, fucktard.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Can you say that women do not have the right to choose after 15 weeks?

No. It’s nobody’s business but hers.

So, then you are ok with a woman's right to choose to abort a nine month old fetus and you're argument about 15 weeks is nothing but a pile of shit.

I’m not ok with aborting fetuses at any time except to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest. But that is not what you asked me Saint thnkr in your post #9,201 dated 23.06.14 as you can see in the first quote. You asked me and I quote:

“Can you say that women do not have the right to choose after 15 weeks?”​

​

My answer to that is no because a woman’s right to choose is continually protected by the Constitution because her fetus has not met a live birth as an individual person to be granted state protection or intervention to save his or her viable life before that.

I would support an amendment to the Constitution changing a fetus’ status being equally protected at around 24 weeks in a pregnancy with this stipulation.

If it is presented in the form of a national referendum where only women could vote yes or no to change the Constitution. I believe it would also require a religious exemption for people, such as those in the Jewish religious tradition, who believe that life begins at first breath. They need their religious liberty to be protected as well.
nf.23.06.14 #9,205 to thnkr #9,201 #9,203

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

^ some asshole who has never read the Constitution

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Learn to mind your business, fucktard.

Already do; having read the live birth requirement that is written in the highest law of the land and in the Blackstone Commentaries on Anglo English Common Law at the time our founders wrote it. If you like originalism.

nf.23.06.14 #9,207 to myrpls #9,204

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Already do

No you don’t.

Homicides are happening and you not only don’t want to anything about it, despite this clearly being your business, you want to stop others from doing anything to help save the victims or punish the perpetrators of this needless violence.

I know how to mind my business. You don’t.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Murderers should go to prison

If you kill your kids, then you are a piece of shit who needs to die in prison.

myrpls.23.06.09 #131 “If you kill your kids, then you are a piece of shit who needs to die in prison.”

myrpls.23.06.09 #135 “Murderers should go to prison”

How many women who traveled out of the mandatory gestation slave state where she lives to terminate her pregnancy has been arrested for killing her kid when she returns to the slave state and tries to go home to her Family or to the place where she works.,

When do arrests, prosecutions and imprisonment of fetus murder begin CarsomyrPlusSix if you are so worked up about it and you demand there be gestation slavery even I know very blue state. Why don’t Republicans pass homicide laws to really force a deterrent to any woman who travels out of the Christian Taliban Confederacy to murder her baby?

nf.23.06.14 #9,209

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Pregnancy is now two bodies, not one.

drkwnd.22.06.27 #3 They are always free to do with their body what they wish. Pregnancy is now two bodies, not one. •••• Yes, one is dependent upon the other for a period of time for everything, but that does not give the mother any right to kill it, any more than anyone has a right to use their body to kill anything.​

You say “pregnancy is now two bodies” .

Question: How many weeks does it take for a pregnancy to have two bodies with both bodies having separate and individual neurological systems capable of sustaining the life of each body individually nf.23.06.15

 

[HikerGuy83]

hkrgy.23.06.13 #9,193

If the SCOTUS ruled on LAW. they would have stuck with Common Law and the concept of viability (quickening) instead of ruling in favor of tyranny of the majority state by state as they did with Dobbs.

Yes, following the constitution and the 10th amendment is so tyrannical.

Don't think the SCOTUS really does much with common law.....not that I recall.

This was NEVER their arena to play in. William O. Douglas was a douchebag.

 

[HikerGuy83]

hkrgy.23.06.13 #9,193 “I don't want the SCOTUS ruling based on morals.”

nf.23.06.14 to #9,193 What about state legislatures passing laws based on banning non-harmful private behavior such as termination of an unwanted pregnancy prior to fetal viability.

Legislatures pass laws.

That's what they do.

If there is something unconstutitonal about them (state or federal) the courts respond.

They respond based on legal reasoning.

Not moral reasoning.

Legislators can pass laws for whatever reason they want as long as they don't violate anything.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

There is zero doubt that the fetus is a human being, simply in one of the earliest stages of life

bttrcp.22.06.27 #46 “There is zero doubt that the fetus is a human being, simply in one of the earliest stages of life”

There is zero doubt that a fetus is a fetus and that is why the distinctions required in scientific language refers to a fetus that has no functional human brain, as a potential human being, not a human being. nf.23.06.15

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Legislators can pass laws for whatever reason they want as long as they don't violate anything.

hkrgy.23.06.15 #9,212

Can state legislatures violate a right to avoid physical consequences such as cause harm to a law abiding individual by restricting her access to a safe medical procedure?

The Supreme Court, in a decision written by Justice Blackmun, recognized a privacy interest in abortions. In doing so, the court applied the right to privacy established in Griswold v Connecticut (1965). At stake in this matter was the fundamental right of a woman to decide whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. The underlying values of this right included decisional autonomy and physical consequences (i.e., the interest in bodily integrity)​

​

.https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/roe_v_wade_ %281973%29​

​

nf.23.06.15 #9,214​

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Sedition Supported By Traitors To Us Republic "

* Scrotus Dobbs Decision Is Dumbfounded Sedition *

The SCOTUS rules on LAW.
What has been going on here is a moral discussion.
I don't want the SCOTUS ruling based on morals. That is not their job.

The dobbs decision is dumbfounded and sedition against us 14th , 9th and 1st amendments , so scotus may rule on law , but it had its head up its ass on this one .

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Dictators Without A Clue "

* Sanctimonious Buffoonery Continues To Ignore The Obvious *

So, then you are ok with a woman's right to choose to abort a nine month old fetus and you're argument about 15 weeks is nothing but a pile of shit.

Would it be more medically advisable to have an abortion or be subject to the risk of delivery for severe congenital abnormalities ?

Anencephaly

What is anencephaly in children?

www.stlouischildrens.org

Anencephaly is a condition that is present at birth (birth defect). It affects the brain and skull bones. With this condition, the brain is not fully formed. It often lacks part or all of the cerebrum. The cerebrum is the area of the brain used for thinking, seeing, hearing, touch, and movement. There is also no bone on the back of the head. Bones may also be missing on the front and sides of the head. Anencephaly is a type of neural tube defect. It occurs in about 3 of 10,000 pregnancies in the U.S. each year. The exact number is not known because many of these pregnancies end in miscarriages. This condition most often leads to death in days or weeks.

 

[HikerGuy83]

hkrgy.23.06.15 #9,212

Can state legislatures violate a right to avoid physical consequences such as cause harm to a law abiding individual by restricting her access to a safe medical procedure?

The Supreme Court, in a decision written by Justice Blackmun, recognized a privacy interest in abortions. In doing so, the court applied the right to privacy established in Griswold v Connecticut (1965). At stake in this matter was the fundamental right of a woman to decide whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. The underlying values of this right included decisional autonomy and physical consequences (i.e., the interest in bodily integrity)​

​

.https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/roe_v_wade_ %281973%29​

​

nf.23.06.15 #9,214​

Nice strawman.

1. There is no such right (to avoid physical harm).

2. Griswold and the so-called right to privacy is on life support after Dobbs. As I said earlier, Douglas was a douchebag.

3. This is about the 10th amendment and the lack of anything in the Constitution that connects the federal government to abortion. It was that way for almost 200 years. Dobbs put it back where it belonged.

 

[HikerGuy83]

" Sedition Supported By Traitors To Us Republic "

* Scrotus Dobbs Decision Is Dumbfounded Sedition *

The dobbs decision is dumbfounded and sedition against us 14th , 9th and 1st amendments , so scotus may rule on law , but it had its head up its ass on this one .

Yes, you have an opinion.

Good to know.

 

[HikerGuy83]

" Dictators Without A Clue "

* Sanctimonious Buffoonery Continues To Ignore The Obvious *

Would it be more medically advisable to have an abortion or be subject to the risk of delivery for severe congenital abnormalities ?

Anencephaly

What is anencephaly in children?

www.stlouischildrens.org

Anencephaly is a condition that is present at birth (birth defect). It affects the brain and skull bones. With this condition, the brain is not fully formed. It often lacks part or all of the cerebrum. The cerebrum is the area of the brain used for thinking, seeing, hearing, touch, and movement. There is also no bone on the back of the head. Bones may also be missing on the front and sides of the head. Anencephaly is a type of neural tube defect. It occurs in about 3 of 10,000 pregnancies in the U.S. each year. The exact number is not known because many of these pregnancies end in miscarriages. This condition most often leads to death in days or weeks.

Great point !

This is the kind of thing a state legislature should be thinking about when crafting abortion law.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

hkrgy.23.06.15 #9,212

Can state legislatures violate a right to avoid physical consequences such as cause harm to a law abiding individual by restricting her access to a safe medical procedure?

a) there is no such right
b) when homicide is made illegal, killers are not law-abiding, by definition, you stupid asshole
c) contract killings are not safe, by definition, you stupid asshole
d) contract killings are not medical, by definition, you stupid asshole

The Supreme Court, in a decision written by Justice Blackmun​

A lying piece of shit. His grave should be a national toilet.

recognized a privacy interest in abortions​

Made up a steaming pile of shit, which only illiterate morons could possibly believe in

. In doing so, the court applied the right to privacy established in Griswold v Connecticut​

Another lie, another pile of shit that should be overturned. There is no “right to privacy” and even if there were there is no reasonable basis for concluding the slim amount of text that could possibly support it means that states can’t ban pills, or can’t ban homicide.

Griswold is nonsense on stilts, just like Roe. No basis whatsoever in the text. Just absolute judicial activism, absolute federal tyranny. No wonder you like it, bootlicker.

the fundamental right of a woman to decide whether or not to terminate her pregnancy​

This is not a right - never was, and never will be, you monstrous filth. You stupid asshole.