Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's right. Most people rightfully regard abortion as a personal issue that is none of their business. Only few people agonize over the sex lives of other people that they may not even know.
I don't know anyone who "agonizes" over other people's sex lives (well, there is an alphabet group that wants everyone to know, but that's another topic).
But killing someone because you feel like it is a separate issue.
I am getting dizzy with the circles you keep going in. Wash Rinse Repeat and Repeat and Repeat.
There are no circles. That's just you getting slapped upside the head with your contradictory cognitive dissonance. Fetal homicide laws have indeed already set the legal precedent that an unborn child is a separate human life.
Who am I or you to tells blacks that a certain aspect of their culture is wrong and immoral? It's their responsibility to do something about it, if they want to.
You support genocide?
Think killing babies is part of a culture, like say, food?
There are no circles. That's just you getting slapped upside the head with your contradictory cognitive dissonance. Fetal homicide laws have indeed already set the legal precedent that an unborn child is a separate human life.
Your arguments are going in circles. You could call it repetition. Repetition doesn't make it so and does not convince others.
Ban abortion and then who knows how many abortions happen every year? It's just a good way to hide them. If things go further unbelievably extreme by banning birth control, then the actual abortion numbers could reverse and go up.
Yep. Lots of the anti-abortion mob believe that IUD's should be banned.
Except for the fact that there are many states imposing restrictions on abortion, should they ignore them all in addition to this one.
States place restrictions on specifically enumerated Constitutional gun rights. There's no difference between that and any perceived right to abortion. The legal precedence already established is that states clearly can and do restrict rights. What about that are you not getting?
And the flip side: the purpose of being a republic is to protect people from the mob.
A woman’s right falls under liberty. No state has a right to infringe on that.
In that case, Constitutional gun rights should not be restricted by any state. But since SCOTUS has consistently allowed states to restrict Constitutional gun rights, it follows that states can also restrict any perceived right to abortion.
If you read all my posts in this thread and on other threads regarding abortion, and even noted in the post you quoted, I completely support choice. I have marched in support of it, and have long considered it one of my top issues in voting.
However, that does not blind me to the fact that the Roe decision - from a purely legal reasoning standpoint - is not the strongest of opinions. I'm simply separating my opinions regarding abortion itself and the integrity of the legal reasoning in the Roe decision.
Exactly. Roe is not a legally sound ruling. It was a HUGE unforced strategic error for the pro-abortion contingent to expose Roe to SCOTUS review.
Should any state be allowed to tell you how many children you can father?
Should any state be allowed to tell you which arms/guns you can and can't own? They already do, despite the fact that the Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms isn't supposed to be infringed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.