Roe vs Wade Is a Bad Ruling

[Lisa558]

that is if she lives in a state that will even give her that much time. what if she doesn't & needs to raise the cash so she can cross state lines? according to texas law - even THAT isn't an option.

then too bad? a bounty is a bounty.

right?

The money leftists give to Planned Parenthood for abortions can be redirected to a “bus across state lines fund”. Problem solved.

99% of these unwanted pregnancies are due to sloppiness and lack of responsibility with using birth control. Maybe if people in the “strict states,” knowing they will have the inconvenience of a bus ride, will use birth control. If you’re old enough to have sex, you’re old enough to use birth control.

 

[Lisa558]

Less than 1% chance of dying from COVID. A woman who goes for an abortion has a 100% chance of killing the life Inside her.

So you have no reasonable response. Just say “fail.”

According to your logic, we should outlaw driving. Every time you get in a car, you risk killing someone in a fatal accident. Much More of a risk than someone dying from COVID you spread.

So, you are opposed to people driving. Right?

 

[playtime]

The money leftists give to Planned Parenthood for abortions can be redirected to a “bus across state lines fund”. Problem solved.

silly you ... thinking it's just 'leftists'.

99% of these unwanted pregnancies are due to sloppiness and lack of responsibility with using birth control. Maybe if people in the “strict states,” knowing they will have the inconvenience of a bus ride, will use birth control. If you’re old enough to have sex, you’re old enough to use birth control.

how utterly .... typical.

 

[playtime]

So you have no reasonable response. Just say “fail.”

because it was a bigley fail.

According to your logic, we should outlaw driving.

you had to stretch for that one, didn'tcha?

Every time you get in a car, you risk killing someone in a fatal accident.

except when you do get into a car, you do what it takes NOT to have that happen by NOT being negligent.

Much More of a risk than someone dying from COVID you spread.

787,000 deaths from 2019 - date from covid

vs


36,000 car accident fatalities in 2019. 42,000 in 2020.

i'm willing to bet that 700,000 deaths haven't occurred so far in 2021.

So, you are opposed to people driving. Right?

<pfffft>

dismissed.

 

[Lisa558]

because it was a bigley fail.


you had to stretch for that one, didn'tcha?



except when you do get into a car, you do what it takes NOT to have that happen by NOT being negligent.




787,000 deaths from 2019 - date from covid

vs


36,000 car accident fatalities in 2019. 42,000 in 2020.

i'm willing to bet that 700,000 deaths haven't occurred so far in 2021.



<pfffft>

dismissed.

Impossible to debate with your crazy responses. Over and out.

 

[playtime]

Impossible to debate with your crazy responses. Over and out.

same here, sweetcakes.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Yes, Overturn Roe | National Review


Ten Legal Reasons to Reject Roe | USCCB

Let's hear it from legal scholars

Wrong.

Roe/Casey is the progeny of Griswold v. Connecticut and Eisenstadt v. Baird – the reasonable, appropriate reaffirmation of the right to privacy limiting the authority of the state, prohibiting government from interfering with personal decisions such as whether to have a child or not.

Those who wish to see Roe/Casey overturned seek only more government, bigger government at the expense of individual liberty.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I agree that it should be a state matter.

Also wrong.

As with our other rights and protected liberties, the right to privacy is not dependent upon one’s state of residence.

Our rights and protected liberties are not subject to the capricious whims of partisan politics.

 

[badbob85037]

Yes, Overturn Roe | National Review


Ten Legal Reasons to Reject Roe | USCCB

Let's hear it from legal scholars

No law will keep a murdering bitch from using a coat hanger on her kid.

 

[Lisa558]

Also wrong.

As with our other rights and protected liberties, the right to privacy is not dependent upon one’s state of residence.

Our rights and protected liberties are not subject to the capricious whims of partisan politics.

Right to privacy doesn’t mean you can kill at whim.

 

[Viktor]

I'm about as pro-choice as they come but I think that RvW was a very bad decision based on it's merits.

Thing is we are into three generations living under the results of the decision and if the pro-life/holy-roller crowd thinks that the abortion genie is going to pushed back into the bottle they have another think coming to them.

Even if RvW is struck down and the issue went back to the states abortion would still exist in some form in every state and given our ever more mobile society it's not much of a much to simply travel to a more abortion friendly state to have the deed done.

Since when does any person get to choose when a baby dies?????????????????????Prochoice my ass.

 

[1srelluc]

Since when does any person get to choose when a baby dies?????????????????????Prochoice my ass.

About 62 million women have thus far since RvW.

 

[JoeB131]

About 62 million women have thus far since RvW.

Which is the problem, isn't it.

When the usual suspects advocated for legalized abortion, they promised us it wouldn't become contraception by other means, but that's exactly what it has become.

If we were only talking about therapuetic abortions, this wouldn't be a controversial issue.

Abortion may be every woman's right, but it's a poor form of birth control.

 

[1srelluc]

Which is the problem, isn't it.

When the usual suspects advocated for legalized abortion, they promised us it wouldn't become contraception by other means, but that's exactly what it has become.

If we were only talking about therapuetic abortions, this wouldn't be a controversial issue.

Abortion may be every woman's right, but it's a poor form of birth control.

Meh, just putting a number out there, I'm not speaking to their motivations. Not my monkey, not my circus.

 

[playtime]

Since when does any person get to choose when a baby dies?????????????????????Prochoice my ass.

 

[Lisa558]

Very deceptive to show a photo of a speem fertilizing an egg, as if to imply that’s the point at which women abort. Nobody even knows they’re pregnant.

But it’s what leftists do: downplay things. Look up a photo of a baby at the 26 week point, and post THAT,

 

[playtime]

Very deceptive to show a photo of a speem fertilizing an egg, as if to imply that’s the point at which women abort. Nobody even knows they’re pregnant.

same goes for that '6 week' cutoff, sweetcakes. & some are trying to pass legislation to grant full personhood to a fertilized egg.

But it’s what leftists do: downplay things. Look up a photo of a baby at the 26 week point, and post THAT,

like i said - you are quite mistaken to only think 'leftists' are pro choice.... but i digress.


anyhoo - a 26 week old fetus is viable ... & roe v wade has that language built right in.

 

[Lisa558]

The same does NOT go for the six-week cut-off. Women know they’re pregnant by then.

An of course a 26-week fetus is viable. Then why are people getting abortions so late that the baby is born alive, and the doctor drops it in the trash can to die?

There needs to be a reasonable compromise: abortion up to the point where you are not causing excruciating pain to a fetus while it is being robbed of life. Have you no heart? I’d say 16 weeks. That gives the woman about 3 months to decide whether she wants to abort the fetus, or allow it to grow.

 

[Lisa558]

I wish there was no “disagree” button. If gives people who can’t argue a point an option of just saying “nu-uh” with nothing behind it.

To the poster who just disagreed with me about having a compromise for abortion, allowing a woman up to three months’ after she learns her failure to use birth control has resulted in a pregnancy (99% of instances), you‘re saying NO to compromise? That a woman should be able to kill a near-term fetus, exacting excruciating pain as its life is robbed from it, and there should be NO restrictions?

IOW, are you taking the “my way or the highway” approach to policies?

 

[playtime]

The same does NOT go for the six-week cut-off. Women know they’re pregnant by then.

that's if a woman is lucky enough to have a reliable cycle.

& even if she is - do the math...

she ovulates, then 2 weeks later she doesn't get her period.

OOPS! she's already 2 weeks pregnant, reducing her time to CHOOSE, making it only 4 weeks. if she has to gather cash, travel, perhaps lie to get time off from work - that puts her in an 'undue burden' situation, & strips her of her 14th amendment right.