The Democrats' Perverse Position on Abortion

[DGS49]

It was not so many months ago when the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling on abortion (Dobbs v. Jackson...), the substance of which was, in the absence of some Constitutional position on abortion, the issue must revert to the States. The Federal government, which is to say, the U.S. Congress, has no power to legislate on the matter of abortion.

And yet...

In virtually every contested election for Congress, the Democrats are attempting to place the abortion issue at the top of the list of critical issues..."If you want to protect the so-called 'right to choose' you must vote for the Democrat."

No Senator and no Congressman will have any say whatsoever in the abortion rights of anyone in the U.S., other than those in the active duty military. This is not my opinion, it is a fact.

Democrats are evil. There is no other explanation.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

California has legalized abortion for many years. This year, enemy democrat Newsom has announced that abortion is in danger. It's on the ballot. I'm voting against it, just to fuck with them.

Abortion as a hot button issue is over. The hysteria has settled down. States are getting real and passing their own laws. More than that, the left has gone too far. They are now understood to expand the right to abortion into actual child killing.

 

[night_son]

It was not so many months ago when the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling on abortion (Dobbs v. Jackson...), the substance of which was, in the absence of some Constitutional position on abortion, the issue must revert to the States. The Federal government, which is to say, the U.S. Congress, has no power to legislate on the matter of abortion.

And yet...

In virtually every contested election for Congress, the Democrats are attempting to place the abortion issue at the top of the list of critical issues..."If you want to protect the so-called 'right to choose' you must vote for the Democrat."

No Senator and no Congressman will have any say whatsoever in the abortion rights of anyone in the U.S., other than those in the active duty military. This is not my opinion, it is a fact.

Democrats are evil. There is no other explanation.

Failure to accept modern world existence of religious ritual mass child sacrifice is precisely the reason mass ritual child sacrifice exists to this very moment. People at large can't seem to swallow the reality of the monolithic (and dark god worship based) evil leering at them, looming over them, doing its bloody deeds regardless of whether or not they believe in it. To be perpetually taken aback or in denial means evil will perpetually get away with it. But hey, at least everyone has a fucking smart phone, right?

 

[protectionist]

California has legalized abortion for many years. This year, enemy democrat Newsom has announced that abortion is in danger. It's on the ballot. I'm voting against it, just to fuck with them.

Abortion as a hot button issue is over. The hysteria has settled down. States are getting real and passing their own laws. More than that, the left has gone too far. They are now understood to expand the right to abortion into actual child killing.

Could you elaborate/clarify the part about actual child killing, with examples ? Links if possible ?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

They are now understood to expand the right to abortion into actual child killing.

Abortion •IS• actual child killing.

 

[DGS49]

The second part of my gripe about the Democrats this cycle is that they are proclaiming their devotion to Roe v. Wade. One of the few coherent statements that Fetterman made was that [paraphrasing] if he were in charge he would support a national abortion policy that mirrors Roe v Wade.

But that is nonsense. Roe v Wade was overturned - without fanfare - by Planned Parenthood v Casey, which figuratively exploded abortion rights. Under RvW, the unrestricted right to get an abortion only exists in the first trimester. After that, the States can regulate abortion - that is to say, make it difficult or nearly impossible. During the third trimester under RvW the only way you could get an abortion would be if the mother's health would be seriously threatened by bringing a baby to term

Is that what today's Leftists want? Hell no, but they assume that people are too ignorant to understand the actual ramifications of saying they support Roe v Wade. What they really want is abortion for any reason up to and including the moment of live birth. But they won't say it out loud.

 

[San Souci]

It was not so many months ago when the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling on abortion (Dobbs v. Jackson...), the substance of which was, in the absence of some Constitutional position on abortion, the issue must revert to the States. The Federal government, which is to say, the U.S. Congress, has no power to legislate on the matter of abortion.

And yet...

In virtually every contested election for Congress, the Democrats are attempting to place the abortion issue at the top of the list of critical issues..."If you want to protect the so-called 'right to choose' you must vote for the Democrat."

No Senator and no Congressman will have any say whatsoever in the abortion rights of anyone in the U.S., other than those in the active duty military. This is not my opinion, it is a fact.

Democrats are evil. There is no other explanation.

Democrats are baby killers. And women who get abortions are infanticides.

 

[Pellinore]

Since when are members of Congress not going to have anything to do with abortion regulation going forward? Dobbs was absolutely not the last we'll ever hear of it, and Congress can pass a law protection abortion rights (like Roe, combined with the Casey expansions). Looking at it from the other angle, a Democratic-controlled House or Senate could keep the GOP from banning it nationwide.

You don't like abortion, which is fine, but if you think of it strategically rather than through your own ideology, there are plenty of reasons for federal office-holders to put abortion front and center.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Since when are members of Congress not going to have anything to do with abortion regulation going forward? Dobbs was absolutely not the last we'll ever hear of it, and Congress can pass a law protection abortion rights (like Roe, combined with the Casey expansions). Looking at it from the other angle, a Democratic-controlled House or Senate could keep the GOP from banning it nationwide.

You don't like abortion, which is fine, but if you think of it strategically rather than through your own ideology, there are plenty of reasons for federal office-holders to put abortion front and center.

No. The only thing they can do is propose a Constitutional Amendment and neither side has 38 states to ban or make it a [blasphemously stupid and paradoxical] “constitutional right.”

 

[Pellinore]

No. The only thing they can do is propose a Constitutional Amendment and neither side has 38 states to ban or make it a [blasphemously stupid and paradoxical] “constitutional right.”

Why can't they simply pass a law forbidding the states from restricting access to abortion?

 

[DGS49]

The reason why they can't simply pass a law is because Congress' powers are limited to those listed in Article I, Section 8. All other powers are reserved to the States and to the people (the private sector).

While it is true that much of what Congress does violates this clear Constitutional mandate, most of what they do is driven through the Grand Canyon of the so-called, "interstate commerce clause." There is no conceivable way that a law defining abortion rights could be squeezed into the interstate commerce clause.

Basic Civics. Democrats at all levels are apparently immune.

 

[Pellinore]

They wouldn't need to justify it under the Interstate Commerce Clause. They could instead claim that the right to self-determination regarding when and how to start a family, or the right to bodily autonomy, or both, are unenumerated Constitutionally-protected rights under the Ninth Amendment. With that established, the Fourteenth Amendment would prohibit States from infringing on that right.

I think the real question would be whether the Supreme Court would shoot that down, too. They just might.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Why can't they simply pass a law forbidding the states from restricting access to abortion?

Because Congress has no authority in setting the criminal code of the 50 states and abortion is not (and could not be) a “Constitutional right.”

Congress can set criminal code for explicitly federal territory. Congress can ban abortion on all military bases, in the District of Columbia, etc, and they should, but they cannot set policy for the states. They have no authority whatsoever to do so.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

They could instead claim that the right to self-determination regarding when and how to start a family, or the right to bodily autonomy, or both, are unenumerated Constitutionally-protected rights under the Ninth Amendment.

That would emanate from conception and not gestation because it’s a man’s baby that is involved.

 

[Pellinore]

Because Congress has no authority in setting the criminal code of the 50 states and abortion is not (and could not be) a “Constitutional right.”

That is incorrect. The Supremacy Clause in the Constitution establishes that all federal laws (starting with the Constitution and heading down) apply to the States. A State trying to pass a law that says a federal law does not apply to them is called nullification, and that was resolved in the 1830s.

The federal government is not only allowed but expected to pass federal laws defending Constitutional rights against anyone, including State legislatures, trying to abridge them. Congress has been doing this since day one, even protecting unenumerated rights (under the 9th Am.) such as the rights to vote or to privacy. There is no legal reason why they couldn't do the same for bodily autonomy, for example, and prohibit State laws from nullifying it.

Congress can set criminal code for explicitly federal territory. Congress can ban abortion on all military bases, in the District of Columbia, etc, and they should, but they cannot set policy for the states. They have no authority whatsoever to do so.

In federal territories, the federal government also handles the issues that would otherwise be left to the States. So, they set voting procedures there, establish a territorial police department and local taxes, build non-Interstate highways, and so on. That doesn't mean the federal government has powers only in those areas, though.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

That is incorrect. The Supremacy Clause in the Constitution establishes that all federal laws (starting with the Constitution and heading down) apply to the States. A State trying to pass a law that says a federal law does not apply to them is called nullification, and that was resolved in the 1830s.

That is incorrect. They have no authority over this matter at all to be “supreme” about.

The federal government is not only allowed but expected to pass federal laws defending Constitutional rights against anyone, including State legislatures, trying to abridge them.

There is no “Constitutional right” in question here. Can you read plain English?

There is no legal reason why they couldn't do the same for bodily autonomy,

Because there is no such “right” and the very idea is lunacy.

 

[Calypso Jones]

premature baby sacrifice by fire at homeless encampment. Warning.

Pre-term baby found dead, burned at Phoenix homeless encampment: 'A perfectly shaped head and little arms' | Blaze Media

Warning: graphic content .A pre-term baby was found dead and burned in a Phoenix homeless encampment over the weekend, and nearby residents are demanding justice.Around 1 a.m. on Saturday morning, Phoenix police said they received a call regarding an endangered child in an area known as "the...

www.theblaze.com

 

[Bob Blaylock]

premature baby sacrifice by fire at homeless encampment. Warning.

Pre-term baby found dead, burned at Phoenix homeless encampment: 'A perfectly shaped head and little arms' | Blaze Media

Warning: graphic content .A pre-term baby was found dead and burned in a Phoenix homeless encampment over the weekend, and nearby residents are demanding justice.Around 1 a.m. on Saturday morning, Phoenix police said they received a call regarding an endangered child in an area known as "the...

www.theblaze.com

“…an area known as "the Zone," the largest homeless encampment in the city.”​

Curiosity led me to find it on Google Maps.

It's nothing compared to any one of many different homeless camps here in Sacramento.

 

[flan327]

It was not so many months ago when the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling on abortion (Dobbs v. Jackson...), the substance of which was, in the absence of some Constitutional position on abortion, the issue must revert to the States. The Federal government, which is to say, the U.S. Congress, has no power to legislate on the matter of abortion.

And yet...

In virtually every contested election for Congress, the Democrats are attempting to place the abortion issue at the top of the list of critical issues..."If you want to protect the so-called 'right to choose' you must vote for the Democrat."

No Senator and no Congressman will have any say whatsoever in the abortion rights of anyone in the U.S., other than those in the active duty military. This is not my opinion, it is a fact.

Democrats are evil. There is no other explanation.

PR

 

[notmyfault2020]

Democrats are evil. There is no other explanation.

I knew that a long time ago. The more u hear about their bs, the more demonic they look

(and we didn't know that could happen..)