Women have the right to control their own bodies.

[Remodeling Maidiac]

And if they controlled them a little better, we wouldn't need abortions.

Women just get stuck holding the bag. They don't get pregnant by themselves. Could we could include another party that perhaps should control themselves a little better, too?

You people CONSTANTLY tell us it's none of our business. Based on that logic alone it is YOUR problem and yours alone no?

I am not "you people." I am me. One person. Stick to my arguments or talk to someone else.

Men either have a say so in the issue or they don't. Which is it?

 

[Magnificat]

Still waiting for Old Biddy to answer my question.

What question was that?

Is a fetus alive? Yes or no

 

[OldLady]

I'm not sure what all this "leave it to the states" stuff is about. There is nothing wrong with federal legislation to leave abortion to hell alone.

Prior to Roe v Wade states made the laws individually. There wasn't a federal law on the books. So overturn Roe v Wade and that states are back in control unless or until a federal law is passed.

A federal law already WAS passed fifty years ago!!! There is no reason to overturn it.

 

[Magnificat]

This argument will rage back and forth till the end of time. Why not just agree to disagree?

Because some of these jokers want to take away women's right to choose.

OK, worse case scenario - SCOTUS overturns Roe v Wade. So, again, for a period of time it is illegal. How long? Only until the next time Democrats control Congress and the White House. They pass and sign into law legislation legalizing abortion in all states, territories and possessions.

Other than that the arguments will never change, or change minds.

They couldn't do that. State rights, don't you know. The federal government has a limited set of powers granted by the Constitution. Everything else is a state right. Abortion is not on the list of federal powers. Sorry.

Since when has that stopped the feds from stepping in and legislating?

Hmmm. Now there's a thinker.

 

[OldLady]

Still waiting for Old Biddy to answer my question.

What question was that?

Is a fetus alive? Yes or no

You mean a ten week old fetus? No, not outside the womb.

 

[dblack]

And if they controlled them a little better, we wouldn't need abortions.

I am all for women being in control of THEIR bodies. You want a boob job, tummy tuck, butt lift, go for it. The pro-"choice" advocates pretend the fetus is an unnecessary piece of fat.

And the pro-lifers pretend the fetus is a full-fledged person. More importantly, they pretend that a pregnant woman's womb is public property.

The human fetus is a human being. Take an elementary biology class. Duh.

I understand the biology just fine. The question is whether a fetus is a separate legal person, with rights that should be protected by the government.

Legality has nothing to do with what is defined as human life. We're talking about human lives here.

Ahhh. .Ok. I thought you were talking about making abortion illegal. My apologies.

 

[OldLady]

And if they controlled them a little better, we wouldn't need abortions.

Women just get stuck holding the bag. They don't get pregnant by themselves. Could we could include another party that perhaps should control themselves a little better, too?

You people CONSTANTLY tell us it's none of our business. Based on that logic alone it is YOUR problem and yours alone no?

I am not "you people." I am me. One person. Stick to my arguments or talk to someone else.

Men either have a say so in the issue or they don't. Which is it?

Men have equal responsibility, yes.

 

[Magnificat]

Still waiting for Old Biddy to answer my question.

What question was that?

Is a fetus alive? Yes or no

You mean a ten week old fetus? No, not outside the womb.

So, you believe that a ten week old fetus is dead? Medical science says otherwise.

 

[Old Man Grumbles]

I've brought this over from what I said in a different thread on Roe v Wade in the CDZ. This speaks to the privacy right the Court spoke to in the 14th Amendment.

While everyone knows that the US Constitution does not specifically list a right to privacy, those using this argument should carefully consider the decision of the court. The court stated that there were "zones of privacy" that had been created in the Constitution. I will call the unwritten right to privacy as "inferred privacy" for this post.

The Constitution does not list a right to privacy. The Court has held, however, that Bill of Rights protections of free speech, assembly, and religious exercise (First Amendment), along with freedom from forced quartering of troops (Third), unreasonable searches and seizures (Fourth), and forced self-incrimination (Fifth) create “zones of privacy.” Further, the Ninth Amendment’s protection of unenumerated rights could be said to protect privacy. These “zones,” the Court held, are places into which the government cannot unreasonably intrude. Roe claimed that the law robbed her of her right to privacy as protected by the combination of Bill of Rights amendments, and of her liberty as protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Roe v. Wade (1973) - Bill of Rights Institute

Now, lets carefully consider this. Should a future case get the court to conclude that the 14th Amendment does not provide an inferred right to privacy, where would this lead to when it comes to the other "zones of privacy"? Could, and would, government then attempt to remove other inferred rights to privacy to further it's own interests? It is certainly possible. In these tumultuous political and social times it would not be unreasonable to think so.

Remove any one zone of privacy and we open the door to eroding further zones, stripping us of our individual rights. Not something anyone would ever want to see happen.

 

[Old Man Grumbles]

I'm not sure what all this "leave it to the states" stuff is about. There is nothing wrong with federal legislation to leave abortion to hell alone.

Prior to Roe v Wade states made the laws individually. There wasn't a federal law on the books. So overturn Roe v Wade and that states are back in control unless or until a federal law is passed.

A federal law already WAS passed fifty years ago!!! There is no reason to overturn it.

I meant a law passed by Congress and enacted by the President. The case law created by the SCOTUS is different, though enforceable obviously. I never said that it should be overturned, I just hypothesized what would be if it was overturned.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Lol, I just looked at PP website. Reading their services, it appears they are the sexual regulation arm of the government. Almost all of what they do has to do with sex in some form or fashion.

Also, what is the very first service listed on their site? Abortion. You know what is listed 2nd? Abortion referral. Now, why do you think they list abortion first? Probably because it's the #1 service they provide. If it weren't, you would think they would put one of their other services as top billing.

Actually, general healthcare is listed 5th on their website.

 

[OldLady]

Still waiting for Old Biddy to answer my question.

What question was that?

Is a fetus alive? Yes or no

You mean a ten week old fetus? No, not outside the womb.

So, you believe that a ten week old fetus is dead? Medical science says otherwise.

Medical science also does not call it a baby.

 

[OldLady]

Lol, I just looked at PP website. Reading their services, it appears they are the sexual regulation arm of the government. Almost all of what they do has to do with sex in some form or fashion.

Also, what is the very first service listed on their site? Abortion. You know what is listed 2nd? Abortion referral. Now, why do you think they list abortion first? Probably because it's the #1 service they provide. If it weren't, you would think they would put one of their other services as top billing.

Actually, general healthcare is listed 5th on their website.

Link that, please.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

And if they controlled them a little better, we wouldn't need abortions.

Women just get stuck holding the bag. They don't get pregnant by themselves. Could we could include another party that perhaps should control themselves a little better, too?

You people CONSTANTLY tell us it's none of our business. Based on that logic alone it is YOUR problem and yours alone no?

I am not "you people." I am me. One person. Stick to my arguments or talk to someone else.

Men either have a say so in the issue or they don't. Which is it?

Men have equal responsibility, yes.

That's half the battle. No for the question that matters. If the MOTHER wants an abortion and the FATHER doesn't what do we do?

 

[OldLady]

I'm not sure what all this "leave it to the states" stuff is about. There is nothing wrong with federal legislation to leave abortion to hell alone.

Prior to Roe v Wade states made the laws individually. There wasn't a federal law on the books. So overturn Roe v Wade and that states are back in control unless or until a federal law is passed.

A federal law already WAS passed fifty years ago!!! There is no reason to overturn it.

I meant a law passed by Congress and enacted by the President. The case law created by the SCOTUS is different, though enforceable obviously. I never said that it should be overturned, I just hypothesized what would be if it was overturned.

We don't have a law? So how did Roe v. Wade reach the SCOTUS?

 

[OldLady]

Women just get stuck holding the bag. They don't get pregnant by themselves. Could we could include another party that perhaps should control themselves a little better, too?

You people CONSTANTLY tell us it's none of our business. Based on that logic alone it is YOUR problem and yours alone no?

I am not "you people." I am me. One person. Stick to my arguments or talk to someone else.

Men either have a say so in the issue or they don't. Which is it?

Men have equal responsibility, yes.

That's half the battle. No for the question that matters. If the MOTHER wants an abortion and the FATHER doesn't what do we do?

Take it to the judge.

 

[Old Man Grumbles]

Lol, I just looked at PP website. Reading their services, it appears they are the sexual regulation arm of the government. Almost all of what they do has to do with sex in some form or fashion.

Also, what is the very first service listed on their site? Abortion. You know what is listed 2nd? Abortion referral. Now, why do you think they list abortion first? Probably because it's the #1 service they provide. If it weren't, you would think they would put one of their other services as top billing.

Actually, general healthcare is listed 5th on their website.

If you are talking about the list on the Services page, they simply listed them alphabetically.

 

[OldLady]

Lol, I just looked at PP website. Reading their services, it appears they are the sexual regulation arm of the government. Almost all of what they do has to do with sex in some form or fashion.

Also, what is the very first service listed on their site? Abortion. You know what is listed 2nd? Abortion referral. Now, why do you think they list abortion first? Probably because it's the #1 service they provide. If it weren't, you would think they would put one of their other services as top billing.

Actually, general healthcare is listed 5th on their website.

If you are talking about the list on the Services page, they simply listed them alphabetically.

I have been to the PP website and I can promise you it does not list abortion as their first service.

 

[Old Man Grumbles]

I'm not sure what all this "leave it to the states" stuff is about. There is nothing wrong with federal legislation to leave abortion to hell alone.

Prior to Roe v Wade states made the laws individually. There wasn't a federal law on the books. So overturn Roe v Wade and that states are back in control unless or until a federal law is passed.

A federal law already WAS passed fifty years ago!!! There is no reason to overturn it.

I meant a law passed by Congress and enacted by the President. The case law created by the SCOTUS is different, though enforceable obviously. I never said that it should be overturned, I just hypothesized what would be if it was overturned.

We don't have a law? So how did Roe v. Wade reach the SCOTUS?

Like every other case. There was a disagreement between the two parties that worked its way to the Supreme Court.

 

[22lcidw]

And if they controlled them a little better, we wouldn't need abortions.

Women just get stuck holding the bag. They don't get pregnant by themselves. Could we could include another party that perhaps should control themselves a little better, too?

The woman has the final say on getting pregnant. Take responsibility.

YOU first.

It's your body. You women keep telling us it's your body, then you want to blame the man. You can't have it both ways.

I am saying the man is one half to blame. That is all.

You have spent decades saying you are better then men. Smarter then men. You can't even figure out the simplest urge from gaia given history. You cry because you screwed up. And screwed up bad. You are so expensive and in most cases so not worth it. You let feminist extremists ph uk you over. And in the process you have ph uked over men. You expect men who you emasculated to pay for you. Half the men will not even put their lives on the line for you anymore. Watching TV is like a bring the men into the death camps revival. And the more this goes on the worse the relationships will become. The first rule of being the smartest sex in the world is........."Say no"! It would save so much misery. Although it would not be a happy relaxing time. Fellas.....you young ones. Soon enough the robots will be much more advanced. Then you can be purely for yourselves. And if the games are stacked with feminist extremism, you can take what you want. You already are in small areas. But the smartest ones do not realize it.