The law of Roe was promoted by a racist white woman who favored eugenics and the practice of Roe has killed statistically significantly more black children per capita than other races in this country. Pointing to race does favor the liberals on this issue.
Roe vs. Wade Overturned.
- Thread starter mrhotdice
- Start date
- Status
Dude you need to calm down. If anyone is sending this country to a second civil war it’s the left. Assaulting people in public, burning down cities.. etc.
I love this argument. The left is way worse then the right with this. Rape victims account for 1% of abortions. ONE PERCENT! Yet you stand on the rape victims as if they’re you’re holy grail for justifying abortions. It’s disgusting to be Frank.
So you keep replying to me even after acknowledging it's a waste of your time? You need to calm down. You're emotionally unstable right now.
That was the argument when liberals claimed legalization would reduce the number of abortions in this country. That was a lie and not motivating now. Making murder illegal also causes most murders to take place in the dark.
Insert exploding heads in 5.... 4.... 3....
If Jesus was on the United States Supreme Court. How would He rule on Roe v Wade?
Proverbs 6 : 16-17
16 there are six things that God hates, seven which are an abomination to him: 17 haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
Religious beliefs are not supposed to be a part of the judicial or legislative process. Separation of church and state is still a thing.
Jesus, if you believe him to be who he claimed, would condemn the entirety of our system. He'd be seen as some contrarian, mislabeled as woke and jailed for his beliefs if he existed today.
I can understand the term limit argument, I'm not sure it would do what many think it would though. If politicians actually have to decide on tough issues there won't be a need for term limits.
It's not as simple as they don't want it, and if there's actually a majority that want it then the local elections will answer that question perfectly as the Govt was designed to do. A panel of unelected people deciding would only create more division.
Clearly it is nap time. Get your mat and close your eyes. Juice and snacks when you wake up!!
Government won't let you kill a recently born child. Seems like a matter of location. Again, if there's a heartbeat, it becomes barbaric. Or if I'm drunk and kill a pregnant mother in a car accident, I'm up on 2 counts. Which is it?
Cmon man.
We know if this goes through as planned, abortion will be illegal in the south and midwest. The options for abortion will be drive to the coasts or do it yourself. It’s not going to stop abortion any more so than marijuana being illegal will keep me from sparking a bowl after work.
They’re already planning a bunch of dumb **** in some states like having funerals for miscarriages or prosecuting women who don’t carry to term.
I guess I’m just a believer in “Don’t like ____? Don’t partake in ______, but don’t tell me I can’t or I must partake in _____.”
You could fill in those blanks with guns, alcohol, drugs, gay marriage, interracial marriage, abortion, being trans, hunting, religion and on and on.
LOL!!!!!! This from a guy who just condemned me to hell. Religious beliefs do belong in the legislature. The constitution does not prohibit people voting with or making laws premised upon religious convictions.
Do you also wear clothes woven of multiple fabrics? God also forbid that. I don't see the right clamoring to make that illegal.
Convenient how y'all pick and choose what to believe in.
Trying to wade through the muck here and missed this post. I'm worried that the fabric of "privacy" which is the backbone of Roe v. Wade could be exploited in a counter measure. To my knowledge the 14th amendment doesn't specifically mention privacy as a stated right. Alito makes it clear that being "rooted in history" is of utmost importance. Short of Roe, what are the main privacy court cases that are deeply rooted in history?
This isn't a catch all, either. This decision will have huge ramifications on a myriad of issues in the coming years.
Dumbshit Democrats is the problem, with that statement that shows your one of them.
Jewish beliefs are that personhood is not achieved until birth. Would you be okay if a group of Jewish lawmakers passed bills legalizing abortion until the moment of birth? I'm guessing you wouldn't be.
Religion should play zero part in the legislative process. A belief that life begins at conception is in direct opposition to the personal or religious beliefs of millions of Americans and it should not be forced upon them.
The church of Satan is arguing that abortion is a pivotal component to their religious structure and needs to be protected as such.
If that BS somehow saves abortion rights, that will be wild. Religion and government mixing has been wildly problematic.
If that BS somehow saves abortion rights, that will be wild. Religion and government mixing has been wildly problematic.
Very true statement. But I've never seen abortion as a religious issue.
You pick and choose what morality you believe. And, you don’t understand the differences between ceremonial/temple rules, social rules, and moral laws.
This is probably true. Babies being sacrificed has always been a thing for those who deny God’s authority.
Yes. If people with those religious beliefs were duly elected to make the laws of the country and the laws did not promote one religion as the official government religion, I would disagree with the morality of the law, but would not call the law illegally implemented.
You? Perfect example of you lumping all liberals into one thought process. Do you think JFK jr is alive?
Ah, leftism is this country's most devoted religion. Outside of the "religion of peace" no one else gets quite as violent and off the rails for disagreeing with their dogma quite like the left's devoted following.
I also have never seen this as a religious issue. Don't think you have to be religious to be like "It's probably wrong to rip that baby's limbs off and vacuum its brains out simply cause I don't want to raise it."
Where in the hell does this come from? You’re deflecting and just acting silly.
Just to clarify, it's no the church of Satan but the Satanic Temple that's doing that. They're actually a pretty cool group that fights for separation of church and state. Their seven tenants are quite reasonable and we would probably benefit from trying to live by them:
- One should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all creatures in accordance with reason.
- The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions.
- One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.
- The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own.
- Beliefs should conform to one's best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one's beliefs.
- People are fallible. If one makes a mistake, one should do one's best to rectify it and resolve any harm that might have been caused.
- Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word.
I don’t view abortion as murder unless it’s in the third trimester. I also don’t believe life begins at skeet.
If this goes through as planned, the sheer number of forced births will overwhelm the foster care system more than it already is. I better see lines of pro-lifers wanting to adopt all these unwanted kids they want brought into the world. I also better not hear any bitching about these kids and their families being on government assistance because $1000 for an abortion is much cheaper than 18 years (or more) of government benefits any way you slice it. We also should probably expand government programs to help offset this influx of forced births. What good is having a child if it starves? Gonna need more SNAP and WIC benefits. Who’s going to pay for it? Taxpayers.
I won’t be surprised when they start finding infants in hefty bags in dumpsters because the state forced someone to have a baby they didn’t want/didn’t have the means to take care of.
Again, the church and state shouldn’t be involved in medical decisions. I opposed vaccine and mask mandates as well because health decisions are personal and best left to the individual and their physician.
Not true. My FIL is a degenerate gambler and a pathological liar that has almost destroyed several lives. I’m not asking his opinion on nothing.
This just leaves it up to each state as it should be. I will say if someone gets raped or they know early on the child would have massive issues mentally/physically, then it should be allowed. Now the party girls banging half the fraternity with full consent, wanting to play adult should woman up and raise their child or give him/her/it (for the Dems) away to someone who wants the child. It's your choice to be dumb and spread your legs without protection so your choice to deal with the consequence.
Thanks for the clarification, I was well aware of their intention, didn't mean to imply they were actively seeking pregnant women to butcher for their "religious beliefs".
I'm making the same point they are. If the tenants of your religion dictate you behave a certain way, do so. Just don't force other people to do so in the process.
By supporting an abortion ban, you support rapists having reproductive rights at the expense of their victims.
You mean to the foster care system where it's likely they age out of the system and are kicked to the streets when they turn 18?
- Status