Roe v Wade just got overturned official thread

Non-Running

Moderation Moderation Information Moderation Information & Rules

Page 34 of 88

1 33 34 35 88

3 years ago 06/26/2022 8:51am EDT

re: Ron Johnson

Ron Johnson wrote:
If men could get pregnant those damn clinics would be on every corner. If you’re pro life I have nothing else to say to you other than to maybe open your mind and educate yourself. Go take a political science course at your local university. This fundamentalist thinking is what restricted a womens right to vote and work in this country and that wasn’t that long ago. This isn’t about abortion. It’s about control. Moderators; stop silencing social perspectives on this forum or just put the holy cross next to the Letsrun logo.

If my mind needed opening then a university is the last place I’d go. Clearly we see where you got your programming from.

The whole control argument is so lame. If it was about control then the justices would have reversed roe and said that abortion is wrong. But you probably didn’t read the opinions of the court.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 8:52am EDT

re: bryan e.

bryan e. wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
So a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body isn't a fundamental right, it depends on where she lives in the US and the whims of a State legislature? Women's rights are a regional issue. I guess that's consistent with the view taken at one point over slavery. States rights trump human rights. This is a Court determined to go back to into the country's past.
I love abortions as much as the next guy, buts it's a weird take that you don't think rights are a regional issue... There is no such thing as human rights. Stop drinking the kool-aid. Rights are always governed by whatever region that human chooses to live their life.

If human rights are only a regional concern I wonder what the UN was up to when it formulated The Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

3 years ago 06/26/2022 8:53am EDT

re: Yawn^23

Yawn^23 wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
If men could get pregnant those damn clinics would be on every corner. If you’re pro life I have nothing else to say to you other than to maybe open your mind and educate yourself. Go take a political science course at your local university. This fundamentalist thinking is what restricted a womens right to vote and work in this country and that wasn’t that long ago. This isn’t about abortion. It’s about control. Moderators; stop silencing social perspectives on this forum or just put the holy cross next to the Letsrun logo.
If my mind needed opening then a university is the last place I’d go. Clearly we see where you got your programming from.
The whole control argument is so lame. If it was about control then the justices would have reversed roe and said that abortion is wrong. But you probably didn’t read the opinions of the court.

I’m sorry but I can’t help you. Why aren’t you at church right now?

3 years ago 06/26/2022 8:55am EDT

re: bong hits for rojo

bong hits for rojo wrote:
The past 20+ years has really revealed the flaws in the American experiment, and I think it's going down the drain. The concept of the electoral college is flawed as is having two senators per state regardless of population. Now we are going back to originalism and religious fundamentalism with a packed court. We should not be in the situation.
Despite not being on the strongest legal ground (although right to privacy Should apply here), Roe mostly got it right and reaffirmed by Casey 20 years later. The right for a first trimester abortion (and certainly use of IUDs and early pregnancy pills) should be an absolute right. Now, those are pretty much out of the question in several states, with more to follow. That's not equitable, it's a tyranny of the minority.
You red-faced rightists can argue all day about late term and abortions for convenience. Take the extreme cases and blow it up and blame the other side. Use absurd rhetorical shillery to "win" an argument, but you are showing your ignorance. Pathetic cretins that you are.

You clearly don’t understand why the electoral college exists or why we have a two body legislative branch. What exactly is wrong about making sure the big states cannot bully the small ones? I’ll wait for an answer.

it is also laughable how you accuse the right of picking extreme examples when the baby killers always point to incest and rape examples.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 8:56am EDT

re: Ron Johnson

Ron Johnson wrote:
Yawn^23 wrote:
If my mind needed opening then a university is the last place I’d go. Clearly we see where you got your programming from.
The whole control argument is so lame. If it was about control then the justices would have reversed roe and said that abortion is wrong. But you probably didn’t read the opinions of the court.
I’m sorry but I can’t help you. Why aren’t you at church right now?

Just keep regurgitating what your professors tell you to. The rest of us will live in the real world. I don’t need the help of baby killers.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 8:57am EDT

re: Tatar...

Tatar... wrote:
Not really what I asked.
Why do just 30% of people want a complete ban on abortion if it's murder? About 1 in 4 women will have an abortion at some point in their lives. Are all these people murderers?
What is it you're seeing that 70% of other people aren't?

The one in four stat is wrong. Closer to 15%.

Your question is at best rhetorical. Like asking if 30% of people think it’s murder, how can you possibly dismiss their views

Humor seemed like the only reasonable response.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 8:57am EDT

re: Armstronglivs

Armstronglivs wrote:
bryan e. wrote:
I love abortions as much as the next guy, buts it's a weird take that you don't think rights are a regional issue... There is no such thing as human rights. Stop drinking the kool-aid. Rights are always governed by whatever region that human chooses to live their life.
If human rights are only a regional concern I wonder what the UN was up to when it formulated The Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

The same UN that has Saudi Arabia on their human rights council?

the UN is a joke and I feel sorry for you if you even give it a modicum of respect.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 8:58am EDT

re: bluh

Just jumped into page 32 to see what's up here. The poster who said advice and consent means you must hold a vote by a certain time or it's unconstitutional is wrong. It means the pres can't get someone appointed unless the senate approves, and the senate didn't approve garland. The poster who said most Rs supported Roe when it came out is beyond help. Not true. It is true that judges appointed by R presidents were part of Roe and Casey, but that's really a matter of who the Rs chose to appoint, not what Rs in general supported or wanted.

The end result is correct. Roe was wrong. This contentious issue isn't a federal constitutional matter. It's a matter for legislation. Let the people decide through their elected representatives, and if they don't like what the elected representatives do, then they'll elect new representatives.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 8:59am EDT

re: Wonderin

Wonderin wrote:
Just jumped into page 32 to see what's up here. The poster who said advice and consent means you must hold a vote by a certain time or it's unconstitutional is wrong. It means the pres can't get someone appointed unless the senate approves, and the senate didn't approve garland. The poster who said most Rs supported Roe when it came out is beyond help. Not true. It is true that judges appointed by R presidents were part of Roe and Casey, but that's really a matter of who the Rs chose to appoint, not what Rs in general supported or wanted.
The end result is correct. Roe was wrong. This contentious issue isn't a federal constitutional matter. It's a matter for legislation. Let the people decide through their elected representatives, and if they don't like what the elected representatives do, then they'll elect new representatives.

Well said.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 9:01am EDT

re: bong hits for rojo

bong hits for rojo wrote:
The past 20+ years has really revealed the flaws in the American experiment, and I think it's going down the drain. The concept of the electoral college is flawed as is having two senators per state regardless of population. Now we are going back to originalism and religious fundamentalism with a packed court. We should not be in the situation.
Despite not being on the strongest legal ground (although right to privacy Should apply here), Roe mostly got it right and reaffirmed by Casey 20 years later. The right for a first trimester abortion (and certainly use of IUDs and early pregnancy pills) should be an absolute right. Now, those are pretty much out of the question in several states, with more to follow. That's not equitable, it's a tyranny of the minority.
You red-faced rightists can argue all day about late term and abortions for convenience. Take the extreme cases and blow it up and blame the other side. Use absurd rhetorical shillery to "win" an argument, but you are showing your ignorance. Pathetic cretins that you are.

Found the person that failed civics class! Whenever liberals don't get mad outcome they like it's always a "failure of the system." Can never just admit their ideas suck a lot of the time.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 9:02am EDT

re: bluh

bluh wrote:
kganrvownlibs wrote:
Well I found my answer. "The number of women dying in childbirth doesn't matter because it is a normal part of female life"
So I guess the answer to my previous post is: there is no mortality rate that would justify abortion...
You got it, slow as you may be. No mortality rate justifies abortion as an unregulated right and without the father having any say in the matter.

That is entirely and solely an expression of your personal views. It has no necessary credence to anyone who believes the issue remains a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body. If the father has a say, it is only because she grants him that - it is not his of right. If it was he would have legal rights to stop her abortion. That is counter to the principle that a woman's reproductive rights are hers and hers alone.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 9:04am EDT

re: Yawn^23

Yawn^23 wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
I’m sorry but I can’t help you. Why aren’t you at church right now?
Just keep regurgitating what your professors tell you to. The rest of us will live in the real world. I don’t need the help of baby killers.

I’m literally a 33 year old dude who went to a sh!tty state school. This shouldn’t be that hard for you.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 9:07am EDT

re: Ron Johnson

Ron Johnson wrote:
Yawn^23 wrote:
Just keep regurgitating what your professors tell you to. The rest of us will live in the real world. I don’t need the help of baby killers.
I’m literally a 33 year old dude who went to a sh!tty state school. This shouldn’t be that hard for you.

If you are 33 then it is even more sad that you still put so much stock in your liberal education instead of letting life and common sense guide you. My condolences

3 years ago 06/26/2022 9:09am EDT

re: Yawn^23

Yawn^23 wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
I’m literally a 33 year old dude who went to a sh!tty state school. This shouldn’t be that hard for you.
If you are 33 then it is even more sad that you still put so much stock in your liberal education instead of letting life and common sense guide you. My condolences

The difference between you and I is that I voted for Hillary in 16’ and trump in 20’. I recognize that I made a huge mistake in voting for Trump. I can admit to my failings. If I were you I’d maybe take a break from reactionary politics for the day.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 9:10am EDT

re: Yawn^23

Yawn^23 wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
If human rights are only a regional concern I wonder what the UN was up to when it formulated The Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
The same UN that has Saudi Arabia on their human rights council?
the UN is a joke and I feel sorry for you if you even give it a modicum of respect.

Your position allows the Saudi (or Russian or Nazi) position on human rights to be as valid as any other because you have made it subjective and dependent on where you live and who exercises power. The Nuremberg Trials showed you are wrong. But you are also wrong because you don't understand that a "human" right is not national or regional or parochial - it is universal, regardless of what you think of the UN.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 9:10am EDT

re: Wonderin

Wonderin wrote:
The end result is correct. Roe was wrong. This contentious issue isn't a federal constitutional matter. It's a matter for legislation. Let the people decide through their elected representatives, and if they don't like what the elected representatives do, then they'll elect new representatives.

Exactly. There’s little to get emotional about. The 14th amendment says nothing about the right to privacy, and the right to privacy, even if one such existed, has nothing to do with the right to have an abortion.

Scotus spun that story out of whole cloth back then and even liberal justices like RBG recognized it and spoke to how the privacy argument made no sense in the original Roe ruling.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 9:11am EDT

re: bluh

bluh wrote:
Tatar... wrote:
Not really what I asked.
Why do just 30% of people want a complete ban on abortion if it's murder? About 1 in 4 women will have an abortion at some point in their lives. Are all these people murderers?
What is it you're seeing that 70% of other people aren't?
The one in four stat is wrong. Closer to 15%.
Your question is at best rhetorical. Like asking if 30% of people think it’s murder, how can you possibly dismiss their views
Humor seemed like the only reasonable response.

It's a reasonable question. If it is murder, why do so many people think it's acceptable?

What is that you're seeing that makes you consider it identical to killing an infant, that we don't?

3 years ago 06/26/2022 9:15am EDT

re: Tatar...

Tatar... wrote:
bluh wrote:
The one in four stat is wrong. Closer to 15%.
Your question is at best rhetorical. Like asking if 30% of people think it’s murder, how can you possibly dismiss their views
Humor seemed like the only reasonable response.
It's a reasonable question. If it is murder, why do so many people think it's acceptable?
What is that you're seeing that makes you consider it identical to killing an infant, that we don't?

It’s also a reasonable question to ask if it’s acceptable, why do so many think it’s murder.

I don’t consider it identical to killing an infant nor particularly care about the sanctity of life argument myself, as I’ve severally noted in this thread previously. I choose to not be dismissive of people who say they value sanctity of life as supreme. Because democracy.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 9:19am EDT

re: bluh

bluh wrote:
Tatar... wrote:
It's a reasonable question. If it is murder, why do so many people think it's acceptable?
What is that you're seeing that makes you consider it identical to killing an infant, that we don't?
It’s also a reasonable question to ask if it’s acceptable, why do so many think it’s murder.
I don’t consider it identical to killing an infant nor particularly care about the sanctity of life argument myself, as I’ve severally noted in this thread previously. I choose to not be dismissive of people who say they value sanctity of life as supreme. Because democracy.

To clarify, because you seem to have entered late, I have maintained that it simply can not be the mother’s sole decision because the unborn child is also the property of the father. If they both want it terminated, democracy is the top-level overarching principle for whether or not or up to what point during the pregnancy it should be legal.

The Supreme Court agrees with that view of democratic legislation being the answer here.

3 years ago 06/26/2022 9:21am EDT

re: bluh

I mistakenly voted for trump in 2020 and am pro choice. At least Hillary wouldn’t have appointed these psycho justices. Who wants this smoke? Any republicans want to come bash a trump voter? I know you need this vote. NEVER AGAIN SUCKERS

Page 34 of 88

1 33 34 35 88

Next Last

What People Are Talking About On LetsRun

No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.

Reply Replying to

Username

Password

Leave the password field blank to post anonymously.

Post Preview

By posting you acknowledge that you have read and abide by our Terms and Conditions.

Remember me on this device.

Roe v Wade just got overturned official thread

This thread has already been deleted.

You have been subscribed.

Roe v Wade just got overturned official thread

Jump To A Page

Follow Armstronglivs

Block Armstronglivs

Follow Armstronglivs

Block Armstronglivs

Follow Armstronglivs

Block Armstronglivs

Jump To A Page

This thread has already been deleted.

Reply Replying to

You have been subscribed.