Again, you cannot cite the source of your own pain. The states are the place in US constitutional design that can legislate on issues like this. Do you disagree with that? Can you provide any citation that would suggest the states are not the correct forum? This started out about a discussion of the law. RBG agreed with me when she was alive. how could that be if as you suggest, we don't understand the constitution and republicanism. Your argumentation is floundering here. You aren't able to discuss the issues, so you revert to this? Laughable.
I'd have thought it was obvious that those on the right who were "screaming about" (doubt) "my body, my choice" were mostly doing it ironically to illustrate the hypocrisy of leftists who made that their rallying cry for decades until they decided they wanted to pressure others to wear masks and get jabs.
As the left supported Roe, which allowed states like CA and NY and IL and NJ and MD to regulate, limit, and even prohibit abortions, they must also be OK with government controlling other people bodies, but not their own.
Babies cannot survive without a host. May as well allow murder of children until age of 6 when they can make their own food?
Wow, the whiplash of your comment... I'm not going to win what? More, anti gun folks are already going around trying to round up guns. So, which fact based statement are you attempting to argue with here?
What on earth are you on about here? I bet you're going to lose your collective shyte today. The horror of folks being protected from government attacking them for their religion... But back to the my body my choice. Obviously, liberals don't actually believe in it, so why should the right? Y'all want to regulate virtually every facet of health care and medical elections, but somehow abortion is different? I've pointed out many times that the reason democrats are for abortion is because they are afraid of minorities who are the vast majority of abortions performed. Looks pretty clear cut to those willing to be objective that democrats here seem amazingly racist in their pursuit of this medical option. It begs credulity that y'all are entirely willing to force every person to take a vaccine that doesn't actually work and at the same time are willing to tell women, no one will stop you from killing your unborn child. Why can't I choose not to be vaccinated again? The answer is pretty obvious. Democrats are afraid of the "other" and are willing to use government to protect themselves from any perceived threat from the unwashed they so fear. When you think about how hypocritical democrats are on these issues, it doesn't make a lot of sense to argue for them on your part.
These are your ridiculous assertions. I had nothing to do with their creation. But you did. I find no one supporting your assertions. That seems problematic.
Under Roe, all 50 states regulated and limited abortions, and 43 states had some sort of ban on abortions. As these states include CA and NY and IL and NJ and MD, it must be said that the left must also be OK with government controlling other people bodies.
No that’s false. https://pub.njleg.gov/bills/2020/S0500/49_I1.PDF You can have an abortion for any reason in NJ up until the day of birth.
But devout Christians, Jews and Muslims believe that a fetus and a baby is one and the same, so would you also ban laws restricting the killings of babies - that is if killing them became acceptable and politically expedient?
And if it does, the law seems to appear to make an accommodation for it. It doesn't mean that the behavior is acceptable. It does surprise me that folks seem to make this point, as if it is the overwhelming reason for an abortion. This is in the less than a couple hundredths of a percent of them. I can't seem to figure out why we're spending the time and effort about the super rare whataboutism though.
No, abortions were legal, but there was a right to impose some restrictions. Under the new court, there is no "right" to an abortion.....
Yes it does. Row was originally a privacy right, under the new court that right doesn't exist, and it is up to the states to decide Roe was said their was "an inherent right to privacy or personal autonomy in various provisions of the Constitution". The new court says you have "no inherent right to privacy or personal autonomy in various provisions of the Constitution".
Some abortions were legal. Some were not. Thus, states had the power to ban abortions. There's no right protected by the US constitution - which is not the same thing. The states get to figure out the particulars.
Thats not what I read. Its 27 weeks, if its after 27 weeks it requires stipulations like the life of the mother. Doctors also have to approve of the abortion. FTR, I dont support abortions if the Baby can live outside the mother.
No, it requires the states to determine which is the act. Privacy is covered under the constitution, which is why it was a "right", and thats what the SC said is not inherent anymore
