So, we find out Jane Roe was paid to lie about her pro-life stance

[EvilCat Breath]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

A right to privacy doesn’t give someone the right to kill an unborn child.

If men were “controlling” women’s bodies then they could force her to have an abortion when she doesn’t want one. When has that been put into law? Oh it hasn’t, so all this talk about “controlling women’s bodies” is BS.

Ignorant nonsense.

Murder concerns criminal law; the right to privacy civil law – one having nothing to do with the other.

It is neither the role nor responsibility of government to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not; the right to privacy safeguards citizens from government excess and overreach with regard to such personal decisions.

Again, no one is forcing a woman to have an abortion, although far leftwing states like China do. Interesting how you people defend China with their forced abortions yet claim you are against government dictating to women if they can have children. Which means you are all full of shit.

Outlawing the killing of human life isn’t anymore of an “overreach” of government anymore than government outlawing rape.

Again, you keep circle jerking over your same failed argument. You still fail to prove anyone is killing a fully developed human being. Why? Because there is no known science out there that identifies a fully developed human being with a functioning brain that uses reason in the womb. Keep circle jerking and you will always go back to where you started.

Really? Yet you can’t explain why killing a newborn is illegal when it isn’t a “fully developed” human being.

I never explained killing a newborn was illegal. I never offered that information, because the newborn is out of the womb. Something you don't get, or can argue about. Why do you make up shit that I never argued about? Answer, because your own argument is a failure.

In other words you can’t defend your idiotic position about “fully developed” humans not being real people. You were too dumb to realize the words you were using also described an infant.

More inventions! Boss, you can 't help yourself can you? Let's make up another scenario, of which I never made claim to. Why do you do this? Simple, you have lost the argument, and you are not smart enough to walk away from it.

Dude, get a hold of yourself. No one said anything about a fully devoloped person not being a human being. Science identifies a fully developed human being at birth. You continue to invent nonsense and lies.

Got a link to support that bullshit? Of course you don't. Because no scientist worth his lab coat will claim a newborn is a “fully developed” human. You’re easily one of the dumbest mother fuckers to ever “chime in” on this topic.

He’s a leftwing zealot, abortion is a sacred pillar of his beliefs. Rational scientific facts won’t sway him. Calling out his bullshit only enrages him even more and make him more irrational.

You have not given rational scientific facts against the no brainer scientific facts I gave you. Do we have to school you all over again?

You can give them scientific facts all day long. You can fill message boxes with facts all day long.

The person you're replying to and those like him will never accept any honest scientific facts.

You are wasting your time.

Both of you.

Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be.

That is fact and reality in this world. Whether anti choice people like it or not.

Well. To be technically honest women don't decide when it's life. She just decides when to end that life and the courts gave women the legal right to do so. That's the fact of the matter. Some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life. That's honesty and those women are very well adjusted.

And here in this post you totally contradicted yourself. Wow, you really know how to put both feet in the mud now don't you? "Women don't decide when it's life," then you said, "some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life." So, if "women don't decide when it's life", how do they know when they are "comfortable in ending it?"Folks, you just can't make this shit up. Fuck! Was that stupid or what?

As I've been saying for decades, their beliefs change with the wind for their own personal and political convenience.

Mine haven't. Abortion is murder. I'm okay with that. All pregnancies of democrat women should be terminated by abortion. That doesn't change the nature of the act.

 

[BWK]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

A right to privacy doesn’t give someone the right to kill an unborn child.

If men were “controlling” women’s bodies then they could force her to have an abortion when she doesn’t want one. When has that been put into law? Oh it hasn’t, so all this talk about “controlling women’s bodies” is BS.

Ignorant nonsense.

Murder concerns criminal law; the right to privacy civil law – one having nothing to do with the other.

It is neither the role nor responsibility of government to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not; the right to privacy safeguards citizens from government excess and overreach with regard to such personal decisions.

Again, no one is forcing a woman to have an abortion, although far leftwing states like China do. Interesting how you people defend China with their forced abortions yet claim you are against government dictating to women if they can have children. Which means you are all full of shit.

Outlawing the killing of human life isn’t anymore of an “overreach” of government anymore than government outlawing rape.

Again, you keep circle jerking over your same failed argument. You still fail to prove anyone is killing a fully developed human being. Why? Because there is no known science out there that identifies a fully developed human being with a functioning brain that uses reason in the womb. Keep circle jerking and you will always go back to where you started.

Really? Yet you can’t explain why killing a newborn is illegal when it isn’t a “fully developed” human being.

I never explained killing a newborn was illegal. I never offered that information, because the newborn is out of the womb. Something you don't get, or can argue about. Why do you make up shit that I never argued about? Answer, because your own argument is a failure.

In other words you can’t defend your idiotic position about “fully developed” humans not being real people. You were too dumb to realize the words you were using also described an infant.

More inventions! Boss, you can 't help yourself can you? Let's make up another scenario, of which I never made claim to. Why do you do this? Simple, you have lost the argument, and you are not smart enough to walk away from it.

Dude, get a hold of yourself. No one said anything about a fully devoloped person not being a human being. Science identifies a fully developed human being at birth. You continue to invent nonsense and lies.

Got a link to support that bullshit? Of course you don't. Because no scientist worth his lab coat will claim a newborn is a “fully developed” human. You’re easily one of the dumbest mother fuckers to ever “chime in” on this topic.

He’s a leftwing zealot, abortion is a sacred pillar of his beliefs. Rational scientific facts won’t sway him. Calling out his bullshit only enrages him even more and make him more irrational.

You have not given rational scientific facts against the no brainer scientific facts I gave you. Do we have to school you all over again?

You can give them scientific facts all day long. You can fill message boxes with facts all day long.

The person you're replying to and those like him will never accept any honest scientific facts.

You are wasting your time.

Both of you.

Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be.

That is fact and reality in this world. Whether anti choice people like it or not.

Well. To be technically honest women don't decide when it's life. She just decides when to end that life and the courts gave women the legal right to do so. That's the fact of the matter. Some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life. That's honesty and those women are very well adjusted.

And here in this post you totally contradicted yourself. Wow, you really know how to put both feet in the mud now don't you? "Women don't decide when it's life," then you said, "some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life." So, if "women don't decide when it's life", how do they know when they are "comfortable in ending it?"Folks, you just can't make this shit up. Fuck! Was that stupid or what?

Let me put it in terms easier for you to understand. You did not decide on when that convenience store clerk had life. You could still be perfectly comfortable in ending that life. Life exists with or without the permission of anyone. It doesn't take a genius to decide to end a life. Not any more than pulling an unwanted, but living, weed out of your garden.

Abortion is not a scientific issue. It has nothing to do with science. It is a legal issue only as has been held over and over by every court.

Now that you have proven yourself a total dolt you can carry on.

This nonsense of yours, not withstanding, one must understand, that your post before this one cancels out anything you could possibly manufacture from an intelligent platform. I understand the desperation in this post, where you are comparing store clerks now to women ending pregnancies, which has nothing to do with your previous example. One must ask, do you have the foggiest idea of what you are talking about? Because your last two posts, have nothing to do with each other. Lol!
And here in this post you totally contradicted yourself. Wow, you really know how to put both feet in the mud now don't you? "Women don't decide when it's life," then you said, "some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life." So, if "women don't decide when it's life", how do they know when they are "comfortable in ending it?"Folks, you just can't make this shit up. Fuck! Was that stupid or what? The woman not deciding life, has what to do with store clerks? I thought this was about abortions? You got shell shocked over this argument, and now you are lost to the world.

 

[BWK]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

A right to privacy doesn’t give someone the right to kill an unborn child.

If men were “controlling” women’s bodies then they could force her to have an abortion when she doesn’t want one. When has that been put into law? Oh it hasn’t, so all this talk about “controlling women’s bodies” is BS.

Ignorant nonsense.

Murder concerns criminal law; the right to privacy civil law – one having nothing to do with the other.

It is neither the role nor responsibility of government to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not; the right to privacy safeguards citizens from government excess and overreach with regard to such personal decisions.

Again, no one is forcing a woman to have an abortion, although far leftwing states like China do. Interesting how you people defend China with their forced abortions yet claim you are against government dictating to women if they can have children. Which means you are all full of shit.

Outlawing the killing of human life isn’t anymore of an “overreach” of government anymore than government outlawing rape.

Again, you keep circle jerking over your same failed argument. You still fail to prove anyone is killing a fully developed human being. Why? Because there is no known science out there that identifies a fully developed human being with a functioning brain that uses reason in the womb. Keep circle jerking and you will always go back to where you started.

Really? Yet you can’t explain why killing a newborn is illegal when it isn’t a “fully developed” human being.

I never explained killing a newborn was illegal. I never offered that information, because the newborn is out of the womb. Something you don't get, or can argue about. Why do you make up shit that I never argued about? Answer, because your own argument is a failure.

In other words you can’t defend your idiotic position about “fully developed” humans not being real people. You were too dumb to realize the words you were using also described an infant.

More inventions! Boss, you can 't help yourself can you? Let's make up another scenario, of which I never made claim to. Why do you do this? Simple, you have lost the argument, and you are not smart enough to walk away from it.

Dude, get a hold of yourself. No one said anything about a fully devoloped person not being a human being. Science identifies a fully developed human being at birth. You continue to invent nonsense and lies.

Got a link to support that bullshit? Of course you don't. Because no scientist worth his lab coat will claim a newborn is a “fully developed” human. You’re easily one of the dumbest mother fuckers to ever “chime in” on this topic.

He’s a leftwing zealot, abortion is a sacred pillar of his beliefs. Rational scientific facts won’t sway him. Calling out his bullshit only enrages him even more and make him more irrational.

You have not given rational scientific facts against the no brainer scientific facts I gave you. Do we have to school you all over again?

You can give them scientific facts all day long. You can fill message boxes with facts all day long.

The person you're replying to and those like him will never accept any honest scientific facts.

You are wasting your time.

Both of you.

Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be.

That is fact and reality in this world. Whether anti choice people like it or not.

Well. To be technically honest women don't decide when it's life. She just decides when to end that life and the courts gave women the legal right to do so. That's the fact of the matter. Some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life. That's honesty and those women are very well adjusted.

And here in this post you totally contradicted yourself. Wow, you really know how to put both feet in the mud now don't you? "Women don't decide when it's life," then you said, "some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life." So, if "women don't decide when it's life", how do they know when they are "comfortable in ending it?"Folks, you just can't make this shit up. Fuck! Was that stupid or what?

As I've been saying for decades, their beliefs change with the wind for their own personal and political convenience.

Mine haven't. Abortion is murder. I'm okay with that. All pregnancies of democrat women should be terminated by abortion. That doesn't change the nature of the act.

Until you have proven that, the nature of the act, is still not murder.

 

[BWK]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

If you think pro lifers care one iota about what Jane Roe believes, you are crazy. She has nothing to do with their pro life beliefs.

I'm sure they don't. But that isn't what the thread is about. It's the fact that she lied and they still lost. Meaning, they have no honest, intelligent, or scientific case.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

If you think pro lifers care one iota about what Jane Roe believes, you are crazy. She has nothing to do with their pro life beliefs.

I'm sure they don't. But that isn't what the thread is about. It's the fact that she lied and they still lost. Meaning, they have no honest, intelligent, or scientific case.

She lied years, decades, after the Roe decision by saying she had a change of opinion. She NOW felt that abortion was wrong. It had nothing to do with winning or losing. That was water under the bridge. The daughter she had was already a grown woman. You don't know anything about the Roe decision do you? You do know that Jane Roe never had an abortion. She had the baby. A little girl.

 

[BWK]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

If you think pro lifers care one iota about what Jane Roe believes, you are crazy. She has nothing to do with their pro life beliefs.

I'm sure they don't. But that isn't what the thread is about. It's the fact that she lied and they still lost. Meaning, they have no honest, intelligent, or scientific case.

She lied years, decades, after the Roe decision by saying she had a change of opinion. She NOW felt that abortion was wrong. It had nothing to do with winning or losing. That was water under the bridge. The daughter she had was already a grown woman. You don't know anything about the Roe decision do you? You do know that Jane Roe never had an abortion. She had the baby. A little girl.

What I know is, you totally made a fool out of yourself with your contradictory statements about life. You seriously don't have a clue. And what Jane Doe having her baby has to do with the price of apples is anybody's guess? Lol! I guess it was time for you to change the subject, when you got caught with those ridiculous statements. WE understand.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I made no contradictory statements. An unborn child is a life. No one declares it alive it's alive. Women can only decide to terminate that life. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Is it the result of the democrat brain?

 

[satrebil]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

A right to privacy doesn’t give someone the right to kill an unborn child.

If men were “controlling” women’s bodies then they could force her to have an abortion when she doesn’t want one. When has that been put into law? Oh it hasn’t, so all this talk about “controlling women’s bodies” is BS.

Ignorant nonsense.

Murder concerns criminal law; the right to privacy civil law – one having nothing to do with the other.

It is neither the role nor responsibility of government to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not; the right to privacy safeguards citizens from government excess and overreach with regard to such personal decisions.

Again, no one is forcing a woman to have an abortion, although far leftwing states like China do. Interesting how you people defend China with their forced abortions yet claim you are against government dictating to women if they can have children. Which means you are all full of shit.

Outlawing the killing of human life isn’t anymore of an “overreach” of government anymore than government outlawing rape.

Again, you keep circle jerking over your same failed argument. You still fail to prove anyone is killing a fully developed human being. Why? Because there is no known science out there that identifies a fully developed human being with a functioning brain that uses reason in the womb. Keep circle jerking and you will always go back to where you started.

Really? Yet you can’t explain why killing a newborn is illegal when it isn’t a “fully developed” human being.

I never explained killing a newborn was illegal. I never offered that information, because the newborn is out of the womb. Something you don't get, or can argue about. Why do you make up shit that I never argued about? Answer, because your own argument is a failure.

In other words you can’t defend your idiotic position about “fully developed” humans not being real people. You were too dumb to realize the words you were using also described an infant.

More inventions! Boss, you can 't help yourself can you? Let's make up another scenario, of which I never made claim to. Why do you do this? Simple, you have lost the argument, and you are not smart enough to walk away from it.

Dude, get a hold of yourself. No one said anything about a fully devoloped person not being a human being. Science identifies a fully developed human being at birth. You continue to invent nonsense and lies.

Got a link to support that bullshit? Of course you don't. Because no scientist worth his lab coat will claim a newborn is a “fully developed” human. You’re easily one of the dumbest mother fuckers to ever “chime in” on this topic.

He’s a leftwing zealot, abortion is a sacred pillar of his beliefs. Rational scientific facts won’t sway him. Calling out his bullshit only enrages him even more and make him more irrational.

You have not given rational scientific facts against the no brainer scientific facts I gave you. Do we have to school you all over again?

You can give them scientific facts all day long. You can fill message boxes with facts all day long.

The person you're replying to and those like him will never accept any honest scientific facts.

You are wasting your time.

Both of you.

Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be.

That is fact and reality in this world. Whether anti choice people like it or not.

Well. To be technically honest women don't decide when it's life. She just decides when to end that life and the courts gave women the legal right to do so. That's the fact of the matter. Some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life. That's honesty and those women are very well adjusted.

And here in this post you totally contradicted yourself. Wow, you really know how to put both feet in the mud now don't you? "Women don't decide when it's life," then you said, "some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life." So, if "women don't decide when it's life", how do they know when they are "comfortable in ending it?"Folks, you just can't make this shit up. Fuck! Was that stupid or what?

As I've been saying for decades, their beliefs change with the wind for their own personal and political convenience.

Mine haven't. Abortion is murder. I'm okay with that. All pregnancies of democrat women should be terminated by abortion. That doesn't change the nature of the act.

Until you have proven that, the nature of the act, is still not murder.

You're right about one thing - it's not murder. It's state sanctioned homicide.

Hitler did the same thing. 6 million Jews can attest.

 

[BWK]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

A right to privacy doesn’t give someone the right to kill an unborn child.

If men were “controlling” women’s bodies then they could force her to have an abortion when she doesn’t want one. When has that been put into law? Oh it hasn’t, so all this talk about “controlling women’s bodies” is BS.

Ignorant nonsense.

Murder concerns criminal law; the right to privacy civil law – one having nothing to do with the other.

It is neither the role nor responsibility of government to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not; the right to privacy safeguards citizens from government excess and overreach with regard to such personal decisions.

Again, no one is forcing a woman to have an abortion, although far leftwing states like China do. Interesting how you people defend China with their forced abortions yet claim you are against government dictating to women if they can have children. Which means you are all full of shit.

Outlawing the killing of human life isn’t anymore of an “overreach” of government anymore than government outlawing rape.

Again, you keep circle jerking over your same failed argument. You still fail to prove anyone is killing a fully developed human being. Why? Because there is no known science out there that identifies a fully developed human being with a functioning brain that uses reason in the womb. Keep circle jerking and you will always go back to where you started.

Really? Yet you can’t explain why killing a newborn is illegal when it isn’t a “fully developed” human being.

I never explained killing a newborn was illegal. I never offered that information, because the newborn is out of the womb. Something you don't get, or can argue about. Why do you make up shit that I never argued about? Answer, because your own argument is a failure.

In other words you can’t defend your idiotic position about “fully developed” humans not being real people. You were too dumb to realize the words you were using also described an infant.

More inventions! Boss, you can 't help yourself can you? Let's make up another scenario, of which I never made claim to. Why do you do this? Simple, you have lost the argument, and you are not smart enough to walk away from it.

Dude, get a hold of yourself. No one said anything about a fully devoloped person not being a human being. Science identifies a fully developed human being at birth. You continue to invent nonsense and lies.

Got a link to support that bullshit? Of course you don't. Because no scientist worth his lab coat will claim a newborn is a “fully developed” human. You’re easily one of the dumbest mother fuckers to ever “chime in” on this topic.

He’s a leftwing zealot, abortion is a sacred pillar of his beliefs. Rational scientific facts won’t sway him. Calling out his bullshit only enrages him even more and make him more irrational.

You have not given rational scientific facts against the no brainer scientific facts I gave you. Do we have to school you all over again?

You can give them scientific facts all day long. You can fill message boxes with facts all day long.

The person you're replying to and those like him will never accept any honest scientific facts.

You are wasting your time.

Both of you.

Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be.

That is fact and reality in this world. Whether anti choice people like it or not.

Well. To be technically honest women don't decide when it's life. She just decides when to end that life and the courts gave women the legal right to do so. That's the fact of the matter. Some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life. That's honesty and those women are very well adjusted.

And here in this post you totally contradicted yourself. Wow, you really know how to put both feet in the mud now don't you? "Women don't decide when it's life," then you said, "some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life." So, if "women don't decide when it's life", how do they know when they are "comfortable in ending it?"Folks, you just can't make this shit up. Fuck! Was that stupid or what?

As I've been saying for decades, their beliefs change with the wind for their own personal and political convenience.

Mine haven't. Abortion is murder. I'm okay with that. All pregnancies of democrat women should be terminated by abortion. That doesn't change the nature of the act.

Until you have proven that, the nature of the act, is still not murder.

You're right about one thing - it's not murder. It's state sanctioned homicide.

Hitler did the same thing. 6 million Jews can attest.

Hitler killed 6 million fully developed human beings with developed brains. Abortion doesn't do that. How do we know? The science tells us so.

 

[satrebil]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

A right to privacy doesn’t give someone the right to kill an unborn child.

If men were “controlling” women’s bodies then they could force her to have an abortion when she doesn’t want one. When has that been put into law? Oh it hasn’t, so all this talk about “controlling women’s bodies” is BS.

Ignorant nonsense.

Murder concerns criminal law; the right to privacy civil law – one having nothing to do with the other.

It is neither the role nor responsibility of government to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not; the right to privacy safeguards citizens from government excess and overreach with regard to such personal decisions.

Again, no one is forcing a woman to have an abortion, although far leftwing states like China do. Interesting how you people defend China with their forced abortions yet claim you are against government dictating to women if they can have children. Which means you are all full of shit.

Outlawing the killing of human life isn’t anymore of an “overreach” of government anymore than government outlawing rape.

Again, you keep circle jerking over your same failed argument. You still fail to prove anyone is killing a fully developed human being. Why? Because there is no known science out there that identifies a fully developed human being with a functioning brain that uses reason in the womb. Keep circle jerking and you will always go back to where you started.

Really? Yet you can’t explain why killing a newborn is illegal when it isn’t a “fully developed” human being.

I never explained killing a newborn was illegal. I never offered that information, because the newborn is out of the womb. Something you don't get, or can argue about. Why do you make up shit that I never argued about? Answer, because your own argument is a failure.

In other words you can’t defend your idiotic position about “fully developed” humans not being real people. You were too dumb to realize the words you were using also described an infant.

More inventions! Boss, you can 't help yourself can you? Let's make up another scenario, of which I never made claim to. Why do you do this? Simple, you have lost the argument, and you are not smart enough to walk away from it.

Dude, get a hold of yourself. No one said anything about a fully devoloped person not being a human being. Science identifies a fully developed human being at birth. You continue to invent nonsense and lies.

Got a link to support that bullshit? Of course you don't. Because no scientist worth his lab coat will claim a newborn is a “fully developed” human. You’re easily one of the dumbest mother fuckers to ever “chime in” on this topic.

He’s a leftwing zealot, abortion is a sacred pillar of his beliefs. Rational scientific facts won’t sway him. Calling out his bullshit only enrages him even more and make him more irrational.

You have not given rational scientific facts against the no brainer scientific facts I gave you. Do we have to school you all over again?

You can give them scientific facts all day long. You can fill message boxes with facts all day long.

The person you're replying to and those like him will never accept any honest scientific facts.

You are wasting your time.

Both of you.

Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be.

That is fact and reality in this world. Whether anti choice people like it or not.

Well. To be technically honest women don't decide when it's life. She just decides when to end that life and the courts gave women the legal right to do so. That's the fact of the matter. Some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life. That's honesty and those women are very well adjusted.

And here in this post you totally contradicted yourself. Wow, you really know how to put both feet in the mud now don't you? "Women don't decide when it's life," then you said, "some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life." So, if "women don't decide when it's life", how do they know when they are "comfortable in ending it?"Folks, you just can't make this shit up. Fuck! Was that stupid or what?

As I've been saying for decades, their beliefs change with the wind for their own personal and political convenience.

Mine haven't. Abortion is murder. I'm okay with that. All pregnancies of democrat women should be terminated by abortion. That doesn't change the nature of the act.

Until you have proven that, the nature of the act, is still not murder.

You're right about one thing - it's not murder. It's state sanctioned homicide.

Hitler did the same thing. 6 million Jews can attest.

Hitler killed 6 million fully developed human beings with developed brains. Abortion doesn't do that. How do we know? The science tells us so.

So the validity of human life should be defined by development status? Cool.

When do we get to kill infants? Toddlers? Or how about everyone with down syndrome? Or the guy born with no arms - can we kill him too?

 

[BWK]

I made no contradictory statements. An unborn child is a life. No one declares it alive it's alive. Women can only decide to terminate that life. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Is it the result of the democrat brain?

And here in this post you totally contradicted yourself. Wow, you really know how to put both feet in the mud now don't you? "Women don't decide when it's life," then you said, "some women are perfectly comfortable with the idea of ending that life." So, if "women don't decide when it's life", how do they know when they are "comfortable in ending it?"Folks, you just can't make this shit up. Fuck! Was that stupid or what?

Your contradictions are on full display for all to see. Obviously you have no idea what that means.

You have been nonsensical from the very beginning, and I have no interest in entertaining your debate, absent of any intelligence. You aren't making any sense. "Women don't decide when it's life" are your exact words. Then you said an "unborn child is life." You're a woman, am I right? Those two statements of yours contradict, and cancel each other out as having any intelligent meaning whatsoever, if we were to connect the two. If a "woman can't decide life",we'll, you just did when you said "an unborn child is life.". Lol! You have been nothing but a waste of time talking total bs.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I made no contradictory statements. An unborn child is a life. No one declares it alive it's alive. Women can only decide to terminate that life. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

 

[BWK]

I made no contradictory statements. An unborn child is a life. No one declares it alive it's alive. Women can only decide to terminate that life. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

"No one declares it's alive, it's alive?" HUh? LOL! That has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read. Are you high? Seriously?

 

[buttercup]

You can give them scientific facts all day long. You can fill message boxes with facts all day long.

The person you're replying to and those like him will never accept any honest scientific facts.

You are wasting your time.

Both of you.

Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be.

That is fact and reality in this world. Whether anti choice people like it or not.

"Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be."


Ladies and gentlemen I present to you the "party of science".

Evidently what you said here flew right over their heads.

That view (which they openly admit to holding) is as ANTI-science as it gets. The thing is though, many of them simply don't care, and some openly admit to not caring if the preborn baby is a human life or not, because for many of them, it comes down to the bodily autonomy "argument."

It's actually easy to disprove that, but I've learned from experience that when you try to show them how that "argument" falls apart, they are never bright (or intellectually honest) enough to grasp what you're saying, and they just move the goalposts or respond with logical fallacies.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I made no contradictory statements. An unborn child is a life. No one declares it alive it's alive. Women can only decide to terminate that life. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

"No one declares it's alive, it's alive?" HUh? LOL! That has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read. Are you high? Seriously?

You are really trying to be stupid aren't you

 

[BWK]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

A right to privacy doesn’t give someone the right to kill an unborn child.

If men were “controlling” women’s bodies then they could force her to have an abortion when she doesn’t want one. When has that been put into law? Oh it hasn’t, so all this talk about “controlling women’s bodies” is BS.

Ignorant nonsense.

Murder concerns criminal law; the right to privacy civil law – one having nothing to do with the other.

It is neither the role nor responsibility of government to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not; the right to privacy safeguards citizens from government excess and overreach with regard to such personal decisions.

Again, no one is forcing a woman to have an abortion, although far leftwing states like China do. Interesting how you people defend China with their forced abortions yet claim you are against government dictating to women if they can have children. Which means you are all full of shit.

Outlawing the killing of human life isn’t anymore of an “overreach” of government anymore than government outlawing rape.

Again, you keep circle jerking over your same failed argument. You still fail to prove anyone is killing a fully developed human being. Why? Because there is no known science out there that identifies a fully developed human being with a functioning brain that uses reason in the womb. Keep circle jerking and you will always go back to where you started.

Really? Yet you can’t explain why killing a newborn is illegal when it isn’t a “fully developed” human being.

I never explained killing a newborn was illegal. I never offered that information, because the newborn is out of the womb. Something you don't get, or can argue about. Why do you make up shit that I never argued about? Answer, because your own argument is a failure.

In other words you can’t defend your idiotic position about “fully developed” humans not being real people. You were too dumb to realize the words you were using also described an infant.

More inventions! Boss, you can 't help yourself can you? Let's make up another scenario, of which I never made claim to. Why do you do this? Simple, you have lost the argument, and you are not smart enough to walk away from it.

Dude, get a hold of yourself. No one said anything about a fully devoloped person not being a human being. Science identifies a fully developed human being at birth. You continue to invent nonsense and lies.

Got a link to support that bullshit? Of course you don't. Because no scientist worth his lab coat will claim a newborn is a “fully developed” human. You’re easily one of the dumbest mother fuckers to ever “chime in” on this topic.

He’s a leftwing zealot, abortion is a sacred pillar of his beliefs. Rational scientific facts won’t sway him. Calling out his bullshit only enrages him even more and make him more irrational.

You have not given rational scientific facts against the no brainer scientific facts I gave you. Do we have to school you all over again?

You can give them scientific facts all day long. You can fill message boxes with facts all day long.

The person you're replying to and those like him will never accept any honest scientific facts.

You are wasting your time.

Both of you.

Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be.

That is fact and reality in this world. Whether anti choice people like it or not.

"Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be."


Ladies and gentlemen I present to you the "party of science".

Roe vs. Wade was never about a woman deciding life, because no one can. The woman was given the choice because it was her body, no one else's. Has nothing to do with determining life. That's totally ridiculous. When are you people going to get it? We are not God. What ails you folks? Seriously?

 

[satrebil]

You can give them scientific facts all day long. You can fill message boxes with facts all day long.

The person you're replying to and those like him will never accept any honest scientific facts.

You are wasting your time.

Both of you.

Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be.

That is fact and reality in this world. Whether anti choice people like it or not.

"Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be."


Ladies and gentlemen I present to you the "party of science".

Evidently what you said here flew right over their heads.

That view (which they openly admit to holding) is as ANTI-science as it gets. The thing is though, many of them simply don't care, and some openly admit to not caring if the preborn baby is a human life or not, because for many of them, it comes down to the bodily autonomy "argument."

It's actually easy to disprove that, but I've learned from experience that when you try to show them how that "argument" falls apart, they are never bright (or intellectually honest) enough to grasp what you're saying, and they just move the goalposts or respond with logical fallacies.

Yep. Every time I show these pro-aborts how their criteria completely falls apart when applied anywhere else on the human condition, they either clam up or ignore it. From there it typically just devolves into "you just want to control women's bodies" nonsense. Their positions are all emotion, no substance... and not an iota of critical thought.

It ultimately boils down to the core ideology amongst all leftists - a complete unwillingness to accept responsibility for their actions. It weaves into every personal and political position they have.

 

[BWK]

You can give them scientific facts all day long. You can fill message boxes with facts all day long.

The person you're replying to and those like him will never accept any honest scientific facts.

You are wasting your time.

Both of you.

Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be.

That is fact and reality in this world. Whether anti choice people like it or not.

"Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be."


Ladies and gentlemen I present to you the "party of science".

Evidently what you said here flew right over their heads.

That view (which they openly admit to holding) is as ANTI-science as it gets. The thing is though, many of them simply don't care, and some openly admit to not caring if the preborn baby is a human life or not, because for many of them, it comes down to the bodily autonomy "argument."

It's actually easy to disprove that, but I've learned from experience that when you try to show them how that "argument" falls apart, they are never bright (or intellectually honest) enough to grasp what you're saying, and they just move the goalposts or respond with logical fallacies.

I don't think you know what you are saying, and you just admitted it. "If the pre-born baby is a human life or not?" Lol! So you don't know. Thanks! That's what I've been saying forever too.

 

[satrebil]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

A right to privacy doesn’t give someone the right to kill an unborn child.

If men were “controlling” women’s bodies then they could force her to have an abortion when she doesn’t want one. When has that been put into law? Oh it hasn’t, so all this talk about “controlling women’s bodies” is BS.

Ignorant nonsense.

Murder concerns criminal law; the right to privacy civil law – one having nothing to do with the other.

It is neither the role nor responsibility of government to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not; the right to privacy safeguards citizens from government excess and overreach with regard to such personal decisions.

Again, no one is forcing a woman to have an abortion, although far leftwing states like China do. Interesting how you people defend China with their forced abortions yet claim you are against government dictating to women if they can have children. Which means you are all full of shit.

Outlawing the killing of human life isn’t anymore of an “overreach” of government anymore than government outlawing rape.

Again, you keep circle jerking over your same failed argument. You still fail to prove anyone is killing a fully developed human being. Why? Because there is no known science out there that identifies a fully developed human being with a functioning brain that uses reason in the womb. Keep circle jerking and you will always go back to where you started.

Really? Yet you can’t explain why killing a newborn is illegal when it isn’t a “fully developed” human being.

I never explained killing a newborn was illegal. I never offered that information, because the newborn is out of the womb. Something you don't get, or can argue about. Why do you make up shit that I never argued about? Answer, because your own argument is a failure.

In other words you can’t defend your idiotic position about “fully developed” humans not being real people. You were too dumb to realize the words you were using also described an infant.

More inventions! Boss, you can 't help yourself can you? Let's make up another scenario, of which I never made claim to. Why do you do this? Simple, you have lost the argument, and you are not smart enough to walk away from it.

Dude, get a hold of yourself. No one said anything about a fully devoloped person not being a human being. Science identifies a fully developed human being at birth. You continue to invent nonsense and lies.

Got a link to support that bullshit? Of course you don't. Because no scientist worth his lab coat will claim a newborn is a “fully developed” human. You’re easily one of the dumbest mother fuckers to ever “chime in” on this topic.

He’s a leftwing zealot, abortion is a sacred pillar of his beliefs. Rational scientific facts won’t sway him. Calling out his bullshit only enrages him even more and make him more irrational.

You have not given rational scientific facts against the no brainer scientific facts I gave you. Do we have to school you all over again?

You can give them scientific facts all day long. You can fill message boxes with facts all day long.

The person you're replying to and those like him will never accept any honest scientific facts.

You are wasting your time.

Both of you.

Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be.

That is fact and reality in this world. Whether anti choice people like it or not.

"Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be."


Ladies and gentlemen I present to you the "party of science".

Roe vs. Wade was never about a woman deciding life, because no one can. The woman was given the choice because it was her body, no one else's. Has nothing to do with determining life. That's totally ridiculous. When are you people going to get it? We are not God. What ails you folks? Seriously?

What ails us?

Pray tell, what ails YOU? What kind of sick, twisted fucks attempt to justify killing babies?

 

[BWK]

You can give them scientific facts all day long. You can fill message boxes with facts all day long.

The person you're replying to and those like him will never accept any honest scientific facts.

You are wasting your time.

Both of you.

Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be.

That is fact and reality in this world. Whether anti choice people like it or not.

"Roe V. Wade gave that choice to women. Not men. Women. Women decide when it's life. No one else. Not a man. Not a book. No one.

Only the woman carrying that pregnancy is the person who decides. If she decides it's not life, it's not and she has an abortion. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it. There never will be."


Ladies and gentlemen I present to you the "party of science".

Evidently what you said here flew right over their heads.

That view (which they openly admit to holding) is as ANTI-science as it gets. The thing is though, many of them simply don't care, and some openly admit to not caring if the preborn baby is a human life or not, because for many of them, it comes down to the bodily autonomy "argument."

It's actually easy to disprove that, but I've learned from experience that when you try to show them how that "argument" falls apart, they are never bright (or intellectually honest) enough to grasp what you're saying, and they just move the goalposts or respond with logical fallacies.

Yep. Every time I show these pro-aborts how their criteria completely falls apart when applied anywhere else on the human condition, they either clam up or ignore it. From there it typically just devolves into "you just want to control women's bodies" nonsense. Their positions are all emotion, no substance... and not an iota of critical thought.

It ultimately boils down to the core ideology amongst all leftists - a complete unwillingness to accept responsibility for their actions. It weaves into every personal and political position they have.

This post makes no sense at all, and argues nothing. I'm here whenever you think you can explain the unexplained intelligently, informatively, and scientifically. I am not here to debate your fantasies. Get to it.