Your tyrannical party isn’t going to force vaccines on anyone. Period. COVID is over and that ship has sailed.
Nope. Had she retired early in Obama's first term she would have been replaced with another Leftist justice. And let's not pretend that Obama didn't get Sotomayor and Kagan seated on the court. You support packing the Court because you didn't get your way. If you think this is the first time the Court has made it up as it went and pushed an agenda guess again.
I always viewed it as intelligence vrs stupidity! Common sense and science should have intelligence a demanding lead. But alas, medical procedures seem to be the glue that holds the transition from advancing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Is suicide by gun bodily autonomy? If what you say is correct, then protective orders and red flag laws are unconstitutional. Yes?
So covid vaccine for you is "tyrannical", but a woman's right to HER body is limited Just as we thought
That doesn't change the point that opposing murdering people doesn't then make me responsible for the victim. That's a weak argument.
My mother has already stated and put it in writing if that ever happened to her that we have permission to "pull the plug" and end her misery. So in that case, yes. Others CHOOSE to want their loved one to lay in a bed unresponsive. It's all about CHOICE.
Correct on a practical scale. From an intellectual romanticist side of things I have issues though: We are aware of the end result of a successful consensual human pregnancy: A new human child is born. Regardless of what state of pregnancy, that fertilized egg has only one end goal. I've made this argument before in the abortion debate section, back when I was more pro-life(I've conceded some things to be pro-choice with life leanings): We do not give birth to animal-human hybrids, etc. There is no biological question about the future of that zygote. There's only a question on whether the female host will allow its bodily function to take place. (yes, going deeper, pregnancy is a natural bodily function of women. But let's hold off on that for now because that'll bring up a new argument. IE: If Pregnancy is a natural bodily function of women, it should also stand to reason she can deny her own function) I'll answer that argument: Theoretically, this is the case but current law doesn't allow for that interpretation in the case of assisted suicide(I am for the record, pro-assisted suicide. Hell, for suicide period. If a person writes in writing that he wants to die and is in clear mental anguish, I don't see the reason for not enabling his suicide.) Outside of present legal arguments not allowing that common sense interpretation, I have another point to raise against that conclusion: While it is true that it is her natural bodily function, the moment that it is a fetus and thus capable of living its own life, she is not interfering with just her bodily function but that of the fetus's(unless we're going to argue that the fetus does not have a body structure, which would be nonsensical on both the pro-life and pro-choice sides.)
And that says it all. Did you even bother to educate yourself on the ruling? There is no right to abortion in the Constitution. Now if you believe from here on out we ignore the Constitution then you are setting up a whole new way of governing. You do realize this decision does not BAN abortion. That even in Mississippi abortion is legal up to 15 weeks. If you want mothers tobhave an unlimited right to kill their unborn babies at their whim then pass the law in your state and then get an amendment to the Constitution. It was never something for the SCOTUS to create out of whole cloth.
The right may have just handed the election to the dems with this decision Roe is overwhelmingly supported by the masses Recent Gallop polls have support for abortion polling as high as 80%
Can you think of a solution to this problem? Or do you not want a solution, opting instead for the sky is falling schtick?
That's HER choice. Not yours. You are seriously comparing a person making a choice for their life against somebody else that isn't making the choice?
Not anymore! https://www.newsmax.com/politics/conservatives-abortion-overturn-roe-v-wade/2022/06/24/id/1075940/
it's possible if for example allowing for conservative states to have their own thresholds on abortion. I could see a future where the lines of abortion differ in terms of the timing by weeks.(This is already the case for the most part) what it would do federally however is enshrine abortion as legal. I think it's a fair compromise. If you want later-term abortions, go to a Liberal State and if you want early-term abortions, it'd be a conservative state.