• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Prediction: Roe v wade will be overturned

...and it's not possible under the Const to criminalize having an abortion.

What makes you think this? I've never heard that said before.
 
What makes you think this? I've never heard that said before.
Mostly because of the 4th and 14th Amendments. And it has been recognized under the 9th.

If you see anywhere in the Const that women can be forced to remain pregnant against their will, to have their bodily autonomy violated, you'll have to point it out.
 

Setting the table for the conservative majority to overturn Roe v Wade.

maybe now democrats will understand how important the judiciary is but I won’t hold my breath.
They’ve been training their base to take the judiciary seriously for forty years, while Democrats have been utterly oblivious.
 
The legislation is merely posturing, because it's un-Constitutional. This is similar to the the GOP House 'repealing' Obamacare over & over. It's done to keep the naive & unaware, believing and in the fold.

It’s unConstitutional if the Supreme Court says it’s unConstitutional.
 
Mostly because of the 4th and 14th Amendments. And it has been recognized under the 9th.

If you see anywhere in the Const that women can be forced to remain pregnant against their will, to have their bodily autonomy violated, you'll have to point it out.

So all the laws prohibiting drug use have slipped by the unconstitutional radar all these years? Or assisted suicide?
 
So all the laws prohibiting drug use have slipped by the unconstitutional radar all these years? Or assisted suicide?
I dont know. You'll have to apply it to abortion. Do you have something? There are at least 10 precedents that RvW is based on.
 
Only if you withdraw your mocking of my teaching background.

Fine, you're as qualified to teach as anyone.
As it turns out, some states don't require much in the way of qualifications unless you're teaching in a public school.
For all we know, your "school" might consist of just about anything imaginable, or...unimaginable.
Dennis Prager thinks HE'S qualified.
As it turns out, he isn't.
 
I dont know. You'll have to apply it to abortion. Do you have something? There are at least 10 precedents that RvW is based on.

It's about bodily autonomy and privacy so the same thing.
 
It's about bodily autonomy and privacy so the same thing.
Well, I believe in decriminalizing drugs and in assisted suicide so I'm not sure what I can contribute. I'd like to see those laws changed...and they are changing in the direction of respecting bodily autonomy more.
 
Well, I believe in decriminalizing drugs and in assisted suicide so I'm not sure what I can contribute. I'd like to see those laws changed...and they are changing in the direction of respecting bodily autonomy more.

I understand that. I'm just pointing out other laws that easily fall into the same category as RvW.
 
Fine, you're as qualified to teach as anyone.
As it turns out, some states don't require much in the way of qualifications unless you're teaching in a public school.
For all we know, your "school" might consist of just about anything imaginable, or...unimaginable.
Dennis Prager thinks HE'S qualified.
As it turns out, he isn't.

My avatar image shows where I've taught. All public schools. You can look up their websites quite easily.

Odd, so many of you seem to do nothing but stare at my avatar image when you claimed it looked like a Nazi symbol, yet now when it shows the schools where I've taught it is like it is invisible to you.
 
My avatar image shows where I've taught. All public schools. You can look up their websites quite easily.

Odd, so many of you seem to do nothing but stare at my avatar image when you claimed it looked like a Nazi symbol, yet now when it shows the schools where I've taught it is like it is invisible to you.
I can post a picture of the White House, doesnt mean I worked there.
 
It's about bodily autonomy and privacy so the same thing.

There is a difference with distinction between bodiliy autonomy ( someone or something else using a person’s body ) and bodiliy integrity which is being able to do whatever one wants to their own body.

That you do not wish to acknowledge the difference is your choice.

Choosing to continue a pregnacy or have an early abortion is the pregnant woman’s choice.

States have a right to protect its citizens from a dangerous medical procedure and when states first started banning abortions,
They were dangerous for the woman ( the citizen).

By the 1970s ( when Roe was decided) medical abortions performed by doctors before viability were safer for the woman than pregnancy and childbirth.

Therefore states may no longer ban abortions before viability as an unsafe medical procedure.
 
They’ve been training their base to take the judiciary seriously for forty years, while Democrats have been utterly oblivious.

I' m inclined to believe that you are right since the Supreme Court now has a majority of religious conservatives but could you explain a bit further in what ways Democrats have been utterly oblivious to the judiciary? As a Democrat I've never ignored it and I never suspected other Democrats ignored it.
 

Setting the table for the conservative majority to overturn Roe v Wade.

maybe now democrats will understand how important the judiciary is but I won’t hold my breath.

I think it is extremely unlikely that R vs W will ever be overturned......even some of the conservative justices on the Supreme Court have said that it is 50 years old and well established law and they don't want to touch it

Repealing R vs W is a pipe dream for the anti-abortion crowd....in my opinion, it doesn't matter who's in power.......its never going to happen...
 
I' m inclined to believe that you are right since the Supreme Court now has a majority of religious conservatives but could you explain a bit further in what ways Democrats have been utterly oblivious to the judiciary? As a Democrat I've never ignored it and I never suspected other Democrats ignored it.

imo, just rolling over on the Garland nomination was pretty oblivious
 

Setting the table for the conservative majority to overturn Roe v Wade.

maybe now democrats will understand how important the judiciary is but I won’t hold my breath.
It is not a party issue. It is a hope that one day we will evolve to the point where killing helpless embryos that are the first stage of human life will end.
 
My avatar image shows where I've taught. All public schools. You can look up their websites quite easily.

Odd, so many of you seem to do nothing but stare at my avatar image when you claimed it looked like a Nazi symbol, yet now when it shows the schools where I've taught it is like it is invisible to you.


I'm not sure it's a good idea to post one's real identity on here.
 
There is a difference with distinction between bodiliy autonomy ( someone or something else using a person’s body ) and bodiliy integrity which is being able to do whatever one wants to their own body.

That you do not wish to acknowledge the difference is your choice.

You're making a distinction up that doesn't exist. Both things are about bodily autonomy.

Choosing to continue a pregnacy or have an early abortion is the pregnant woman’s choice.

States have a right to protect its citizens from a dangerous medical procedure and when states first started banning abortions,
They were dangerous for the woman ( the citizen).

By the 1970s ( when Roe was decided) medical abortions performed by doctors before viability were safer for the woman than pregnancy and childbirth.

Therefore states may no longer ban abortions before viability as an unsafe medical procedure.

Completely irrelevant to what is being talked about and your tired shtick will be ignored as I don't feel like correcting willful ignorance right now.
 
So your reasoning is that abortion SHOULD NOT be an option if a woman CAN AFFORD to care for a kid.

Okay, I'll go with that then
Only if you pay that women's expenses yourself. It's only right since you think it is your business.
 
Only if you pay that women's expenses yourself. It's only right since you think it is your business.

Right and wrong should never be subjected to someone's financial stake in a matter.
 
Back
Top Bottom