Roe v. Wade was wrong and so is the SCOTUS.

[TheNightFly]

Women's right to abortion is necessitated by our right to consent, not by our right to privacy. Our right to privacy just means they don't have to give anyone an explanation. The way consent works is that it only applies to the person you give it to, it cannot automatically transfer to other people, and it can be withdrawn at any time. The consent that a woman gives to a man for sex only applies to him and for sex. It does not apply to other members of his family or his friends or to a pregnancy with a baby who doesn't even exist yet.

Unborn babies have the same rights and obligations as the rest of us. That includes a right to life and an obligation to obtain consent. Without consent, a pregnancy becomes an assault, just as sex becomes rape ,and it's irrelevant how or why it happens, whether by accident or intent. We all have a right to defend ourselves from assault and the government is obligated to support us in that endeavor. Since abortion is the only means of stopping a non-consensual pregnancy, the government is obligated to ensure that women always have access to it.

The purpose of abortion is to end a non-consensual pregnancy, not to kill the baby. The baby still has a right to life and abortionists should make every effort to save the baby without injury when possible while performing an abortion or face murder charges. If our goal is to save babies lives then we should only ban abortion until most babies can survive and to ban all methods of abortion that involve harming the baby- poisoning, exsanguination, dismemberment etc. Banning abortion after the heartbeat is not about saving babies, it's about persecuting women under religious doctrine. There is no way to ban abortion without establishing a precedent that women have no right to self defense and therefore no right to consent.

 

[deannalw]

Unborn babies have the same rights and obligations as the rest of us. That includes a right to life and an obligation to obtain consent. Without consent, a pregnancy becomes an assault, just as sex becomes rape ,and it's irrelevant how or why it happens, whether by accident or intent. We all have a right to defend ourselves from assault and the government is obligated to support us in that endeavor. Since abortion is the only means of stopping a non-consensual pregnancy, the government is obligated to ensure that women always have access to it.

You are crazy in a real scary way.

 

[Ridgerunner]

TheNightFly while I don't agree with some of the things you have stated, I want to give you credit for thinking above and beyond some of these whack jobs and their murderous ways...

 

[Asclepias]

I cant fathom how insulting it must be for women to deal with this shit where people are trying to control what they do with their bodies.

 

[task0778]

IMHO, Roe v Wade was classic judicial activism, legislating from the bench. Nowhere in our Constitution does it mention a woman's right to choose to have an abortion, and BTW nowhere in the Constitution does it mention the right to privacy either. Decisions about abortion should have been left in the hands of the legislative branch, at the state or federal level. IOW, it was a bullshit ruling by a liberal court that should tell you what will happen if the democrats ever gain control of the SCOTUS or pack the court with enough liberals. And don't think for a second they won't do exactly that as soon as they have enough votes to abolish the filibuster.

 

[airplanemechanic]

I cant fathom how insulting it must be for women to deal with this shit where people are trying to control what they do with their bodies.

We don't care what they do with their bodies, it's the bodies of the babies that we care about.

 

[Asclepias]

it's the bodies of the babies that we care about.

If you really cared you would carry the child to term for the female that doesn't want the parasite in her. Have you volunteered to do that?

 

[deannalw]

I cant fathom how insulting it must be for women to deal with this shit where people are trying to control what they do with their bodies.

I don't care what they do with their body. Seriously- I haven't one fuck to give. They can beat themselves in their head with a ball peen hammer. Yay them!

It's the other body being murdered that matters to me.

 

[deannalw]

We don't care what they do with their bodies, it's the bodies of the babies that we care about.

Ya beat me!

 

[Asclepias]

It's the other body being murdered that matters to me.

Prove it by carrying the child to term. If you're not going to do that you're just full of shit.

 

[Asclepias]

Ya beat me!

He beat you off? Why would you say something like that on this topic?

 

[Ridgerunner]

IMHO, Roe v Wade was classic judicial activism, legislating from the bench. Nowhere in our Constitution does it mention a woman's right to choose to have an abortion, and BTW nowhere in the Constitution does it mention the right to privacy either.

And no where does the constitution guarantee Government Medical Care...

 

[Ridgerunner]

If you really cared you would carry the child to term for the female that doesn't want the parasite in her. Have you volunteered to do that?

Roe v Wade is going down the drain... So you can get a grip on yourself and

 

[Asclepias]

And no where does the constitution guarantee Government Medical Care...

"Provide for the general welfare...."

 

[Asclepias]

Roe v Wade is going down the drain... So you can get a grip on yourself and

Not where I live thank god.

 

[Ridgerunner]

"Provide for the general welfare...."

 

[whitehall]

There is no shortage of bad Supreme Court decisions in the 20th century. A former KKK member wrote the majority opinion that justified FDR's notorious #9066 executive order that justified the incarceration of American citizens without due process. Roe was another bad decision based more on social expediency than Constitutional law. The Court found a "right to privacy" that did not exist to justify the killing of the unborn.

 

[Asclepias]

You forgot about that one eh?

 

[Ridgerunner]

You forgot about that one eh?

Commentators virtually agree on the answer Madison proposed and defended in Federalist 41, namely, that the general welfare clause is neither a statement of ends nor a substantive grant of power. It is a mere “synonym” for the enumeration of particular powers, which are limited and wholly define its content.

Madison on the Meaning of the “General Welfare,” the “Purpose” of Enumerated Powers, and the “Definition” of Constitutional Government

Abstract. According to James Madison, “the most important and fundamental question” he ever addressed was the meaning of and relation between the general welfar

academic.oup.com

 

[Asclepias]

Commentators virtually agree on the answer Madison proposed and defended in Federalist 41, namely, that the general welfare clause is neither a statement of ends nor a substantive grant of power. It is a mere “synonym” for the enumeration of particular powers, which are limited and wholly define its content.

Madison on the Meaning of the “General Welfare,” the “Purpose” of Enumerated Powers, and the “Definition” of Constitutional Government

Abstract. According to James Madison, “the most important and fundamental question” he ever addressed was the meaning of and relation between the general welfar

academic.oup.com

One mans opinion doesn't mean much of shit.