Sign in to follow this  
NipkowDisc

Because of the new anti-abortion law(s)...

82 posts in this topic

egg-sucking godless liberal secularist lawyers will want to get these cases brought before the scotus sooner rather then later

to put the kibosh on this conservative trump era perfidy...

we thank you.

:D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The obvious hypocrisy in the "heartbeat" laws are the reasons given for it.  Like the ALABAMA govorner, of all people, claiming she signed the bill because of ..."Alabama's devotion to the sanctity of "precious human life."  

???

So, one of the several Southern states that, for more that 100 years after the civil war held "precious human life" in such high regard their legislative and law enforcement arms looked the other way while the Kl*n and other bigoted whites looted, lynched , burned alive and bombed churches full of black children and meanwhile facing NO consequences for their actions, their "respect" for "precious human life" was SO overpowering, it must ave made them unable to move!  :rolleyes:

Sepiatone

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, NipkowDisc said:

egg-sucking godless liberal secularist lawyers will want to get these cases brought before the scotus sooner rather then later

to put the kibosh on this conservative trump era perfidy...

we thank you.

:D

 

Another ignorant post from Nippy.  There is a strong possibility that AL's law and others will never get to the Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court only hears cases when there are conflicting decisions made by different Federal appeals courts and this may not happen.  The AL law and others may just be struck down at appeals levels.

There is no automatic right to appeal to Supreme Court and have the case heard.  The Supreme Court could very well decide not to hear any of the cases and let lower court decisions stand.

As for protecting life, these same states do practically nothing about restricting access to guns, preventing school and other mass shootings, providing adequate health and nutrition for the poor, ad infinitum.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, NipkowDisc said:

we doan fret because we got Brett.

 

Kavanaugh stated unequivocally that Roe v. Wade is "settled law."  Also, it will likely be up to Chief Justice Roberts even if Kavanaugh proves to be the liar and hypocrite he really is.  Roberts is unlikely to support the AL and similar laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TheCid said:

Kavanaugh stated unequivocally that Roe v. Wade is "settled law."  Also, it will likely be up to Chief Justice Roberts even if Kavanaugh proves to be the liar and hypocrite he really is.  Roberts is unlikely to support the AL and similar laws.

so there is hope for RGB not getting all bent outta shape and going into a feminist tirade if RvW were overturned.

:lol:

Related image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NipkowDisc said:

so there is hope for RGB not getting all bent outta shape and going into a feminist tirade if RvW were overturned.

:lol:

 

How did you reach that conclusion based on my post re: Roe v. Wade being overturned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus it is not liberals but conservatives who hope that one of the new state laws will get

to the SCOTUS. Alabama's may be too restrictive to be a good case for the Supreme Court.

As far as Kavanaugh goes I wouldn't trust him period. Time will tell.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

As far as Kavanaugh goes I wouldn't trust him period. Time will tell.

You only say that because you never went boofing with him and Squi.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

You only say that because you never went boofing with him and Squi.

Have no idea what boofing and Squi are.

Have you moved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LawrenceA said:

You only say that because you never went boofing with him and Squi.

One of the biggest regrets of my life. I was too busy spelunking with Albertine.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

You only say that because you never went boofing with him and Squi.

OK, I looked up boofing.  Similar to corn hole in the South), but not the kind using "bean" bags and targets.  Squi is one of Kavanaugh's friends from high school or college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert ReichVerified account @RBReich 24h24 hours ago

 
 

"The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity...

When Government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human

responsible for her own choices."

--Ruth Bader Ginsburg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mr6666 said:

Nationwide Protests and State Boycotts Planned Amid Wave of GOP Attacks on Abortion Rights

"They're coming for women. They're coming for doctors. They're coming for Roe. But we're the majority—and we're NOT going back."

 

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/05/17/nationwide-protests-and-state-boycotts-planned-amid-wave-gop-attacks-abortion-rights

I think the current goal of anti-abortionists is to essentially outlaw abortions in as many states as possible.  Mostly by creating almost insurmountable restrictions.  Ultimate goal is to outlaw all abortions nation-wide, but that is unlikely.

While the majority may be pro-abortion nationally, they are not in every state.  Even in states where they may be in the majority, they still elect anti-abortion Republicans to state legislatures and governorships.

My personal opinion is that I don't know if it is right or wrong, but neither does the government.  Should be up the woman and her physician.

Also find it extremely hypocritical to say it is OK in cases of rape or incest.  "Murder" is murder using the anti-abortionist term.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, TheCid said:

My personal opinion is that I don't know if it is right or wrong, but neither does the government.  Should be up the woman and her physician.

Which would make you pro-choice, much as I am. Despite the rhetoric from the Right, pro-choice does not equal pro-abortion. Pro-choice leaves it up to the individual to do what is best for them.

That being said, I do understand that if someone genuinely believes that abortion = murder, then I cannot fault them for being against it or fighting against it, however misguided they may be in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

Which would make you pro-choice, much as I am. Despite the rhetoric from the Right, pro-choice does not equal pro-abortion. Pro-choice leaves it up to the individual to do what is best for them.

That being said, I do understand that if someone genuinely believes that abortion = murder, then I cannot fault them for being against it or fighting against it, however misguided they may be in my opinion.

What about someone who believes in slavery or racial superiority?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheCid said:

What about someone who believes in slavery or racial superiority?

What about them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LawrenceA said:

What about them?

Do you believe that someone who believes in them should be able to fight for them and try to get the governments to pass laws permitting them?  Same for male superiority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheCid said:

Do you believe that someone who believes in them should be able to fight for them and try to get the governments to pass laws permitting them?  Same for male superiority.

It's a false equivalency. Finding murder to be morally repugnant is fairly universal, wouldn't you say? So if someone believes that others are committing acts of murder via abortion, then I can't tell them that murder is wrong. I can tell them that I don't believe that abortion is murder, though.

Supporting slavery or racial or gender superiority is not attached to a universally held moral tenet such as murder being a bad thing. 

You're being overly argumentative. Trying to pick up the slack while jamesjazzguitar is away? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

It's a false equivalency. Finding murder to be morally repugnant is fairly universal, wouldn't you say? So if someone believes that others are committing acts of murder via abortion, then I can't tell them that murder is wrong. I can tell them that I don't believe that abortion is murder, though.

Supporting slavery or racial or gender superiority is not attached to a universally held moral tenet such as murder being a bad thing. 

You're being overly argumentative. Trying to pick up the slack while jamesjazzguitar is away? 

It's a nasty job, but somebody has to do it.

Where is James anyway?

Also, what's with the Arizona?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheCid said:

Where is James anyway?

I think James is on holiday in Europe, that lucky devil. He mentioned something about it a while back.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I support reproductive rights and authority over one's own body, I have to state that while I too, back before Roe v Wade,   supported a form of legalized abortion, I never liked the idea of using abortion as a form of contraception.

Sepiatone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear, my opinion is that while others may not approve of abortion and believe it is wrong, they can protest within reason.  I disagree with protesters within a block of an abortion facility or taking pictures of women going into them.

BUT, they do NOT have the right to force their beliefs on others through government rules and regulations.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These laws were deliberately made to be so draconian that there would be an immediate challenge in court. The red state legislators knew they would not be implemented next month or next year. The conservatives are goading the liberals into taking a case to the Supreme Court where they hope Roe V Wade will be overturned by their conservative majority. Overturning Roe would not make abortion in the US illegal the next day. However, it would make federal legislation making abortion illegal possible, and it WOULD return the abortion laws to be on a state by state basis where these draconian laws could be enforced. The likely outcome is that about half the states - the blue ones - would have liberal abortion laws while the red states would have these severe ones where four weeks pregnant rape victims could not have an abortion unless a police report had been filed, and often they are not filed.

Roberts has become the swing vote on the court lately though. Apparently he does not want to go down in history as the chief justice of Trump's Kangaroo Supreme Court. My apologies to kangaroos everywhere.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us