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.
How about prosecuting irresponsible females who have sex and bring children into the world who cannot afford to be mothers?
JWK
These pro-abortionists would rather a woman be able to have sex anytime she wants without using birth control and without dealing with the outcome of a pregnancy. Just kill it is there motto!
Well, I reached page 65 of the draft opinion. Pages 39-65 provide the rationale and page 65 holds the decision to overturn Roe and Casey, if that is indeed what they eventually do.
Page 62 is a statement that this decision pertains to abortion only and is not meant to affect gay marriage, etc etc.
The majority of the discussion here on CD is (I'm sorry) the emotional one regarding whether the zygote or the 12 week old fetus is a 'human being.' That is not what the court is deciding here.
They are making a determination on whether the US Constitution supports a right to abortion as asserted under Roe. They say inxay.
(no). And they don't appear to have much use for Casey either, again, if I read this correctly, as the so-called right was upheld there in the absence of any additional compelling factors and not even relying on the rationale used in Roe. It's pretty remarkable. ** any errors in my comment here are solely my own. I am not legal scholar and I have never played one on TV.**
Since the sun is shining, I'm outta here for the afternoon. I have actual 'things' to do. LOL.
Fortunately, I don't think birth control, gay marriage and interracial marriages are anywhere near as controversial as abortion. As with abortion, if you don't want to marry someone of the same sex, then don't do it. If you don't want to marry someone of a different race, then don't do it. I suspect the anti-abortion lobbies also wanting birth control banned are in the minority as well as radical. They can push it, but will be pushed back as oppressive, freedom robbing people.
The major group of "freedom robbing people" are control freaks who detest federalism, our Constitution's big-tent system, and they recoil from the through of having the States, and people therein, exercising hometown rule over those matters which, “. . . in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State” [see Federalist No. 45].
Indeed, our control freak crowd which has been obnoxiously using federal force for generations to impose their personal sense of fairness, reasonableness, or justice.as the rule of law in every state in the country, and on every person in the United States, are the real "freedom robbing" crowd, and they object to rule of law as expressed in our written constitutions, state and federal.
How about prosecuting irresponsible females who have sex and bring children into the world who cannot afford to be mothers?
JWK
I think many people from anti-abortion groups would tell you it's wrong to criminalize such a natural feminine thing for a woman as her motherhood whatever her financial recourses. Anyway, it's not a bad idea to encourage but not require the poor woman to give her baby up for adoption. But some don't want to give up their own flesh and blood and wonder years later how well in life it turned out.
I think many people from anti-abortion groups would tell you it's wrong to criminalize such a natural feminine thing for a woman as her motherhood whatever her financial recourses. Anyway, it's not a bad idea to encourage but not require the poor woman to give her baby up for adoption. But some don't want to give up their own flesh and blood and wonder years later how well in life it turned out.
"Neglect of a child is considered a form of abuse. Generally, such neglect is described as the failure of a parent or caregiver to provide food, shelter, clothing, medical care, or the failure to supervise a child to a degree that the child’s health, safety, and well-being could result in physical or emotional harm and injury. Criminal neglect can result in the responsible adult being placed in jail or prison and the child being removed from the home."
I still support prosecuting irresponsible females who have sex and bring children into the world who cannot afford to be mothers. To not prosecute this type of person is in effect, encouraging irresponsible behavior.
The major group of "freedom robbing people" are control freaks who detest federalism, our Constitution's big-tent system, and they recoil from the through of having the States, and people therein, exercising hometown rule over those matters which, “. . . in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State” [see Federalist No. 45].
Indeed, our control freak crowd which has been obnoxiously using federal force for generations to impose their personal sense of fairness, reasonableness, or justice.as the rule of law in every state in the country, and on every person in the United States, are the real "freedom robbing" crowd, and they object to rule of law as expressed in our written constitutions, state and federal.
JWK
It seems freedom can mean different things. Do some people actually consider an important freedom is to be free of being daily offended from leaving next door to a same sex married couple as well as from the other next door having a married interracial couple? Then to some people maybe there is the freedom of being free from not having to live across the street from a single woman who occasionally has guys over for company and gets legal abortions.
It seems freedom can mean different things. Do some people actually consider an important freedom is to be free of being daily offended from leaving next door to a same sex married couple as well as from the other next door having a married interracial couple? Then there is the freedom of not having to live across the street from a single woman who occasionally has guys over for company and gets legal abortions.
I'm not sure what that has to do with supporting federalism, our constitution's big-tent system and having the States, and people therein, exercising hometown rule over those matters which, “. . . in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State” [see Federalist No. 45].
"Neglect of a child is considered a form of abuse. Generally, such neglect is described as the failure of a parent or caregiver to provide food, shelter, clothing, medical care, or the failure to supervise a child to a degree that the child’s health, safety, and well-being could result in physical or emotional harm and injury. Criminal neglect can result in the responsible adult being placed in jail or prison and the child being removed from the home."
I still support prosecuting irresponsible females who have sex and bring children into the world who cannot afford to be mothers. To not prosecute this type of person is in effect, encouraging irresponsible behavior.
JWK
Then surely you want such women sent to prison for the rest of their child bearing years. So, a 20-year-old poor, neglectful woman would have to go prison for 30 years, all to assure you she can't be a poor mother again. A 40 year old woman would only have to go for 10 years. In effect, though, you'd only encourage abortion. Women can do it in secret from using abortion inducing drugs.
Then surely you want such women sent to prison for the rest of their child bearing years. So, a 20-year-old poor, neglectful woman would have to go prison for 30 years, all to assure you she can't be a poor mother again. A 40 year old woman would only have to go for 10 years. In effect, though, you'd only encourage abortion. Women can do it in secret from using abortion inducing drugs.
So, instead of having a productive discussion, you resort to an old, tired and stupid debating trick ___ exaggerate you opponent's position and they argue against you own exaggeration.
.
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.
