Well the good news is that they will find the leak...they better or that will erode the trust and confidence in SCOTUS. Could be either side, but 99.9% sure we will find out and then it will be clear.
Supreme Court Leak
- Thread starter Pirata
- Start date
people have medical freedom and a right to their bodies. thats always been the argument.
Not good enough. You don't have that freedom when that decision immediately kills another human life. Give me a good reason why someone would need an abortion (outside of the three exceptions everyone mentions) and I'll listen.
but whats human life? right now theyve put a time frame on when the fetus becomes a human. seems like a good comprimise. there is no easy answer to complicated matters.
It's my body, I can do whatever I want with it.
But that doesn't fly, and rightly so, when I use my body to directly impinge on somebody else's body without their consent (Hitting someone, peeing on someone, sexual assault, etc,).
none of that is related to whats going on inside your body. your health. its illegal to hit somebody with your baby too. thats more similar to peeing on someone or punching them. this is completely , wildly, different. a woman creates the baby inside of her. at what point do her rights go away? its literally her.
to not even see this point of view is astonishing. the court had it this way for decades, and majority of your states will see it this way.
And that baby is not a living human being? If it wasn't, I'd think you'd call it a fetus. But you don't.
i use the term "it" . because it is an it.
is it living? idk what constitutes that? (courts decided this) is it a being? or an organism as shu09 explained it. we kill organisms every day.
Who is saying we shouldn’t let women speak? What about women who are pro life and support the rights of the unborn?
im just saying this board is an echochamber of men
there are women who support pro life. much, much less of them. i would tend to consider a womens opinion more so than a man in this particular arena. cant argue that logic. if the majority of women were pro life it would alter my stance.
Mens BB site…what do you expect?
I greatly respect women's POV…it’s deeper than just one question though. I think you’ll find a multitude of views from women on the topic.
I've been told repeatedly by the left that men can get pregnant. Apple came out with the pregnant man emoji this year. Therefore, men get to speak on the issue of abortion.
lol is this @SHUHitman trying on a large homefield shu t shirt?I've been told repeatedly by the left that men can get pregnant. Apple came out with the pregnant man emoji this year. Therefore, men get to speak on the issue of abortion.
Last edited:
Will be interesting to see how this effects voter turnout and results in the mid-terms. I could see suburban women getting more motivated to come out. Also had a conversation with some leaders in the Hispanic community here and they tend to be more pro-life and have been hurt more by the economy/inflation than most.
the old phrase "funny cause its true"
these issues are always exceptionally geographic. the specific geographic areas that have always been on the wrong side since before the revolution. every time. they disguise it as morals but its really based on selfishness to continue the way of life they specifically want.
the argument against banning guns: people will still find ways to get guns. itll just create a more dangerous climate. but that logic doesnt carry to abortions. because its not based on logic. people will still get abortions. but it will be a more dangerous climate. save lives they said...
so you think there will be a drop in total abortions? there isnt. its not stopping it. so why make it more dangerous? why?
any situation where the geography clear cut like this makes it easier to pick a side.
Nice deflection. Your data was pure bullshit.
Personally, I don’t think there will be much change in the number of abortions. Even the states that will propose/pass legislation will allow them before 15 weeks or beginning of the second trimester.
Why do we have to pick a side. Can’t we respect the will of the people that live in their own state? Do you think somebody from Mississippi would rather travel to New Jersey to get an abortion or just get one within the first 15 weeks in their own state?
the geography that has a history (and present) hating black people, immigrants, women, gays, etc. but will fight for the right of a 0-12wk organism inside someones body. but if that fetus turns into someone who may need help from tax payer dollars then f em!! theyre ruining the country!!
how many years go by until we can call a spade a spade?
how many years go by until we can call a spade a spade?
Michigan hates black people?
Why do you care anyway what happens in those states? You obviously despise them by your postings.
idk maybe i care about some of the collateral people in those states? the ones that may need this procedure. i know its a difficult concept to think of other people in that tower.
plus history shows huge divides in human rights topics leads to bad things.
No, you just have a lot of hate and prejudices in you. You don't care about "these people" who can get the procedure up until the 15th week. You barely understand the topic and you throw nonsense talking points against the wall and then use the racist card as your final line of a weak defense. You can't respect any opinion that doesn't agree with yours. Sad.
Read the opinion. There is a very detailed analysis of stare decisis and it’s applicability to Roe and Casey.
Yes, and according to SHUSA, we should dismiss those 42% of woman who care about the rights of the unborn child because they are essentially racist white men.....
That's my assumption as well.
I don't think 15 weeks would be unreasonable, but I think many states will move to 6 weeks if not a compete ban once Roe is no longer in effect.
Don't know how each state would respond, but I would think it would get a lot of pushback to shorten the 15 weeks which would cause election consequences if they did. Science has advanced so much in 50 years that pretty much every birth risk can be identified within that 15 weeks where it couldn't in the past.
Yeah, I agree with that. But some states already have a ban in place at 6 weeks. Oklahoma just did yesterday. More will follow without the legal hurdle or Roe.
Similar threads
