• 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!

Supreme Court effectively denies 10 year old rape victim an abortion

Shrink726 said:
This is the kind of disgrace this horrific SCOTUS has left us with. I defy even the most fervent right to life advocates to justify this.

Click to expand...


Yeah.....blame the court for not making up a non Constitutional law out of thin air.

Why didn't Democrats codify Roe when they had the chance with FOCA?

www.congress.gov

Text - H.R.25 - 103rd Congress (1993-1994): Freedom of Choice Act of 1993

Text for H.R.25 - 103rd Congress (1993-1994): Freedom of Choice Act of 1993
www.congress.gov

Keep in mind that I support most abortion before you go off on some liberal rant.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Yeah.....blame the court for not making up a non Constitutional law out of thin air.

Why didn't Democrats codify Roe when they had the chance with FOCA?

www.congress.gov

Text - H.R.25 - 103rd Congress (1993-1994): Freedom of Choice Act of 1993

Text for H.R.25 - 103rd Congress (1993-1994): Freedom of Choice Act of 1993
www.congress.gov

Keep in mind that I support most abortion before you go off on some liberal rant.
Click to expand...
Because there were too many asshole talebangelicals to allow for its passage.

And now the Supreme Court has redefined what's unconstitutional to apply only to those provisions specifically enumerated as federal. All else goes back to the states.

Great idea. Kind of like having a Jew tried by a jury of 12 nazis. What could possibly go wrong?
 
Shrink726 said:
This is the kind of disgrace this horrific SCOTUS has left us with. I defy even the most fervent right to life advocates to justify this.

Click to expand...
1. Article is garbage. Barely talks about the 10 year old,and gives no context of her circumstances. Also, funny how there is no mention of the rapist. It's almost like it's a made up story!

2. She can carry the child to term, and put it up for adoption. Problem solved.
 
Shrink726 said:
Because there were too many asshole talebangelicals to allow for its passage.

And now the Supreme Court has redefined what's unconstitutional to apply only to those provisions specifically enumerated as federal. All else goes back to the states.

Great idea. Kind of like having a Jew tried by a jury of 12 nazis. What could possibly go wrong?
Click to expand...
So, you equate state deciding on issues like being tried by NAZIs!

That's literally the dumbest comparison I have seen in a long time.
 
Shrink726 said:
Because there were too many asshole talebangelicals to allow for its passage.

And now the Supreme Court has redefined what's unconstitutional to apply only to those provisions specifically enumerated as federal. All else goes back to the states.

Great idea. Kind of like having a Jew tried by a jury of 12 nazis. What could possibly go wrong?
Click to expand...

BS

You had Democrats deciding against the bill because the radicals in your own party ruined it for you.

Your party could have had the vote.

“I’m firmly pro-choice for the first three months of pregnancy,” Democratic congressman Paul McHale of Pennsylvania told CQ. “But I have a great deal of difficulty as a matter of conscience accepting elective termination [of pregnancy] at that last stage in the gestational process.”

Matthew Yglesias claimed today on Twitter that without scrapping the Senate filibuster, Democrats would have had no hope of codifying Roe at that time. But a close look shows that there were in fact 60 senators who supported a nationwide right to abortion back then.

From April 2009 to January 2011, Democrats held either 59 or 60 Senate seats. In 2009, every Senate Democrat, with the exceptions of Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Bob Casey Jr. of Pennsylvania, supported a right to abortion. Democrats in other conservative states, including Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, had voted in favor of a resolution expressing support for Roe in 1999.* Harry Reid had voted against that resolution but subsequently made his peace with progressives in order to become majority leader. Democratic senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas said of his position on abortion that he was “somewhere … in the middle of that issue.” Even if Pryor, Nelson, and Casey had defected on an abortion vote, there were three Republican senators who supported Roe: Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, and Olympia Snowe of Maine. Their votes would have gotten some federal abortion bill the 60 votes it needed to overcome a Senate filibuster. (Another pro-Roe Republican, Scott Brown of Massachusetts, filled the Senate seat formerly held by Democrat Ted Kennedy in January of 2010.)
 
FurriesRock said:
So, you equate state deciding on issues like being tried by NAZIs!

That's literally the dumbest comparison I have seen in a long time.
Click to expand...
Not when the state(s) in question have blatantly telegraphed their intention to deny American women their right to control their own bodies. Actually, I think the comparison is quite apt.
 
Shrink726 said:
Not when the state(s) in question have blatantly telegraphed their intention to deny American women their right to control their own bodies. Actually, I think the comparison is quite apt.
Click to expand...


You could have had a law passed years ago and you continue denying this fact.
 
Shrink726 said:
Not when the state(s) in question have blatantly telegraphed their intention to deny American women their right to control their own bodies. Actually, I think the comparison is quite apt.
Click to expand...

Shrink726 said:
I certainly hope you never have a daughter.
Click to expand...
Awww, are you mad?

LOL, what are you going to do?

NOTHING!
 
RetiredUSN said:
You could have had a law passed years ago and you continue denying this fact.
Click to expand...
Some Democrats are cro-magnons too.

Just look at Manchin and Sinema.
 
RetiredUSN said:
My daughter is pro choice, but she doesn't agree with the radical's up to birth nonsense.
Click to expand...
Nor do I nor do most other liberals. We generally support free and unfettered access to abortions up to 15 weeks. I have yet to meet a liberal who thinks it's just fine to abort a fetus after clear viability has been established.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Yeah.....blame the court for not making up a non Constitutional law out of thin air.

Why didn't Democrats codify Roe when they had the chance with FOCA?

www.congress.gov

Text - H.R.25 - 103rd Congress (1993-1994): Freedom of Choice Act of 1993

Text for H.R.25 - 103rd Congress (1993-1994): Freedom of Choice Act of 1993
www.congress.gov

Keep in mind that I support most abortion before you go off on some liberal rant.
Click to expand...

Because they made the mistake of believing in the legitimacy of the Supreme Court. Hopefully they won't make that mistake ever again.
 
RetiredUSN said:
I knew you would go off with the usual liberal ranting.
Click to expand...
Not liberal ranting at all. I'm actually agreeing with you. There are idiot Democrats too. Nowhere near as many as you can easily find in Republican ranks mind you, but they're there.

Hardly a "liberal rant."
 
FurriesRock said:
1. Article is garbage. Barely talks about the 10 year old,and gives no context of her circumstances. Also, funny how there is no mention of the rapist. It's almost like it's a made up story!

2. She can carry the child to term, and put it up for adoption. Problem solved.
Click to expand...
There are no circumstances under which forcing a 10 year old girl to carry a pregnancy to term is morally justifiable. She's a child, she shouldn't be forced to endure the trauma of pregnancy or childbirth, after she's already been raped.
 
Shrink726 said:
Nor do I nor do most other liberals. We generally support free and unfettered access to abortions up to 15 weeks. I have yet to meet a liberal who thinks it's just fine to abort a fetus after clear viability has been established.
Click to expand...


OH...... you never met one..........................big whoooop!

Are you denying abortion extremists now?
 
RetiredUSN said:
OH...... you never met one..........................big whoooop!

Are you denying abortion extremists now?
Click to expand...
No. There are extremists of every political persuasion. The VAST majority of liberals are fine with a 12 or 15 week limit on unfettered abortions.
 
Irredentist said:
There are no circumstances under which forcing a 10 year old girl to carry a pregnancy to term is morally justifiable. She's a child, she shouldn't be forced to endure the trauma of pregnancy or childbirth, after she's already been raped.
Click to expand...
Wrong!

Also, if you think that pregnancy and childbirth is trauma then perhaps you should go outside and scream into the forest about how nature traumatized you and every female of every species on the planet. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
 
FurriesRock said:
Wrong!

Also, if you think that pregnancy and childbirth is trauma then perhaps you should go outside and scream into the forest about how nature traumatized you and every female of every species on the planet. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Click to expand...
I know pregnancy and childbirth are traumatic, because I work on a maternity ward and I've heard the screams. Only a monster would want to force a ten year old girl through that.
 
Irredentist said:
I know pregnancy and childbirth are traumatic, because I work on a maternity ward and I've heard the screams. Only a monster would want to force a ten year old girl through that.
Click to expand...


Then again............... your party could have codified Roe and this wouldn't be a issue.

Only yourselves to blame.
 
Irredentist said:
I know pregnancy and childbirth are traumatic, because I work on a maternity ward and I've heard the screams. Only a monster would want to force a ten year old girl through that.
Click to expand...
Anyone who thinks that forcing a ten year old CHILD rape victim to have a child is morally justifiable really needs to be sterilized.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom