Why the whining about men voting to overturn Roe v. Wade?

When I looked up the information on removing a supreme Court Justice, they are removed by impeachment.
Removed, yes, but there are cases where a Federal Judge or Justice could be simply arrested. This probably isn't one of those cases, but who knows what someone could successfully argue.

Amusingly, if a Justice were hypothetically arrested, found guilty, and sentenced, they wouldn't necessarily lose their position. They could keep doing their job from their prison cell.
 
Article III, Section 1, Clause b. "The Judges ... shall hold their offices during good behaviour ..."

The Justices in this case could be subject to impeachment, not trial, meaning no proof of a crime is required. All they'd need is 218 Representatives to impeach, and 67 Senators to remove.
In other words it's not going to happen no matter how atrocious the situation becomes because of their agenda.
 
Removed, yes, but there are cases where a Federal Judge or Justice could be simply arrested. This probably isn't one of those cases, but who knows what someone could successfully argue.

Amusingly, if a Justice were hypothetically arrested, found guilty, and sentenced, they wouldn't necessarily lose their position. They could keep doing their job from their prison cell.
So we see the weaknesses in the Constitution now. It's not a perfect document, it was written by men after all, just like the Bible. Too bad the Bible didn't have amendments. In order to form less judgment on it's followers and the insinuation that non followers must follow these rules.
 
Abortions have not been banned moron. The issue has been returned to the states. I don't know of any state that has banned abortions necessitated by medical conditions. Inconvenience and "Uh oh, I got drunk and fucked the wrong guy last night." are not reason for murder of innocents.
Numerous states have had trigger bans already take effect, and more will be in effect soon. Many (if not most) of those have exceptions only if the life of the mother is in danger, but pay no attention to cases of rape or incest, or if the pregnancy threatens the mother's health.
 
So we see the weaknesses in the Constitution now. It's not a perfect document, it was written by men after all, just like the Bible. Too bad the Bible didn't have amendments. In order to form less judgment on it's followers and the insinuation that non followers must follow these rules.
So far the Constitution has been amended 27 times. That's a lot of corrections in a so-called perfect document. Today 80% of Americans believe in a woman's right to choose. 60% of Americans wanted Roe versus Wade to stay in place and continue protecting that right. One of the most serious decisions a woman has to make in her lifetime.
 
So we see the weaknesses in the Constitution now. It's not a perfect document, it was written by men after all, just like the Bible. Too bad the Bible didn't have amendments. In order to form less judgment on it's followers and the insinuation that non followers must follow these rules.
As a country, we kind of have the habit of not figuring out what happens in every specific situation, until they actually happen. This is in contrast to institutions like the Catholic Church or the British Royal Family, who have archives full of what-if contingencies, 99.99% of which will never come to pass.
 
Numerous states have had trigger bans already take effect, and more will be in effect soon. Many (if not most) of those have exceptions only if the life of the mother is in danger, but pay no attention to cases of rape or incest, or if the pregnancy threatens the mother's health.
All abortions have not been banned, that is correct. But the abortion bands now being put in place are worse than the abortion bands that were in place by the States before 1973. That is the whole reason Roe versus Wade came into existence in the first place, to codify abortion laws on a national level, and eliminate the horrible laws which were causing women to lose their lives. Thanks to technology this time around it won't be as deadly hopefully , but at the same time it doesn't help the situation.
 
As a country, we kind of have the habit of not figuring out what happens in every specific situation, until they actually happen. This is in contrast to institutions like the Catholic Church or the British Royal Family, who have archives full of what-if contingencies, 99.99% of which will never come to pass.
Churches don't affect everyone just their members. Unfortunately, they have an indirect effect of affecting everyone else. I think the founding fathers figured that out and that's why they put that clause in there about religion. Our public government is supposed to be secular to avoid that contamination of biases and prejudices.
 
Many (if not most) of those have exceptions only if the life of the mother is in danger, but pay no attention to cases of rape or incest, or if the pregnancy threatens the mother's health.
Do you always contradict yourself in the same sentence? ^^^^ Come back when you get a researched and thought out response.
 
That is the whole reason Roe versus Wade came into existence in the first place, to codify abortion laws on a national level
Courts can only rule on existing law. They don't make laws. Congress dropped the ball at half court by not legislating a national abortion law. Blame them--not the court.
 
And you're an idiot if you really think that, why are you pricks so vindictive.

He said men need to stay out of it because it's none of our business, so him approving of the overturning of Roe seems to be the logical conclusion.
 
He said men need to stay out of it because it's none of our business, so him approving of the overturning of Roe seems to be the logical conclusion.
If you were alive back then, if you know the whole story you'll understand. The men back then were right and what they did because the states had enacted such egregious abortion laws that women were killing themselves left and right. These men and the one woman got on to the supreme Court with a set agenda in mind. Not only that, they lied while under oath during the Congressional hearings committing perjury. None of them deserve to be on the supreme Court.
 
If you were alive back then, if you know the whole story you'll understand. The men back then were right and what they did because the states had enacted such egregious abortion laws that women were killing themselves left and right. These men and the one woman got on to the supreme Court with a set agenda in mind. Not only that, they lied while under oath during the Congressional hearings committing perjury. None of them deserve to be on the supreme Court.
The states are enacting abortion laws which are even more egregious today. The Federal government is going to have no other choice but to step back in again and set things right, to protect its citizens.
.
 
Do you always contradict yourself in the same sentence? ^^^^ Come back when you get a researched and thought out response.
Health and life are two different things.

If a pregnancy shatters a woman's health, requiring considerable (and massively expensive) care during her stay or leading to long-term complications, many states don't count that as a good enough reason.
 
We guys should just butt out of the abortion issue. It’s none of our business.
If the child is born and you are the proven genetic father, you are on the hook for child support for at least the next 18 years.

So yes, it is "our" business.

Also if the child is born we would have a claim for custody, so again "our" business.

Which would suggest/imply we should have a voice/say on whether the child(fetus) is aborted or not.

Of course, one aspect would be we guys if we want to see the child born, should pony up on paying support to the carrying/pregnant mother through the birth, and maybe also the recovery.

In a case where the father is unknown and/or can't be found, the "state"/citizens would be obligated to the support of a future citizen.
 
Abortion is good for men. Men don't always need the burden of being a father. It is nice to be able to convince a young woman to abort and not bother the man
That is monumentally stupid. Any "man" that would want such a thing isn't worth being called a man.

He (I say that loosely) deserves to be castrated.
 
But they do already. They actually know they are women. It is your side that seems confused there.
This is a free Nation. Women are supposed to be equal to men under the law. Would a man ever let the government do something this invasive to their bodies.
 

Forum List

Back
Top