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.
You should have told the drafters and signatories of the US Constitution that since they clearly give power to the people in the 10th Amendment.
As it would be a civil matter (not criminal), as in the TX law, any person pursuing enforcement would have to prove they've been harmed to have standing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blondy
The founders are spinning in their graves and kicking themselves for not including a provision to kick states out of the union.
The idea that they would support Texas' blatant misuse of law to concoct the bogus scheme they have is profane.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blondy
The founders are spinning in their graves and kicking themselves for not including a provision to kick states out of the union.
They could have saved this country a huge body count that incurred from the civil war if they had.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blondy
The idea that they would support Texas' blatant misuse of law to concoct the bogus scheme they have is profane.
The 10th Amendment is in the Constitution, no one is misusing it, they are applying it.
btw: right to privacy, not mentioned in the Constitution, thus the title of this thread.
Because you know its true ... I am 60 years old and was here during Roe V Wade decision being handed down. Saw it right off in the end who it served best. It damn sure wasn't women.
Correct. The Roe v. Wade decision was rendered to benefit wealthy men who didn't want an embarrassment and/or the responsibility of owing a bastard heir, much like the files/evidence have been sealed in the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases.
Because you know its true ... I am 60 years old and was here during Roe V Wade decision being handed down. Saw it right off in the end who it served best. It damn sure wasn't women.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Correct. The Roe v. Wade decision was rendered to benefit wealthy men who didn't want an embarrassment and/or the responsibility of owing a bastard heir, much like the files/evidence have been sealed in the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases.
Yes, I saw that argument written up some where on the internet about the number illegitimate children that would have been born, if not for Roe v Wade. It's horrible the spin they will put on this ... my first born grand baby girl, today 15, my daughter did not marry the father. And thank God for that, because coming out of a poor home in the u.s. wow
My daughter will be teaching at a local college this year and my grand baby girl, so smart, she'll be starting college at age 16.
The law was not about poor women at all, at least not in the way they'd have people to believe. [they counted on people's behaviors and that is what I saw in the 70s; hasn't changed]
Because you know its true ... I am 60 years old and was here during Roe V Wade decision being handed down. Saw it right off in the end who it served best. It damn sure wasn't women.
Millions of women.....the majority in fact, disagree with you.
Yes, I saw that argument written up some where on the internet about the number illegitimate children that would have been born, if not for Roe v Wade. It's horrible the spin they will put on this ... my first born grand baby girl, today 15, my daughter did not marry the father. And thank God for that, because coming out of a poor home in the u.s. wow
My daughter will be teaching at a local college this year and my grand baby girl, so smart, she'll be starting college at age 16.
The law was not about poor women at all, at least not in the way they'd have people to believe.
Congrats to you and your family! And anyone who thinks Roe v. Wade was about women's rights or protecting poor women is sadly mistaken. It was about letting wealthy men walk away from their "mistakes."
Correct. The Roe v. Wade decision was rendered to benefit wealthy men who didn't want an embarrassment and/or the responsibility of owing a bastard heir, much like the files/evidence have been sealed in the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases.
Listens to the Twilight Zone playing in the background.
I guess when all else fails, it's time to move into conspiracy theory land lol.
Congrats to you and your family! And anyone who thinks Roe v. Wade was about women's rights or protecting poor women is sadly mistaken. It was about letting wealthy men walk away from their "mistakes."
Wealthy men needed Roe less than anyone.
There were always doctors who would perform a D&C for a price and wealthy men who needed to know knew how to find them.
Nothing has failed. SCOTUS has let the TX law stand.
Your logic has failed miserably which is why you are now in conspiracy theory land.
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.
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.
