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.
I don't think they will overturn it but I've always questioned how the 14th amendment can be applied to women but not to the unborn? There are already federal laws protecting the unborn so why wouldn't the 14th amendment apply?
They have 5 votes. It was a made up law in 1973 by 7 judges. The constitution doesn't say anything about abortions. For 7 political judges after 100 years after the 14th was written to find a reason they all of the sudden discovered in 1973 that it applies to abortions and telling the states what they can regulate or allowed, it's an insult to our constitution and it's sadder that it's taking 49 years to fix.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 10 days ago)
35,636 posts, read 17,989,189 times
Reputation: 50678
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanJuanStar
70%? Bold number. We don't make laws or judges interpret the constitution by questionable poll numbers. I don't think 70% of the Red states or any purple states would like unlimited abortions on demand. That is b.s. Even in blue states. I really doubt 70/30 would like unlimited abortions without regulations forced by the feds, maybe in a few very blue states but that is not even 40% but I know for sure in 30 states min, Roe as it stands now isn't supported by 70%. That is B.S. and you know it.
I completely disagree.
We should make laws that people agree with. People who are governed by laws they think are unjust, won't comply, and will revolt.
I'm not talking about unlimited abortions. Almost no one wants late term abortions, except in the case where the baby won't survive after being born anyway. I'm talking about what's happening now, status quo, the people want that to continue.
Decisions about whether to choose adoption, end a pregnancy, or continue a pregnancy should be made by a pregnant person with the counsel of their family, their faith, and their health care provider. Politicians, religious movements and government should not be involved in anyone’s personal medical decisions about their reproductive health or pregnancy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpgypsy
Decisions about whether to choose adoption, end a pregnancy, or continue a pregnancy should be made by a pregnant person with the counsel of her family, her faith, and her health care provider. Politicians should not be involved in anyone’s personal medical decisions about their reproductive health or pregnancy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpgypsy
^^^
^^^^
Just stop with the falsehoods that you are utilizing, about me, to distract from the issue of this thread.
So my grammatical choice of using the term pregnant person ( and I do not believe I ever said people..but not sure) in a sentence, in which I had already used the word "woman" and the term "her" a few times, is now an offense against history? Against MAGA-conservative folks? Against you?
Post all you want to maintain the last word on another absurd and false accusation against a fellow poster, Chuckity. Serious people who comprehend the title of this thread, and the devastating and destructive issues this SCOTUS decision portends, will not be intimidated.
You wanna know what is truly at odds with history, Chuckity? The topic & title of this thread!
Roe has been the law of the land for 49 years, and the U.S. Supreme Court’s draft opinion, which will likely overturn it--- on blatant ideological reasoning---will gut the constitutional rights of WOMEN to make personal decisions about their own bodies, here in the year 2022, in the United States of America.
You've used pregnant person and "their" - signaling how progressive you are.
And then you changed the exact same phrase to use female pronouns. Thereby straddling the fence.
And my posts do have a place in this thread and I'm not changing the subject. For the last several years, progressives and the left have done their damndest to strip womanhood from the female gender - until it doesn't serve them any longer.
Now all of a sudden, it's a women's rights issue.
Add to that, the left has been downright militant about mask and vaccine mandates - and now they've brought back their "my body my choice!" chant.
It's hypocritical ... to say the very least. And it shows they're easily led by whatever way the progressive wind blows.
The fact remains that when the SCOTUS decision does come out, and if t does strike down Roe, abortion will continue to remain legal in the United States.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 10 days ago)
35,636 posts, read 17,989,189 times
Reputation: 50678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckity
You've used pregnant person and "their" - signaling how progressive you are.
And then you changed the exact same phrase to use female pronouns. Thereby straddling the fence.
And my posts do have a place in this thread and I'm not changing the subject. For the last several years, progressives and the left have done their damndest to strip womanhood from the female gender - until it doesn't serve them any longer.
Now all of a sudden, it's a women's rights issue.
Add to that, the left has been downright militant about mask and vaccine mandates - and now they've brought back their "my body my choice!" chant.
It's hypocritical ... to say the very least. And it shows they're easily led by whatever way the progressive wind blows.
The fact remains that when the SCOTUS decision does come out, and if t does strike down Roe, abortion will continue to remain legal in the United States.
In your eyes, women would rather plan for an expensive abortion trip rather than just use BC. Those pro abortioners... anything for an abortion I guess.
But I guess if they save up beforehand, once they get pregnant they'll be ready and prepared to go get that abortion.
Makes perfect sense.
No statistics. No need to make anything up. Easy to find news stories about abortion clinics in cities being overwhelmed caused by neighboring states banning most abortion. Wichita is one of the latest places with a flood of new patients.
Once again, it's none of my business what a woman does with her reproductive or sex life when I'm not her sex partner. If I wanted to otherwise make it my business, then I'd become a social worker for men and women who need help and wouldn't mind me making it their business.
You can either work to change the laws in your state or move to a different state.
I mean, it's kinda in the same vein of what conservatives were told by the left when they complained that they were being censored on social media: go create your own social media.
No statistics. No need to make anything up. Easy to find news stories about abortion clinics in cities being overwhelmed caused by neighboring states banning most abortion. Wichita is one of the latest places with a flood of new patients.
Once again, it's none of my business what a woman does with her reproductive or sex life when I'm not her sex partner. If I wanted to otherwise make it my business, then I'd become a social worker for men and women who need help and wouldn't mind me making it their business.
If it's none of your business why do you care?
Why are you in this discussion at all?
Seems if you truly didn't care, you wouldn't be involved at all. Wouldn't even be on your radar.
So the "none of my business" argument is garbage. Because you want women to get abortions.
It's the only reason you are arguing. You do truly want it to be you business.
You can either work to change the laws in your state or move to a different state.
I mean, it's kinda in the same vein of what conservatives were told by the left when they complained that they were being censored on social media: go create your own social media.
Or: Oh if you don't get a shot you'll get fired? Hey, you have a choice. Just go get another job.
Yep, we do have some states where abortion is protected at the state level, and where it will remain accessible if Roe falls. There is, however, a very real danger that in a few short years, with complete control of the federal levers of power, anti-choice, anti-women extremists could enact a federal abortion ban, which could abolish abortion nationally, regardless of state law. This is not theoretical — it is their endgame.
We the people ( and I do mean women also, Chuckity) must urge Congress to pass the Women’s Health Protection Act. The bill, already passed by the House of Representatives, would put the protections offered by Roe into federal law.
We do have some states where abortion is protected at the state level, and where it will remain accessible if Roe falls. There is, however, a very real danger that in a few short years, with complete control of the federal levers of power, anti-choice, anti-women extremists could enact a federal abortion ban, which could abolish abortion nationally, regardless of state law. This is not theoretical — it is their endgame.
We the people ( and I do mean women also, Chuckity) must urge Congress to pass the Women’s Health Protection Act. The bill, already passed by the House of Representatives, would put the protections offered by Roe into federal law.
Can you do that without threatening politicians? Protesting at their homes? Following them into bathrooms? Threatening their family and children?
If you can, good on you. But I suspect you can't.
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.
