Which should have first priority: The woman, the fertilized egg, or the fetus?

[BlindBoo]

What if other states use the same legal reasons for GUNS - with anti-gun citizen vigilantes going after gun owners. Maybe states like New York will enact such laws.

It's a brave new world. If this {civil punitive damage enforcement angle} works to circumvent Supreme Court precedent for the States, why not for the Bill of Rights too. Hell, those weren't for the States anyway, right?

 

[Lakhota]

It's a brave new world. If this {civil punitive damage enforcement angle} works to circumvent Supreme Court precedent for the States, why not for the Bill of Rights too. Hell, those weren't for the States anyway, right?

Amen! These NaziCon zealots should be careful what they wish for!

 

[kaz]

Amen! These NaziCon zealots should be careful what they wish for!

So you think abortion is in the bill of rights. OMG you're stupid and a racist

 

[Cellblock2429]

SCOTUS has gone full Taliban in upholding the new draconian Texas abortion laws!

SCOTUS and their NaziCon zealots are not pro-life - they are pro-birth. They have no regard for the mental/physical/financial reasons that women seek abortions. They don't care!

What if other states use the same legal reasons for GUNS - with anti-gun citizen vigilantes going after gun owners. Maybe states like New York will enact such laws. It can happen!

/——-/ Lakhota sez “Keep killing those babies for fun and profit.”

 

[Cellblock2429]

Amen! These NaziCon zealots should be careful what they wish for!

/——-/ We wish that you libtards stop killing babies and selling their body parts.

 

[BlindBoo]

So you think abortion is in the bill of rights. OMG you're stupid and a racist

The Supreme Court sets precedent with it's interpretation of the Constitution which includes the all the Amendments. If a State is allowed to set aside a precedent with a new and arbitrary enforcement process then why shouldn't it apply to other precedent setting decisions the court has made? Could a state ban some guns and set up a bounty on anyone who turns someone in who has one? Probably set a bounty on sellers, resellers, manufactures.....Just let anyone sue them too.

It is absurd, of course. So is the Texas law.

 

[kaz]

The Supreme Court sets precedent with it's interpretation of the Constitution which includes the all the Amendments. If a State is allowed to set aside a precedent with a new and arbitrary enforcement process then why shouldn't it apply to other precedent setting decisions the court has made? Could a state ban some guns and set up a bounty on anyone who turns someone in who has one? Probably set a bounty on sellers, resellers, manufactures.....Just let anyone sue them too.

It is absurd, of course. So is the Texas law.

Show the part in the Constitution that says the Supreme Court can make up Constitutional law much less new rights in the bill of rights.

According to the 10th amendment, the Texas abortion law is up to Texas. I don't care for the law much either. But what's absurd is reading the Constitution and thinking it ways anything about abortion. Hint, it doesn't

 

[Care4all]

In my opinion, and in a life or death situations, in this order...the mother, the fetus, the frozen fertilized embryo.

The woman may choose to take her own life to save the fetus....not certain if doctors would accept that or not, for fear of being sued, later....

If a frozen embryo clinic was on fire, and adults inside, they'd save the living and breathing humans first and foremost, then if possible, without putting the firemen in danger...save the frozen embryos if they can.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

SCOTUS has gone full Taliban in upholding the new draconian Texas abortion laws!

SCOTUS and their NaziCon zealots are not pro-life - they are pro-birth. They have no regard for the mental/physical/financial reasons that women seek abortions. They don't care!

What if other states use the same legal reasons for GUNS - with anti-gun citizen vigilantes going after gun owners. Maybe states like New York will enact such laws. It can happen!

ALL LIVES MATTER

 

[Meathead]

Was the woman not a fertilized egg and a fetus? You know, in reality the stork doesn't bring babies to mommies and daddies.

 

[Meathead]

ALL LIVES MATTER

Racist! Only black thug's lives matter!

 

[Care4all]

Show the part in the Constitution that says the Supreme Court can make up Constitutional law much less new rights in the bill of rights.

According to the 10th amendment, the Texas abortion law is up to Texas. I don't care for the law much either. But what's absurd is reading the Constitution and thinking it ways anything about abortion. Hint, it doesn't

Sure it does. Women and men, have a right to privacy....it isn't just for men. It's not the government's business that you may or may not be pregnant.

If I am understanding this correctly, that's why Texas put in no govt penalties for doctors etc to perform an abortion, past the 6 weeks pregnant/ Fetal heartbeat...Texas set up in civil law, for vigilante penalties brought by the citizens....even non citizens, not related to the woman can bring these new suits, and if they win, collect $10,000 per doctor etc lawsuit....and get their court costs paid by the doctor as well....a BOUNTY.... If the doctor wins the case, the doctor still has to pay his own court costs....not the person suing....

Texas legislature did it this way because with certainty, it is unconstitutional for govt to pass this law, but if they give no penalty or $10,000 fine, then the doctor can't file suit for the govt hurting them, because it is not the govt, it is citizens.

I call bull shit on that crazy ass alleged loophole, the Texan legislature thinks is their way around the law and constitution.

States have to follow what is Constitutional... the constitution says so. Right now, via roe v wade, and several other landmark cases, abortion is legal and constitutional, up until the point of viability.

 

[BlindBoo]

Show the part in the Constitution that says the Supreme Court can make up Constitutional law much less new rights in the bill of rights.

According to the 10th amendment, the Texas abortion law is up to Texas. I don't care for the law much either. But what's absurd is reading the Constitution and thinking it ways anything about abortion. Hint, it doesn't

We've talked about legal precedent before.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

We've talked about legal precedent before.

That ain't how the Constitution works.

 

[whitehall]

A heartbeat means life. People could be arrested for treating dogs the same way as abortionists treat women. Who benefits most from abortions? Surely it isn't a woman who might turn hateful after enduring symptoms similar to PTSD for the rest of her life. The beneficiaries of abortion are the Native American warriors and the CPA's and the rednecks who see their future responsibilities eliminated at the stroke of a scalpel. Women who trust these men are nothing but the walking mental and physically and spiritually wounded.

 

[kaz]

Sure it does. Women and men, have a right to privacy....it isn't just for men. It's not the government's business that you may or may not be pregnant.

If I am understanding this correctly, that's why Texas put in no govt penalties for doctors etc to perform an abortion, past the 6 weeks pregnant/ Fetal heartbeat...Texas set up in civil law, for vigilante penalties brought by the citizens....even non citizens, not related to the woman can bring these new suits, and if they win, collect $10,000 per doctor etc lawsuit....and get their court costs paid by the doctor as well....a BOUNTY.... If the doctor wins the case, the doctor still has to pay his own court costs....not the person suing....

Texas legislature did it this way because with certainty, it is unconstitutional for govt to pass this law, but if they give no penalty or $10,000 fine, then the doctor can't file suit for the govt hurting them, because it is not the govt, it is citizens.

I call bull shit on that crazy ass alleged loophole, the Texan legislature thinks is their way around the law and constitution.

States have to follow what is Constitutional... the constitution says so. Right now, via roe v wade, and several other landmark cases, abortion is legal and constitutional, up until the point of viability.

Sawish!

This is how democrats argue. It's just slight of hand.

Our privacy is protected by the 10th amendment. But the 10th amendment is a sledge hammer, you don't like it. So you ignore it, you literally pretend it doesn't exist.

So now how do you protect your version of privacy which only applies to abortion? You MAKE IT UP. You create a tiny selective right to privacy to replace the sledge hammer privacy protection you destroyed

 

[kaz]

We've talked about legal precedent before.

Begging the question. You really aren't smart? You don't grasp what you just argued, do you? Be honest

 

[Care4all]

Sawish!

This is how democrats argue. It's just slight of hand.

Our privacy is protected by the 10th amendment. But the 10th amendment is a sledge hammer, you don't like it. So you ignore it, you literally pretend it doesn't exist.

So now how do you protect your version of privacy which only applies to abortion? You MAKE IT UP. You create a tiny selective right to privacy to replace the sledge hammer privacy protection you destroyed

I didn't make it up silly one, the republican leaning supreme court in Roe v wade established such.

 

[BlindBoo]

Begging the question. You really aren't smart? You don't grasp what you just argued, do you? Be honest

You pretended not to understand then, why should I think you'd do otherwise now? You are not credible.

 

[Natural Citizen]

This is a sincere poll. I would appreciate honest answers. If you're willing, I would also appreciate your reasons. I will not criticize your choice. I would just honestly like to know where USMB posters stand on this issue.

NOTE: I know there are many possible variables, but this poll assumes "typical" circumstances. In other words, this is a superficial poll that assumes "normal/average" circumstances - meaning no rape, incest, health, deformity, financial, or other extenuating issues.

Obstetricians are trained that when they are treating a pregnancy they are treating two patients.

Poll questions are therefore incomplete, rendering discussion irrelevant to scope of the terms of controversy.