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

Go fuck yourself. Read the link I provided and call that guy a fool. Idiot.
You obviously didn't read all of my post. I agree I said it came into being to protect former slaves in Southern States. However, also protected native Americans and most people who came here as immigrants. The only official document that proves most people here are US citizens are their birth certificates. You try to have a good day, I plan on it and I'm out of here I had my say and you can go fuck yourself. Hope it's enough to make your day.
 
Sure.


Follow the Source links for each state. A few examples:
Arkansas: "... bans abortion in all cases except to save the life of the mother."
Idaho: "The law only makes exceptions for rape, incest and to save the pregnant person’s life."
Mississippi: "The trigger law includes exceptions for some women seeking abortions, including for rape and for the life of the mother."
Oklahoma: "All abortions are now banned in Oklahoma, except to save a mother’s life, rape or incest."
South Dakota: "unless there is appropriate and reasonable medical judgment that performance of an abortion is necessary to preserve the life of the pregnant female,"
 
Go fuck yourself. Read the link I provided and call that guy a fool. Idiot.
I've seen that article before. I don't think he's a fool; I think he's got an agenda, because he's misrepresenting the ideas of jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction in a legal sense means that the person in question is in a physical space where the laws of the given political body reach. That means that if you are within a place where you can be arrested by United States officers, you are within our jurisdiction. There are only a few exceptions: If you are a representative of a foreign embassy and therefore enjoy diplomatic immunity; if you are on board a ship docked in a US base; or if the US has been invaded and you are behind enemy lines. (It also used to apply to some Indian lands, but no longer.) The 14th makes no distinction for why someone was in the US; the fact that they are on US soil means they enjoy full Constitutional rights, including birthright citizenship if they are born here.

There will always be those who think Wong should be reversed and the meaning of the Citizenship Clause changed but, as I said, don't hold your breath.
 
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.
I forget which state, maybe Michigan, Port limitations on what constitutes a threat to the mother's life. When I saw that, I said to myself, they are asking for a lawsuit. They are saying their opinion is more important than the doctors. If the woman dies they could be sued for millions and rightly so.
 
I've seen that article before. I don't think he's a fool; I think he's got an agenda, because he's misrepresenting the ideas of jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction in a legal sense means that the person in question is in a physical space where the laws of the given political body reach. That means that if you are within a place where you can be arrested by United States officers, you are within our jurisdiction. There are only a few exceptions: If you are a representative of a foreign embassy and therefore enjoy diplomatic immunity; if you are on board a ship docked in a US base; or if the US has been invaded and you are behind enemy lines. (It also used to apply to some Indian lands, but no longer.) The 14th makes no distinction for why someone was in the US; the fact that they are on US soil means they enjoy full Constitutional rights, including birthright citizenship if they are born here.

There will always be those who think Wong should be reversed and the meaning of the Citizenship Clause changed but, as I said, don't hold your breath.
The 14th Amendment is addressing ex-slaves and their descendants.
 
Notice the part highlighted in purple.
I read the whole thing initially. The Indian rights law order came about without it. And as it says it protects all people born in the United States. It's designed to protect all our citizens.
 
I read the whole thing initially. The Indian rights law order came about without it. And as it says it protects all people born in the United States. It's designed to protect all our citizens.
The Indian rights law wouldn't have came along without it.
 
I read the whole thing initially. The Indian rights law order came about without it. And as it says it protects all people born in the United States. It's designed to protect all our citizens.
No, that is not what it was designed for. The purpose was to ensure full citizenship rights to slaves and their descendants. That was the intent. It has been USED to ensure citizenship to people born here to illegals. That's what the article states.
 
No, that is not what it was designed for. The purpose was to ensure full citizenship rights to slaves and their descendants. That was the intent. It has been USED to ensure citizenship to people born here to illegals.
Hopefully this will go to SCOTUS too to end that it allows birth right citizenship. It was done specifically to allow slaves to be citizens. Then abused forever.
 
The 14th Amendment is addressing ex-slaves and their descendants.
Okay, so now you're just repeating.

You seem to be stuck on the idea that ex-slaves and immigrants are mutually exclusive. Just because it was written primarily to address ex-slaves and their descendants, that does not mean that it doesn't apply just as strongly to immigrants, which weren't as pressing an issue at the time.

After all, if they had desired it to affect only ex-slaves and their descendants, they could have added a clause that said "... for ex-slaves and their descendants."
 
Okay, so now you're just repeating.

You seem to be stuck on the idea that ex-slaves and immigrants are mutually exclusive. Just because it was written primarily to address ex-slaves and their descendants, that does not mean that it doesn't apply just as strongly to immigrants, which weren't as pressing an issue at the time.

After all, if they had desired it to affect only ex-slaves and their descendants, they could have added a clause that said "... for ex-slaves and their descendants."
And they also could have said "This applies to the children born here to people that crossed the border illegally", but it doesn't, does it.

A Supreme Court Justice should understand the intent of the Amendment instead of twisting it to cover their agenda.
 
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.
The Constitution isn't interpreted by polling the American people's opinions. Your kind of thinking is exactly the problem in this country.
 
Arkansas: "... bans abortion in all cases except to save the life of the mother."
Your post said that was excluded. Contradicted yourself again.
Mississippi: "The trigger law includes exceptions for some women seeking abortions, including for rape and for the life of the mother."
This also contradicts your post.
Oklahoma: "All abortions are now banned in Oklahoma, except to save a mother’s life, rape or incest."
Again. Wow, every one of your examples specifically state exceptions where abortion is allowed. Exactly what you were complaining would not be addressed. Murder for convenience is not allowed.
 
Your post said that was excluded. Contradicted yourself again.

This also contradicts your post.

Again. Wow, every one of your examples specifically state exceptions where abortion is allowed. Exactly what you were complaining would not be addressed. Murder for convenience is not allowed.
Okay, we've got crossed wires here.

I'm pretty sure that all states with anti-abortion laws make exceptions when the mother's life is in danger; that is, when there is a good chance that's she is going to actually die from the procedure. I think we can agree on that.

I was pointing out that many states with anti-abortion laws do not make an exception for when her health is in danger. That is, when she will probably survive the process of having the baby, but it is going to leave her with serious and long-lasting health issues. That's not the same as her life.

The links I posted show examples of states that specify that they only make exceptions for when her life is in danger, but allow no such exception for her health.

See?
 
No, that is not what it was designed for. The purpose was to ensure full citizenship rights to slaves and their descendants. That was the intent. It has been USED to ensure citizenship to people born here to illegals. That's what the article states.
Like I said, amendments that bring about freedoms can be expanded to include all Americans as it says so in the amendment itself. All people born in America are protected by this act. That birth certificate proves you are an American. Do you have your certificate from your grandparents or great grandparents whoever migrated here in your family line. My sister has a copy of it. But we do not have the original paper. Thank God we are all born here and being born here proves that we're Americans.
 

Forum List

Back
Top