SCOTUS Declines To Hear Case Granting Fetal Personhood Rights

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Funny how it wasn't unconstitutional for over almost 50 years and now these lying creeps say it's unconstitutional. It isn't and it wasn't.

It was always unconstitutional.

Can you read English?

 

[Stann]

Roe v Wade was abject tyranny, a fiction based on the shadow of the also fictional “right to privacy” and then enforced against the states appropriate of nothing.


Well you’ll be happy to know that previous law was never repealed and is now in force again. But it’s incredibly lax and penalties are far too weak, hopefully we can fix that.

LOL, what else could I expect from you.

 

[Stann]

It was always unconstitutional.

Can you read English?

It was constitutional, it was the law of the land until they ruled it unconstitutional by a minority opinion with three judges appointed by trump who perjured themselves under oath when they testified before Congress. So now we have criminals on the supreme Court.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

It was constitutional

Next time just say “No, I am illiterate and cannot read a short plain English document that is readily publicly available and that every schoolchild should be able to summarize if not quote.”

There is no “right to abortion” in the text.

There is no “right to privacy” in the text.

No claim of a “right to abortion” will EVER be constitutionally valid unless you pass an constitutional amendment, and at that point secession or civil war would be obligatory.

The 10th Amendment exists. Learn to read and then read it.

who perjured themselves under oath when they testified before Congress

Please refrain from being a retarded liar if you can manage that.

 

[Stann]

Next time just say “No, I am illiterate and cannot read a short plain English document that is readily publicly available and that every schoolchild should be able to summarize if not quote.”

There is no “right to abortion” in the text.

There is no “right to privacy” in the text.

No claim of a “right to abortion” will EVER be constitutionally valid unless you pass an constitutional amendment, and at that point secession or civil war would be obligatory.

The 10th Amendment exists. Learn to read and then read it.


Please refrain from being a retarded liar if you can manage that.

I'm sorry I'm not going to believe a word a psychopath like you says.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

I'm sorry I'm not going to believe a word a psychopath like you says.

So that’s a “no” on you choosing not to be a retarded liar, then.

 

[Stann]

So that’s a “no” on you choosing not to be a retarded liar, then.

There is something wrong with you maybe that's it. Good luck.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Well in the case of Roe versus Wade they made a right wing decision because Trump installed three liars on the court who Purge themselves under oath and then went with a minority opinion to circumvent the law. It is overwhelmingly right wing. What I said was they can't subvert the law entirely that's why they denied trump's appeal. Most things within reason and in accordance with the law. Repeating settled law is a really bad idea.

So, did roe make abortion a cotus right, or did it simply say that women had a right to privacy?

Also, you say they made a right wing decision...so then I guess you could say that when roe was first decided, it was a left wing decision. I say the supreme court doesn't have the power to make that decision at all. That would be a states rights issue, certainly not a federal issue, and the scotus was simply undoing something that it should have never done in the first place.

 

[Stann]

So, did roe make abortion a cotus right, or did it simply say that women had a right to privacy?

Also, you say they made a right wing decision...so then I guess you could say that when roe was first decided, it was a left wing decision. I say the supreme court doesn't have the power to make that decision at all. That would be a states rights issue, certainly not a federal issue, and the scotus was simply undoing something that it should have never done in the first place.

Maybe you weren't alive back then but I was I was a young man and women were killing themselves left and right because of the egregious abortion laws States had I think Texas was the worst and that's the case they used. It was the right decision because the states had overstepped their authority and put in laws that were unjust. I consider any abortion law by the courts or the state illegal and out of their jurisdiction. It's a medical procedure my God. The decision needs to be left between the doctor and the woman. You can play word games all you watch it doesn't matter if not right. Women do not deserve to be second class citizens. And if you don't have control of your own body what rights do you have period.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Maybe you weren't alive back then but I was I was a young man and women were killing themselves left and right because of the egregious abortion laws States had I think Texas was the worst and that's the case they used. It was the right decision because the states had overstepped their authority and put in laws that were unjust. I consider any abortion law by the courts or the state illegal and out of their jurisdiction. It's a medical procedure my God. The decision needs to be left between the doctor and the woman. You can play word games all you watch it doesn't matter if not right. Women do not deserve to be second class citizens. And if you don't have control of your own body what rights do you have period.

women were killing themselves left and right because of the egregious abortion laws States had I think Texas was the worst and that's the case they used.

Sure, but back then there were a lot of shady actors performing abortions. It wasn't sanitary or good at all. Nowadays, the procedure is common, safe, and sanitary, and, despite some states banning it, will always be available. And to top it off, there are groups, and I think some states that have set up funds to pay for the entire expense of having an abortion, including travel.

I consider any abortion law by the courts or the state illegal and out of their jurisdiction.

Except the court that makes abortion legal, you'd support them making laws on abortion then, right?

It's a medical procedure my God. The decision needs to be left between the doctor and the woman

I agree, it is a medical procedure. Since when does the supreme court, or the Federal government have the authority to make a law that force states to allow medical procedures?

It does need to be between doctor and the patient, my only gripe here is the courts making "law" and the federal government overstepping its bounds.

I wouldn't support a federal abortion ban for the same reason I wouldn't support them making abortion legal federally. It's not for them to decide.

And if you don't have control of your own body what rights do you have period.

This is the lie they have perpetuated to push their pro abortion agenda. The old "republicans want to control women's bodies" trope.

Nobody wants to control women. How about this: if you are a woman, and you want to get on tik tok and punch yourself in the face for 30 minutes, go for it, nobody is going to stop you. If you are a woman, and you want to surgically attach a horn to your head, and call yourself a unicorn, feel free, you'll get no resistance. If you want to cut your hair off and have it glued to your arm pits, you'll not get any pushback. It's not until you are trying to mess with what other people consider "life" that they take a stand. Beyond that, nobody cares what a woman does, and nobody is trying to control them.

 

[Stann]

Sure, but back then there were a lot of shady actors performing abortions. It wasn't sanitary or good at all. Nowadays, the procedure is common, safe, and sanitary, and, despite some states banning it, will always be available. And to top it off, there are groups, and I think some states that have set up funds to pay for the entire expense of having an abortion, including travel.



Except the court that makes abortion legal, you'd support them making laws on abortion then, right?



I agree, it is a medical procedure. Since when does the supreme court, or the Federal government have the authority to make a law that force states to allow medical procedures?

It does need to be between doctor and the patient, my only gripe here is the courts making "law" and the federal government overstepping its bounds.

I wouldn't support a federal abortion ban for the same reason I wouldn't support them making abortion legal federally. It's not for them to decide.



This is the lie they have perpetuated to push their pro abortion agenda. The old "republicans want to control women's bodies" trope.

Nobody wants to control women. How about this: if you are a woman, and you want to get on tik tok and punch yourself in the face for 30 minutes, go for it, nobody is going to stop you. If you are a woman, and you want to surgically attach a horn to your head, and call yourself a unicorn, feel free, you'll get no resistance. If you want to cut your hair off and have it glued to your arm pits, you'll not get any pushback. It's not until you are trying to mess with what other people consider "life" that they take a stand. Beyond that, nobody cares what a woman does, and nobody is trying to control them.

Just as there is no pro-life movement, there is no pro abortion group. There are women who hate abortion for whatever reason. There are people who respect women to make the decisions they need in their lives. Your comparisons are idiotic. This is a step backwards not a step forwards. We are not a authoritarian state and abortion laws are really out of the question anymore. We're supposed to be all grown ups. And no one is supposed to control another person.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Just as there is no pro-life movement, there is no pro abortion group. There are women who hate abortion for whatever reason. There are people who respect women to make the decisions they need in their lives. Your comparisons are idiotic. This is a step backwards not a step forwards. We are not a authoritarian state and abortion laws are really out of the question anymore. We're supposed to be all grown ups. And no one is supposed to control another person.

My comparisons are spot on. Nobody wants to control women. That is a lie perpetuated by the left to gin people up, its a talking point. Nobody cares what women do, except when there is a baby involved, another life.

My argument is not whether abortion should be legal or not, my argument is that it's not up to the federal government to make that choice.

 

[Stann]

My comparisons are spot on. Nobody wants to control women. That is a lie perpetuated by the left to gin people up, its a talking point. Nobody cares what women do, except when there is a baby involved, another life.

My argument is not whether abortion should be legal or not, my argument is that it's not up to the federal government to make that choice.

My argument is that no government has the right to pass abortion loss at least not in a Free Nation.

 

[airplanemechanic]

They eat meat. They support wars and executions. They hunt. They do all manner of things that make then not "pro-life", but really they wanted "anti-abortion", but "anti-" sounds negative to them.

Are you REALLY comparing an innocent unborn child to a deer, rabbit, enemy soldier and condemned killer? Can you BE that fucking stupid?

But....for the record I am very anti-war but that doesn't I won't support a valid war. And I am 100% against the death penalty.

 

[Unkotare]

They eat meat. They support wars and executions. They hunt. They do all manner of things that make then not "pro-life", but really they wanted "anti-abortion", but "anti-" sounds negative to them.

The "life" in "pro-life" refers to human life, genius.

 

[Stann]

The human right to life is the salient concern here.

There is no right to kill innocent humans in cold blood in violation of their human right to life.

There is no conflict of rights here -there is only the right to life.

A zygote,a blastula, a gastrula, a fetus whatever stage the embryo is in it is alive and a " potential " human being. I think the rights of the woman who actually exists and is a citizen a person has priority over that lump of flesh that may or may not become a person.

 

[Blaster]

And all the while, these sham believers in the Non-Existent "Right To Life" are cheering Pooty on as he kills unborn babies in Ukraine. FYI, "Right To Life" means exactly that. You do not get to pick and choose who does and does not have that right.

Nobody is cheering for Putin. Gee you're dumb.

 

[MagicMike]

Really? I think they are simply trying to limit the murder of infants.

Is this an "infant?"

 

[Stann]

I agree but here's the problem:

the Justices probably made this decision (not tohear the case) BECAUSE ---and possibly ONLY because-- they wanted to be seen as... "independent [thinkers using] the law to make decisions.," as u say.

In other words, they appear to care (not judging, just saying that, at this point in my knowledge of thecase, they APPEAR to care) more about what people think, meaning leftists, than they do about MURDER

If so, that is nothing short of abominable.

They don't listen to cases that don't have any merit.

 

[Stann]

Nobody is cheering for Putin. Gee you're dumb.

Actually there are people on here who are cheering for Putin, I guess you haven't noticed.