What Alito Gets Wrong About the History of Abortion in America

The "unborn" are a ready made "constituency"for any pol whose actual politics=religious fanaticism. They can't disagree and they always vote for him 100%. It'd be great for him if they really existed but that minor detail has never bothered religious people very much.

 

It’s not a dodge to ignore stupidity. The right isn’t to kill people. The human right is to protect your life. You don’t have a human right to randomly kill people. You’re confusing the right of self defense. I strongly suggest you do not go out and kill people and then tell the police you have a human right to kill. That’s not going to work out for you two.

 

If they have the "right" to prohibit an abortion why should it be limited? Same argument as with any no exceptions law. Why should the fetus "die" just because the mother will? (or was raped by her father etc). The fetus is an INNOCENT but the mother is already a woman and thus a "vessel of sin". She's already had SEX and is thus "impure" and besmirched beyond redemption anyway. Best to have her die doing her "Christian Duty" and then we can speed her on to Hell where she belongs. Who knows, maybe the offspring will be MALE.

(Jeebus on an crutch. With all due respect some Republicans make BORAT look enlightened.)

 

It’s not the same argument at all. You don’t understand the legal difference between elective abortion and abortion to protect the life of the mother? I find it difficult to believe that an adult doesn’t understand that. Are you being serious or am I being trolled?

 

Again, the "rationale" for prohibiting both types of abortions is precisely the same. Why should an innocent "life" suffer for something it had no part in causing?

Didn't the mother know she was sick before she had sex? Or didn't she have a duty to find out?

Are you trolling me? I find it a little hard to credit that blind religious fanaticism makes one so impervious to the overwhelming illogic and inhumaneness of their viewpoint, but I've always found the religious mindset hard to fathom.

 

It’s not the same. In one instance the pregnancy is causing harm on the mother that would lead to hear demise. In the other instance you have a perfectly healthy fetus and mother. Every deep red conservative state has implemented a carve out in their abortion regulations to protect the life of the mother. That’s not an accident. You keep claiming otherwise, but you’ve already been forced to admit that your position has been hyperbolic. Your claim that mothers cannot receive an abortion in cases where the mother’s life is in danger is flatly false. And, now you’re just flailing into more hyperbolic arguments to try to defend your initially false premise.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
But they don't care what "someone else's " body does to the woman.

WHY does that "someone else" have more rights than any born person?



Who does??

If abortion is banned it means the fetus has more rights than the woman it's in ...and EVERYONE else.

WE do NOT have the right to life if it infringes on the rights of others.

WE have the right to self defense , WOMEN have the right to self defense...or don't you think so?

 

and that dodge means you have no answer, no rebuttal, no refutation...nothing

Yup, a fetus harms the woman it's in so she should have the same right everyone else has, the right to self defense...the right to kill in self defense....but some people want to take away that right from women so they can do anything they want to them...just like destroying women's right to their own bodies...that means one can do anything to women because they have no rights....what weak men need

LOL, you sure are flailing around now....where TF did I say it's OK to randomly kill people? You needed to make something up just to have something to say ...and it was unintelligent drivel

 

This doesn't make sense.

You don't have the right to kill in self defense unless it is to save your life or the life of someone else.

 

The right to kill is not the same thing as the right to self defense. You're confusing the two for obvious reasons.

 

A fetus directly threatens the life of the mother for the entire time it is in her. Women die every day from totally unpredicted complications to their pregnancies

 

Actually, no.

 

https://eagleforum.org/topics/era/10-reasons-to-oppose-equal-rights-amendment.html

Your post about the ERA is purely emotional. Are you a woman?

https://eagleforum.org/topics/era/10-reasons-to-oppose-equal-rights-amendment.html

Are you a woman? You seem emotional. If the ERA is passed, women might get abortions, but they'll be ****ed in every other way. They'll be made soldiers crawling through the **** like every other man, no more preferential treat in family court (gone is alimony and other things normally given them without question). Have fun.

 

So, when a pregnant woman and the mass of cells she carries are both killed, how does it get to be considered a double murder?
There is an initiative afoot to speed up DNA analysis to pin down the perp in shootings. Here you are stating that the mass of cells pregnant women carry doesn't have a unique DNA signature. What does the science say about uniqueness of DNA signatures as they relate to unique humans?

 

You seem to be tied to medieval thought processes. Are you Borat?. No wait, I'm sorry. Borat seems enlightened compared to you.

I am not a woman I think injustice to some is injustice to all. Also I have daughters I love as human beings, not as inferior beings and/or political pawns.

 

Nothing significant whatsoever. DNA signatures are meaningless as to saying a separate legal entity exists.

 

Ah no the SC said, you now have the power to ban abortion.

 

The fact that its intelligent makes it intelligent.

 

Because it was done against the will of the woman.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
WE do NOT have the right to life if it infringes on the rights of others.

Uh, it's simple...we have no right to life if it infringes on the rights of others.
If climbing into the lifeboat will sink it and drown those on board...they have the right to not let you in...

If a fetus has a right to life it infringes on the right to life and the right of self defense of the woman..

Yup, you can kill in self defense....a fetus is harming the woamn it's in and the only way to stop the harm is by killing it.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
LOL, you sure are flailing around now....where TF did I say it's OK to randomly kill people? You needed to make something up just to have something to say ...and it was unintelligent drivel

.


where TF did I say it's OK to randomly kill people?

YOU claimed I did and I didn't so You needed to make something up just to have something to say ...and it was unintelligent drivel

 

And if not climbing into the life boat means the guy will die then he has every right to kill those trying to stop him.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
WE do NOT have the right to life if it infringes on the rights of others.


Uh, it's simple...we have no right to life if it infringes on the rights of others.
If climbing into the lifeboat will sink it and drown those on board...they have the right to not let you in...

If a fetus has a right to life it infringes on the right to life and the right of self defense of the woman..




Yup, you can kill in self defense....a fetus is harming the woman it's in and the only way to stop the harm is by killing it.

Yup.

 

Huh? My post wasn't emotional in any way, shape or form.

 

So you have no valid argument. That's what I thought.

Even RBG stated that Roe v Wade was an overreach ,,, that by 1880 Federalism allowed each state to determine it's own stance on abortion ,,, that virtually all states ruled it unlawful ,,, that the Court should have limited its ruling to the case at hand, the Constitutionality of the Texas law.

That the SCOTUS stomped on the 10th Amendment made the ruling controversial by manufacturing a right to privacy that exists nowhere might have brought us to the latest ruling if not for Casey and the Hyde Amendment. Not only did latter day radicals decide that their word on Hyde was as worthless as their word on any compromise they agree to, but they decided that pull post birth 'abortion' under the Roe umbrella. In short, we got here because of Biden and Ralph Northam.

The people you have chosen to stand with are corporations who don't want to pay maternity leave and hate those annoyances of women in the workplace needing some time off to care for their children ,,, statists who believe that any children who are allowed life should be raised by the government, and racists who founded Planned Parenthood to eliminate "human weeds" for the same reason that Nazis eliminated Jews. In fact, Nazis were jealous of American Democrats for thinking of genocide to clean up the gene pool before they did.