|
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Texas governor says the state may contest a Supreme Court ruling on migrant education
Seem Abbot and other conservatives have heard the new song coming from the Supreme Court You've got a friend in me ! And are going to flood the courts with their wish lists Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Tennessee Gov. Lee Signs Law Restricting Abortion Pill Mail Delivery
Yet Tennessee does not require a license or permit to own or purchase a gun and does not require owners to register firearms. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Republicans put out a memo to their senators advising them on how to respond.
It says, in part, according to Axios, which obtained the memo: "Expose the Democrats for the extreme views they hold. Joe Biden and the Democrats have extreme and radical views on abortion that are outside of the mainstream of most Americans." I am guessing the radical view is allowing abortion at all. Republicans hard at work lying Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
It has always been striking that the states most committed to ending abortion tend to invest the least in caring for expectant mothers and children after they are born.
Because it’s about control Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
As usual if you look into anything supported by the Republican Party you find it’s related to money
The shortage in the “domestic supply of infants” that Alito referred to prevents further growth in the billion plus private adoption industry. White babies sell for more, so let’s get those uterus’s working Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
the radical view, is abortion late in pregnancy. americans don’t like that. you’re correct that there’s not a big appetite to ban abortion. But most americans want some restrictions. Not die hard liberals though. those are facts. Americans don’t want abortion banned, but they don’t want it unlimited, either You posted a photo showing countries that ban abortion ( which is never going to happen here, and you failed to mention that naturally). Dan Crenshaw posted a graphic yesterday, i have no idea if it’s correct, but it was a list of countries that allow elective late term abortions. US China North Korea. Now, you LOVE finding examples of individual republicans behaving horribly, and claiming all republicans are responsible for their actions. You constantly do that. Will you apply that logic here? If you judge republicans by the company they keep, will you judge democrats the same way? Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Keep making things up Jim it shows how committed you are to being a conservative Late term for conservatives is 30 seconds after sex Abortions late in pregnancy are rare but but conservatives what you to think otherwise.. shocking Again facts aren’t your friend According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 1.3 percent of abortions were performed at or greater than 21 weeks of gestation in 2015. In contrast, 91.1 percent were performed at or before 13 weeks and 7.6 percent at 14 to 20 weeks. But keep moving the goal posts Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
i never said late term abortions were common. i said liberals want them, and most americans don’t. i’m correct. abortions after rape are also rare, but the left never stops talking about that. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
late term abortions liberals want to control people as much as conservatives, that’s what you’re saying? high taxes, more laws, mask mandates, vaccine mandates, take more of my money, etc. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Spoke like a true believer The center is liberal in your mind and the minds of the the current GOP and the uninformed MAGA universe Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
and that’s kooky gibberish. you’re desperate. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
When a Supreme Court Justice writes that abortion should be outlawed for the purpose of generating an increased “domestic supply of infants” to meet needs of parents seeking infants to adopt, we aren’t exaggerating by stating that they want you to be brood mares for the state.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
People don’t want addicted babies when abortion was legal ! you think parents are going to want them now from women were forced to carry the baby to term . Will little to no Prenatal Care… Oh I forgot since Amy adopted everyone should adopt , and l seriously doubt Abortion is the reason it’s hard to adopt children in the US . Or there are no children see below While technically no longer referred to as orphans, The Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption pegs the number of children in U.S. foster care at a staggering 443,000, more than 123,000 of whom are considered to be waiting children available for adoption. According to a report from the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, “Children adopted privately from the U.S. are most likely to be white (50 percent); those adopted internationally are least likely to be white (19 percent). The majority of children adopted internationally are Asian (59 percent).” I’ve said it before this is religious ruling not based on sound legal reasoning it’s just written to sound like one .. now the right loves activist judges :kewl: |
Quote:
you’re saying that the reason americans go overseas to adopt, ISN’T because there aren’t enough babies here. It’s because the babies here, are “addicted” and are therefore of lower quality than babies that can be gotten elsewhere? You will say anything?regardless of how made up it is, to advocate for liberalism. There’s a years-long waiting list to adopt babies here. And there no large number of babies that go into orphanages or foster. babies get adopted. You don’t know anyone who has tried to adopt a baby, who you can ask, who can tell you how wrong you are? You’re also obviously saying that women who have abortions are all irresponsible drug addicts who are such deadbeats that they can’t prevent their babies from being born addicted. You’re casting people who get abortion, in a very very negative light. Your pals in the left wouldn’t care for that characterization. “Americans only go overseas to adopt, because the quality of babies is superior to what’s available here.” Congratulations, that’s really brilliant. And if more babies are born here that need some help, i’ll gladly pay higher taxes to give them what they need. dave thomas data is probably correct, there are a huge number of KIDS in foster care desperate to be adopted. But they aren’t babies. They are older children. Older children, sadly, have a hard time getting adopted. Babies do not. those kids in foster care didn’t enter foster care as babies and stay there for years if they were available for adoption. you say this was a religious decision. Prove it. I’ve asked you 5 times to tell us where in the draft opinion, Alito was wrong on the law? Just because you don’t like the decision, doesn’t mean it was incorrectly decided based in the law. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Jim all but one of the 4 people I know who adopted babies went to China or Russia and all are white working class .. I also know one who’s a nurse and adopts Aka crack babies she has foster cared for
And they couldn’t afford a baby period . In the USA you say this was a religious decision. Prove it So now Jim you are a believer in evidence ? It’s odd you supported the questioning and the election laws being changed .. said it was a good thing Based solely on Trumps lies and peoples lack of Trust in Voting Aka manufactured by the GOP and promoted via the minority . So now people question the rational of the overturning of Roe . And how religious feelings seem to supersede 50 years of it being law , only since the newest 3 justices got on stage ,while the Majority of Americans feel the right to an abortion should remain .. Your response is prove it because you agree with the ruling, is the same reason you supported the voter law changes! because you agreed with the rational not the evidence .. The tyranny of the minority y Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
which is it? it’s very difficult to get a baby here. There are t enough of them. Maybe less abortions helps with that. you’re correct they’re expensive. But there’s still a long waiting list for babies. the demand for babies far outweighs the supply. that’s why people go offshore, which is also stupidly expensive. you keep saying the decision to reverse is wrong, or based on religion instead of the law. but you ofer zilch for support. i’ve asked at least 5 times for you to back up your accusations. you got nothing. Ruth bader ginsburg has said the scotus handles Roe incorrectly, that they went too far. We get you don’t like it. But unfortunately for you, your wishes aren’t a basis for SCOTUS to make rulings, only the constitution. what’s the minority doing? it’s going to the states, where we all get to decide. that’s the definition of a democratic republic. 9 unelected lawyers making huge decisions, that’s the tyranny of the minority. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
MSNBC host argues for
abortion, because adoption “not always a safe route for black and brown babies.” that’s what she said. is abortion a safer route for them? Brilliant. https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbcs...n-black-babies Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
“LIBERALS ARE NOT TRYING TO CONTROL A PERSONS LIFE”. ?????? THOSE COCKSUCKERS LOCKED DOWN THE COUNTRY THE LAST 2 YEARS WITH A BULL#^&#^&#^&#^& VIRUS, PUT THOUSANDS OF RESTAURANTS & OTHER BUSINESSES OUT OF BUSINESS IN THE PROCESS, MANDATED USELESS #^&#^&#^&#^&ING MASKS, MANDATING USELESS VACCINES & BOOSTER SHOTS & FIRED THOUSANDS OF NURSES, POLICE & FIREMEN IF THE DIDNT GET THE SHOT YA…. LIBERALS ARE NOT TRYING TO CONTROL A PERSONS LIFE ITS A #^&#^&#^&#^&ING SHAME YOUR MOTHER WASNT AS BIG A SUPPORTER OF ABORTIONS AS YOU APPEAR TO BE. |
https://media1.giphy.com/media/dxm77...nR4zYQ/200.gif
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
A million Americans died from what you call bull#^&#^&#^&#^&
That’s one out of every 330 The biggest killer of cops and firemen in history is Covid In South Florida in particular, 33 law enforcement officers have lost their lives in the line of duty during the past 2 years. Three were killed by gunfire, one died in a car crash, one died due to an injury, and 28 died from COVID-19. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
You go on & keep believing all that. Millions as you say died from Covid. Year in year out….. how many die from the flu ??? All of a sudden everyone dies of Covid but none of the flu ? I’ll bet you get a hard on every time you pull into a gas station & pay $4-$5 for a gallon of gas or $6+ for diesel |
Quote:
A fetus does not all of a sudden become a human being only after it leaves its mother's body. A human being does not start becoming human or a "being" only after it is pulled from the mother's body. A human being doesn't switch from being non-human to being human only after it is no longer in the womb. A human being starts becoming human at fertilization in a woman's fallopian tube creating a zygote. The zygote is a biological "being." It is human by virtue of its human DNA--the same DNA that the "born" baby and developing adult that derives from a zygote will have for its entire life. (Not the same genetic code as the mother, but a unique DNA). The zygote is an organism of the human species (Homo Sapiens). It is a human organism. It is alive--a living human organism. An organism is a "being." The zygote is therefor a living human being. It is the same organism as the grown adult, but at an earlier stage of life. The next step in the stages of human life is the zygote developing into an embryo. The next is the embryo becoming a fetus. The next stage, as we all know, is being "born"--detached from the mother's body--a baby with the same distinct DNA as the zygote which was the first stage of its existence as a human being. A baby that is nearly exactly the same human organism that was in its mother's body before it was removed and "born." From the "baby" stage, the human being keeps developing into childhood, adolescence, stages of adulthood until the mid twenties when the human body stops developing and begins a long path into senescence. At no stage, other than DNA, does the human body remain exactly the same. It constantly changes from beginning to end. To claim that some midpoint time in a life is the point at which that life becomes human is not biologically scientific. It begins as a living human from conception (fertilization) and stays so until death. Some biological (rather than philosophical, religious, ethicl, political) perspective articles: https://secularprolife.org/2017/08/a...12fe0fdf4d5e51 https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/a...7b2deb2f31c899 https://lozierinstitute.org/a-scient...n-life-begins/ https://www.mccl.org/post/2017/12/20...nborn-children To be clear, I am not taking an absolute political, legal, or religious stand on abortion. But whatever arguments are made pro or con should at least consider whether a fetus is a human being, or not. A scientifically neutral definition can ground a basis for which legalities, moralities, values, ethics, philosophies can have at it. |
Other than the religious, the other question is "when is it ok to impose involuntary servitude and dispense with any claim to bodily autonomy?"
The answer to that is essentially never. If the state can discard an individual's bodily autonomy, no other rights will survive. No person though is entitled to another person's organs without their consent. Most parents give their lives to save their child. The government can't mandate you do so though. I'm not entitled to my genetic match's kidney even though I'll die without it. A fetus, even if it was a human life, has no inherent right to live off the flesh of its parent. A parent may allow a fetus to live off its flesh, but the fetus doesn't have an inherent right to do so. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Need a tissue ? You sound like a Snowflake .. and of course other things …. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
And the global market sets oil and gas prices ! Wow you’re wicked smart and so well informed…. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Yes Jim seems the things they want to control tend to involve individual freedoms and not to expand them but to limit them .. unless it’s a gun And all those nurse firemen and police who didn’t get the shot . And I know a few they had a choice the same choice you find acceptable with women who want an abortion MOVE to a state that allows it .. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Usually to prevent innocent people from being hurt. And if Roe gets overturned, abortion only gets banned if people in a state want it that way. Again, that's democracy. "unless it’s a gun" I'm not anyone's idea of a gun guy. But unlike abortion, it's explicitly in the constitution. "MOVE to a state that allows it .." Why would one have to move to a pro-choice state, to get an abortion? When I complain about the cost of living in CT, at some point every single liberal suggests I move to a state I like better. Again, I'm just using your logic. You're not holding any cards here. None. The left needs to come up with something besides fear-mongering, before the midterms. How's the stock market doing? |
Quote:
So then, how do we apply a notion of autonomy to the human body? A human being inherently perpetuates its species by the union of male and female chromosomes through sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. This is an inherent "right" dictated, in the least, by the ingrained, biologically inherent capability to do so. Some will go beyond the mere biology and say that this is the inherent right and duty of human beings as created by a creator of life. Without an expression of this inherent right, human beings would not continue to exist. human bodily autonomy is only meaningful as such when it expresses itself as dictated by the potential of what a human body is not only capable of doing, but by the inherent bodily functions that drives its existence. Bodily autonomy is not merely a tabula rasa of infinite "rights," but an inherent "blueprint" of how a human body must function in order to exist and survive. There is no complete "autonomy" to do what a human being may desire. Human bodies are "trapped" by an internal biological design, a human engine that requires the body to develop through stages of existence in unelectable prescribed ways in which the body has no recourse to resist--if it wishes to continue to exist. Strictly biological, scientific, human "bodily" autonomy is circumscribed by how the human body must function in order to exist--at least to exist as what we know is human. A pregnant woman's body functions inherently in basic ways that she does not have an ability to control. She has no "inherent right" of bodily autonomy" over what her biological blueprint dictates. The "inherent right" to "bodily autonomy" that you speak of is not actually inherent. It is a constructed right. It is, as Black's Law Dictionary says, "a right granted pursuant to another outside means or source." So the discussion, re abortion, is not really about an "inherent" right, but what right(s) a society wishes to create. |
Quote:
They’re not even pretending that rape is wrong any more. Outlawing abortion in all cases. Giving rapists custody rights. This is white and male supremacy being mainstreamed by the extremist Republican Party. Women are viewed as property. Plain and simple. They have no inherent rights but exist for the continued survival of the species and to maintain the domestic infant supply Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Viewing a human being as the property of another human being is a constructed, not an inherent right. It's a form of slavery. Slavery has been a constructed right of most religions at some time in their history. And the constructed right of most forms of government as outright at some time of their history, or as implied as in being slaves to a job, or to lawful restrictions, or to societal mores, or to unwanted relationships. Unfortunately, we have not advanced as a species to be able to adapt to self governing anarchy and still allow for "inherited rights" to flourish without being trampled on by human passions that emanate from the developing human "mind" to conjure up artful constructions and desires that go beyond being merely human bodies. And many of those constructions strike us as beautiful or desirable or even necessary to combat or contain those destructive human penchants that evolve with our intellectual ability to manipulate our human essence and engineer nature itself. And so we create rights beyond inherited biological rights. We conceive so-called unalienable rights that we describe as lawfully sacrosanct and rise above the mere inherent biological rights of human beings. Concerning abortion, which is a constructed right, how does the fact that a fetus is a human being affect you're view of abortion? What positive and negative consequences do you see as results of aborting human beings--the ramifications of selectively destroying the inherent rights of human bodies to generate more humans? |
The Constitution doesn’t say that, it does say
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Let's start with the Torah. In Exodus 21:22 we get a clear statement that a fetus is *not* a person: "When men fight, and one of them pushes a pregnant person and a miscarriage results, but no other damage ensues, the one responsible shall be fined..." This stands in sharp contrast with the next verse, which states that "a life for a life, an eye for an eye..." The Torah literally couldn't be more explicit: a fetus is not a human life. In fact, in the Talmud (circa 600ce), we are told clearly that a fetus is not an independent life by none other than that the great Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi, who said that "a fetus is considered a part of the pregnant person's body, equivalent to their thigh." The Mishnah (200ce)--in a section dealing with the death penalty--even says that if a pregnant person is set to be executed, you don't delay the execution unless they are literally in labor. Otherwise? The fetus is considered just another part of their body. (Arikhin 1:4) Mishnah Oholot 7:6- "A person who is having trouble giving birth, they abort the fetus and take it out limb by limb, because existing life comes before potential life. If most of the child has come out already they do not touch it, for we do not push off one life for another" Perhaps no idea is more central in classical Jewish legal texts thinking about abortion than that of the "rodef" / "the persuer", which Rambam--living a millennia ago--codified into law. (M.T. Shmirat Nefesh 1:9) 'Rodef' is a legal category in Judaism for someone/something on the way to kill a human being. Jewish law obligates us to stop a Rodef at any cost--up to and including taking their life. Thus, a pregnancy that endangers life is considered a Rodef and *must* be terminated. This is what rabbis mean when we say that "access to abortion is a religious requirement for Jews." Because there are situations where Judaism doesn't just allow abortion, but in fact traditionally *requires* abortion (when the life of the pregnant person is threatened) "But only when the pregnant person's life is in physical danger??!?" Nope! Not just literally their life, but also their well-being, their mental health, and all sorts of other explanations that encompass the vast majority of the reasons that folks pursue abortions. All of which is to say: laws that limit or criminalize abortion aren't just violations of the human rights of every person who can become pregnant, but are also infringements on the religious liberty of every American Jew, and an imposition of governmental Christianity on us all. Rabbi Daniel Bogard Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Nobody is imposing abortion on anyone. There’s no science in the Constitution, there’s a separation between church and state. Once again the originalist twists the meaning to fit his beliefs Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
wdmso, you might be right, it might have been a conservative who leaked the draft. a brilliant conservative who foresaw that the draft would trigger the woke mob into showing their true colors, their disdain for democracy, their seething hatred for christianity, their willingness to incite and then overlook political violence every single
time it advances their cause. i didn’t think more could happen that would make democrats look vile and incompetent before the midterms, but they pulled it off. that plus the stock market. if you’re going to convince judges, you don’t tell them why you like abortion. They don’t care about that. Tell them why the constitution says that the feds have the jurisdiction to prohibit state restrictions. That’s literally all that matters, and the left never discussed it. if it gets overturned, you then have the opportunity to convince state legislators why abortion is vital. THEY care about public opinion. Not judges. Take a middle school civics class And of course Bidens DOJ is not enforcing the federal law which makes it a crime to protest for the purpose of influencing judges. Anger is righteous only when it comes from the left. Parents who speak up at school board meetings are domestic terrorists. Folks who go berserk at the home of judges where their children live, are righteous. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:11 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com