Legal/scotus thread

[sturg33]

Lcool


You and your gang aren’t fighting to have those laws you just cited though lol

So, that point is really just irrelevant

Me and my gang want the states to decide when it's ok to murder a child.

I'll now be able to choose to live.in a state where we don't allow that barbarianism

A nice change

[goldfly]

Me and my gang want the states to decide when it's ok to murder a child.

I'll now be able to choose to live.in a state where we don't allow that barbarianism

A nice change

Thank you for proving me right in that your last comment was worthless to the conversation

[sturg33]

Yes, we know you are being disingenuous with the way you present “late term abortions”

99.9999999999% are needed medical procedures that can kill the woman and the baby will not survive

It is practically zero the way you want to paint it of someone going all the way through the hardships of pregnancy and then deciding last minute “I just don’t want this”


It’s wild how many people are seriously down to let women die from an ectopic pregnancy

“Pro life” lol

Where did you get this number from?

This data indicates auch lower number, from pro choice groups, to boot

https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...erm-abortions/

[goldfly]

I’m referencing partial birth abortions with that stat since that’s what most of pro life tries to talk about as late term abortions (which doctors don’t subscribe to that term but anyway)

The late term/partial birth abortion is a bs scare tactic used by the fetus lovers (too bad they don’t care about them once they become human)

Thus why I used the words “ going all the way through the hardships of pregnancy and then deciding last minute “I just don’t want this””


Now, if ya want to get by 21 week stance, as stated, doctors would disagree with that stance as being late term abortions

But “0.02% of all abortions occurred after 26 weeks gestation”

Which brings that number even further down to like 320-600

That’s total, like adding together by choice of not wanting it or medical reasons

For the few that do it by choice, it’s usually tied to not having money for the cheaper option easy on and they have to save up to finally get the more expensive procedure later on (if they get enough money in time)

That would then leave us with Pretty much All the rest,past that arbitrary 21 weeks, to be finding out issues with the baby or safety for the mother.

This has been fun sitting here typing all this out for no reason for you while waiting for laundry though.

I’ll conclude, that abortion is healthcare

[Jaw]

Yes, we know you are being disingenuous with the way you present “late term abortions”

99.9999999999% are needed medical procedures that can kill the woman and the baby will not survive

It is practically zero the way you want to paint it of someone going all the way through the hardships of pregnancy and then deciding last minute “I just don’t want this”


It’s wild how many people are seriously down to let women die from an ectopic pregnancy

“Pro life” lol

I don't know anyone who is opposed to abortion when there is a significant risk to the mother's life. The desire to ban them is all about elective abortions.

The problem in stating it that way is that there the Kermit Gosnell "we're doing this for your mental health and it has nothing to do with adding some more feet to my collection jar" types who use the term "health risk" to justify anything. So the exceptions have to be very specifically tailored in a way that doesn't fit casual internet ****posting.

[Jaw]

I don't see how actually ending abortion can be good for Republicans, while having it as an issue to fuel their base is. The fallout from abortion being illegal will only create more havoc for women and a backlash against Republicans.

I'm guessing Runnin meant electorally. Now that the social cons have what the Chamber of Commerce Pubs have been stringing them along with, will they still turn out to vote? A few years ago they probably wouldn't have. Now the Dems have gone so far to the left on every social issue I don't think it will be a problem.

The damage that the James Lindsay and Libs of Tik Tok types have done to the Dems by highlighting the extremists in classrooms can't be overstated. People don't like it when you screw with their kids.

[Tapate50]

I don't know anyone who is opposed to abortion when there is a significant risk to the mother's life. The desire to ban them is all about elective abortions.

The problem in stating it that way is that there the Kermit Gosnell "we're doing this for your mental health and it has nothing to do with adding some more feet to my collection jar" types who use the term "health risk" to justify anything. So the exceptions have to be very specifically tailored in a way that doesn't fit casual internet ****posting.

Completely agree

[cajunrevenge]

Republicans today "abortion its mentioned in the constitution, this is a state issue they should decide for themselves"



Republicans when they get Congress and the White House "what we actually meant was, of course this is a federal issue"

[Jaw]

Republicans today "abortion its mentioned in the constitution, this is a state issue they should decide for themselves"



Republicans when they get Congress and the White House "what we actually meant was, of course this is a federal issue"

I hope not. I would much rather have a ruling that removes this entirely from the federal government's jurisdiction. I think it would be a huge benefit to national politics, and I think it's going to be a hugely divisive issue as long as you're trying to get places like California and New York to adhere to the same rules as Mississippi and Kentucky. It's just not necessary, let it be decided at the state level as (imo) it always should have been.

[cajunrevenge]

Everything's federal under the general welfare clause. If not they will just make it up. For example, the federal government claims they have the power to regulate marijuana that is grown yourself and smokes by yourself under the interstate commerce clause. It's all just made up nonsense.

[sturg33]

I’m referencing partial birth abortions with that stat since that’s what most of pro life tries to talk about as late term abortions (which doctors don’t subscribe to that term but anyway)

The late term/partial birth abortion is a bs scare tactic used by the fetus lovers (too bad they don’t care about them once they become human)

Thus why I used the words “ going all the way through the hardships of pregnancy and then deciding last minute “I just don’t want this””


Now, if ya want to get by 21 week stance, as stated, doctors would disagree with that stance as being late term abortions

But “0.02% of all abortions occurred after 26 weeks gestation”

Which brings that number even further down to like 320-600

That’s total, like adding together by choice of not wanting it or medical reasons

For the few that do it by choice, it’s usually tied to not having money for the cheaper option easy on and they have to save up to finally get the more expensive procedure later on (if they get enough money in time)

That would then leave us with Pretty much All the rest,past that arbitrary 21 weeks, to be finding out issues with the baby or safety for the mother.

This has been fun sitting here typing all this out for no reason for you while waiting for laundry though.

I’ll conclude, that abortion is healthcare

Can you link to your data source

[striker42]

Everything's federal under the general welfare clause. If not they will just make it up. For example, the federal government claims they have the power to regulate marijuana that is grown yourself and smokes by yourself under the interstate commerce clause. It's all just made up nonsense.

But that marijuana you grow yourself is preventing you from buying marijuana under the hypothetical interstate marijuana market so it has an impact on interstate commerce.

I know that's ridiculous. I just wish courts knew it too.

[Jaw]

But that marijuana you grow yourself is preventing you from buying marijuana under the hypothetical interstate marijuana market so it has an impact on interstate commerce.

I know that's ridiculous. I just wish courts knew it too.

That sums up perfectly how out of control the Commerce and General Welfare clauses have become.

[mqt]

I don't know anyone who is opposed to abortion when there is a significant risk to the mother's life. The desire to ban them is all about elective abortions.

The problem in stating it that way is that there the Kermit Gosnell "we're doing this for your mental health and it has nothing to do with adding some more feet to my collection jar" types who use the term "health risk" to justify anything. So the exceptions have to be very specifically tailored in a way that doesn't fit casual internet ****posting.

This can be one of the primary issues with abortion bans, though. First, who draws the line of what constitutes a significant risk to the mother? Who is going to perform the procedure and where? If a doctor determines the mother’s life is at risk and performs the surgery, and a court disagrees, what are the consequences?

[sturg33]

Because one side ha some critical thinkers, and the other are hivemind children who are programmed their talking points and nothing else

[Tapate50]

Now that Covid is over, is “my body my choice “ now a thing again?

[sturg33]

Now that Covid is over, is “my body my choice “ now a thing again?

100%.

It is critical in the new thing

[cajunrevenge]

The war on drugs would disagree about my body, my choice being a thing.

[cajunrevenge]

So where were these Republicans against leaks when Devin Nunes leaked Comeys memo to the media 10 days before the election? Where were these Republicans against mobs trying to pressure supreme court justices into changing their votes when Trumps angry mob was trying to pressure Congress to change their certification vote? It's an insurrection for the job to do it to the supreme court justices but somehow not an insurrection when a mob tries to stop the peaceful transfer of power? Wtf.

[57Brave]