- Joined
- Mar 27, 2022
- Messages
- 2,381
- Reaction score
- 2,028
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
You think poor women can afford to go to Canada?Well there you go. Problem solved. Pro-choicers can go abort their babies in Canada.
....or in any other state of the union that would legally allow it.
Why is that anyones problem but theirs? Isn’t pro-choice about minding your own business and letting the chips fall where they may?You think poor women can afford to go to Canada?
Where do you think that the wealthy went before Roe came, to other countries to get their abortions. THe problem is, states are trying to pass laws that allow theem to punish those who go somewhere else to get abortions. Do not know if tht is actually constitutional, but with this present court, who knows.Well there you go. Problem solved. Pro-choicers can go abort their babies in Canada.
....or in any other state of the union that would legally allow it.
Ah yes **** poor people...Why is that anyones problem but theirs? Isn’t pro-choice about minding your own business and letting the chips fall where they may?
Well there you go. Problem solved. Pro-choicers can go abort their babies in Canada.
....or in any other state of the union that would legally allow it.
Why is that anyones problem but theirs? Isn’t pro-choice about minding your own business and letting the chips fall where they may?
Hey, that’s the message of pro-choicers so take your own advice.Can someone explain to this poster how impressively stupid it is to try turning something about bodily autonomy into "minding your own business"?
The most hamfisted attempt at reframing I've seen...
You think the cabal of filty-rich democrat congresswomen won't pony up and spend the fraction of their millions necessary to get them there? Or that a virtual plethora of other options might also be available?You think poor women can afford to go to Canada?
Completely ignoring that the current 1st draft of the SC Mississippi opinion strikes at the heart of the implicit right to privacy which virtually everything else regarding sex, pregnancy, contraception etc etc etc is based upon. All it will take is somebody bringing a case against the others. How likely is that in the most litigious country in the world? If a case like that gets to the SC, the court will not be able to to unwrap the damage they will have done in this decision.You think the cabal of filty-rich democrat congresswomen won't pony up and spend the fraction of their millions necessary to get them there? Or that a virtual plethora of other options might also be available?
C'mon - I thought you people were "pro-choice" - and yet, you don't seem to see any choices out there save the one - which if you think about it, means you're not pro-choice at all.
Not ignoring it - I'm completely dismissing it as totally irrelevant to my post.Completely ignoring that the current 1st draft of the SC Mississippi opinion... < snipped for relevance >
What pro choice people want more than anything is the moral backing Roe vs Wade gives them.Well there you go. Problem solved. Pro-choicers can go abort their babies in Canada.
....or in any other state of the union that would legally allow it.
But if theyre coming from Texas they can be sued when they go home.They won't need to. If the states become involved in individual state abortion laws we'll have abortion friendly states women can go to anytime. Nothing will really change.
AKA "Abortion is legal for people who have the money."Well there you go. Problem solved. Pro-choicers can go abort their babies in Canada.
....or in any other state of the union that would legally allow it.
They should keep their legs shut if they are unprepared for motherhood.You think poor women can afford to go to Canada?
AKA "Abortion is legal for people who have the money."
Are you pro-life? Is this what you wanted?
You think the cabal of filty-rich democrat congresswomen won't pony up and spend the fraction of their millions necessary to get them there? Or that a virtual plethora of other options might also be available?
C'mon - I thought you people were "pro-choice" - and yet, you don't seem to see any choices out there save the one - which if you think about it, means you're not pro-choice at all.
American women will be able to obtain abortions in Canada if the United States Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade and returns abortion law to the state level, says Karina Gould, minister of families, children and social development.
In an interview with CBC News Network's Power & Politics on Tuesday, Gould was asked if American women would be allowed to access the procedure in Canada.
"I don't see why we would not," she told host Vassy Kapelos. "If they, people, come here and need access, certainly, you know, that's a service that would be provided."
Gould's remarks came after U.S. political news outlet Politico published a copy of an initial draft opinion written by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, a Republican appointee. That opinion suggests a majority of justices are prepared to overrule Roe v. Wade — the landmark decision that allowed legal abortions in the U.S. — and return the issue to state legislatures.
snip
Given the number of state who already do, or will have laws on the books outlawing abortion- yea I think a lot will change. Probably be illegal or significantly restricted in the tri state area near me Ohio, Indiana Kentucky.They won't need to. If the states become involved in individual state abortion laws we'll have abortion friendly states women can go to anytime. Nothing will really change.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?