- Joined
- Jul 28, 2008
- Messages
- 45,596
- Reaction score
- 22,537
- Location
- Everywhere and nowhere
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
or ant-choice as some of you pro-deathers are calling us
Pro-life, Pro-states rights.
We wouldn't be in this huge mess if SCOTUS had done what it was supposed to and sent Roe-v-Wade back to Texas where it belonged.
You mean those dopes on the highest court in our land didn't check in with you before they made that decision? :roll:.
You mean those dopes on the highest court in our land didn't check in with you before they made that decision? :roll:
I think they know the constitution a tad better than anyone on this thread. It would seem that their decision reflects that understanding.
I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court's judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes.
The fact that it's a SCOTUS decision does not make it right. Do you think that Dred Scott v. Sandford and Plessy v. Ferguson were good decisions just because SCOTUS made them?
From a legal perspective the dissenting opinion was much more valid
I'm pro-choice and don't support abortion bans, but the Court overstepped its bounds in Roe v Wade. Abortion is not a constitutional issue
Why you go personal, asshole?
DISCLAIMER: This is not a thread about debating the legality of Abortion, so if that is what you want to do, please do it on one of the countless other threads regarding that portion of the debate.
This thread is a Public Poll about your personal views on abortion AND the government's role regarding abortion.
It gets at the concept of a national standard vs. State-by-State regulation compared to where you stand personally on the issue.
The options are:
1. I'm Pro-Choice and I think that abortion should be legal nationwide
2. I'm Pro-Life and I think that abortion should be illegal nationwide
3. I'm Pro-Choice, but I believe that each state should be able to decide for themselves if abortion should be legal or not
4. I'm pro-life but I believe that each state should be able to decide for themselves if abortion should be legal or not.
5. Other (please elaborate)
Then after voting, please elaborate why you feel the way you do, but again, please do not convert this into a thread debating the legality of abortion, just about the government's role in abortion.
You mean those dopes on the highest court in our land didn't check in with you before they made that decision? :roll:
I think they know the constitution a tad better than anyone on this thread. It would seem that their decision reflects that understanding.
If you are honestly pro-life meaning you think the pregnant woman is actually carrying a child / a living human being inside her that has a right to life why would you want the states to decide whether or not they want aborton to be legal or illegal?
If you are honestly pro-life meaning you think the pregnant woman is actually carrying a child / a living human being inside her that has a right to life why would you want the states to decide whether or not they want aborton to be legal or illegal? If you honestly are actually pro-life on the issue of abortion then you do not want abortion to be legal except for maybe in rare circumstances. Saying you are against abortion but the government shouldn't make it legal nationwide is like saying yes I am against child abuse or I am against child porn but I do not think the government should make it illegal nationwide, it should be left up to the states.
We all know our constitutions
Why was a comeback necessary? There was no reason for you to say what you did except for the reason I supplied--accurately. Get over yourself.:roll:Asshole? :lol: Very nice come back. :roll: I expected no less considering your argument here.
Now who's getting personal? Can't take a valid evaluation and response to your arrogant post? Then don't post.
First--it's a Constitutional amendment concerning a specific issue. That's the appropriate way to go about making a "law of the land."The Thirteenth Amendment to the constitution violates "state's rights" too.
Or, more to the point, it trumps them.
I'm pro-choice, but only up to a point.
I'm in favor of abortions being allowed, but only early in the pregnancy. I'd like it if they were only legal in the first trimester (that's a little difficult as many don't even know they're pregnant until the 2nd trimester - but somewhere in that area would be best). I'd also like to see a lot more done to make it easier and more likely for mothers to put their children up for adoption.
Did someone say they thought that?
I didn't hear anyone say any such thing.
Nothing and no one has any "right" to live "inside" anyone else.
Being allowed to share someone else's body is a privilege, not a "right".
But do you think this should be the national standard, or different per state?
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?