# All eyes on Roberts ahead of Supreme Court's abortion ruling



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

*All eyes on Roberts ahead of Supreme Court's abortion ruling*
BY JOHN KRUZEL - 06/21/20 06:00 PM EDT 14,769
12,485
Chief Justice John Roberts is under the microscope as the Supreme Court prepares to issue its first major ruling on abortion rights in the Trump era, which will give the clearest indication yet of the court’s willingness to revisit protections that were first granted in Roe v. Wade.

The tie-breaking vote may rest with Roberts, and the case stands to test his role as the court’s new ideological center as well as his allegiance to past rulings.
A decision could come as early as Monday, following a blockbuster week at the court.


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)




----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)




----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)




----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jun 28, 2020)

_“All eyes on Roberts…”_

Meaning, Roberts will feel the wrath of the reprehensible, authoritarian right if the Chief Justice votes to uphold the Constitution, votes to safeguard the right to privacy, and votes to limit the power of the state – prohibiting government from forcing women to give birth against their will through force of law.


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)




----------



## Picaro (Jun 28, 2020)

FRom his ruling essentially opening the door and giving faggot pedophiles unfettered access to children, making it illegal to keep them away from jobs around children, we know he's a degenerate pagan, and will probably vote to make the disgusting human sacrifices so loved by left ans well as right wing neo-pagans as expansive and easy as possible. Just because they mouth a few GOP establishment slogans every now and then doesn't make him wonderful; most right wingers are as pro-pagan as left wing sociopaths are.


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

Picaro said:


> FRom his ruling essentially opening the door and giving faggot pedophiles unfettered access to children, making it illegal to keep them away from jobs around children, we know he's a degenerate pagan, and will probably vote to make the disgusting human sacrifices so loved by left ans well as right wing neo-pagans as expansive and easy as possible. Just because they mouth a few GOP establishment slogans every now and then doesn't make him wonderful; most right wingers are as pro-pagan as left wing sociopaths are.



I'm not getting my hopes up. 

I'm Not giving up all hope entirely, either.


----------



## Picaro (Jun 28, 2020)

I hope I end up surprised and wrong, myself. After-birth abortions up to the age of two years old are trendy among the sickos now; if they win on this we'll see a lot more peddling  of that psychotic 'progressivism' by next year. According to pagan 'science', babies up to two years old are no different than a month old fetus.


----------



## alang1216 (Jun 28, 2020)

Chuz Life said:


> *All eyes on Roberts ahead of Supreme Court's abortion ruling*
> BY JOHN KRUZEL - 06/21/20 06:00 PM EDT 14,769
> 12,485
> Chief Justice John Roberts is under the microscope as the Supreme Court prepares to issue its first major ruling on abortion rights in the Trump era, which will give the clearest indication yet of the court’s willingness to revisit protections that were first granted in Roe v. Wade.
> ...


Are they deciding Roe v Wade or the merits of this particular case?  If the latter, they'll rule against Texas since they've already struck down similar laws.


----------



## Lysistrata (Jun 28, 2020)

Picaro said:


> FRom his ruling essentially opening the door and giving faggot pedophiles unfettered access to children, making it illegal to keep them away from jobs around children, we know he's a degenerate pagan, and will probably vote to make the disgusting human sacrifices so loved by left ans well as right wing neo-pagans as expansive and easy as possible. Just because they mouth a few GOP establishment slogans every now and then doesn't make him wonderful; most right wingers are as pro-pagan as left wing sociopaths are.


Your comment is ridiculous. You are asserting that all LGBTs are pedophiles, while failing to guard against heterosexuals who are pedophiles. Your comments about pagans are absurd. as is your reference to "human sacrifices." Americans, including Roberts, have the right to choose what religion to follow, if any. Why are you so bigoted against Pagans?


----------



## there4eyeM (Jun 28, 2020)

This should be in the humor forum! There are actually "votes" with this choice!
America is really a crazy place. Perhaps it always has been, but recently the level has, what could we say? Risen, fallen?
If it isn't ideologues who claim some lives matter its theologues who claim women have to bear children.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jun 28, 2020)

Lysistrata said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > FRom his ruling essentially opening the door and giving faggot pedophiles unfettered access to children, making it illegal to keep them away from jobs around children, we know he's a degenerate pagan, and will probably vote to make the disgusting human sacrifices so loved by left ans well as right wing neo-pagans as expansive and easy as possible. Just because they mouth a few GOP establishment slogans every now and then doesn't make him wonderful; most right wingers are as pro-pagan as left wing sociopaths are.
> ...


The thread premise is ridiculous – no doctor is allowed to ‘kill children.’


----------



## there4eyeM (Jun 28, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Picaro said:
> ...


Someone else noticed!
Well, it would be possible if he were serving in the military as, say, a pilot, while still a doctor. Then it would be patriotic.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jun 28, 2020)

dont let it worry you libs

Roberts has gone totally native

he will vote against saving innocent human life


----------



## Pete7469 (Jun 28, 2020)

BTW Libturds, it will still be cheap and easy to dispose of your genetic garbage in shit holes like Commiefornia. So if Texas gets to make abortion nearly impossible, just take your malignant parasite asses the fuck out of our beloved state and get your eggs scrambled in LA or Oakland.

You've got no business having children or polluting our state.

.


----------



## Picaro (Jun 28, 2020)

Lysistrata said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > FRom his ruling essentially opening the door and giving faggot pedophiles unfettered access to children, making it illegal to keep them away from jobs around children, we know he's a degenerate pagan, and will probably vote to make the disgusting human sacrifices so loved by left ans well as right wing neo-pagans as expansive and easy as possible. Just because they mouth a few GOP establishment slogans every now and then doesn't make him wonderful; most right wingers are as pro-pagan as left wing sociopaths are.
> ...



lol the assorted deviants and neo-pagans get all butt hurt when people just keep on stating the facts instead of bowing to mentally ill psychotic peer pressure from them. The LGBT 'rights' hoax was founded by pedophiles, for pedophiles, and NAMBLa has alwasy been a welcome and beloved member, until Jesse Helms came along, that is. They still are beloved and supported by the faggot privilege 'activists', they just have to hide it from young people who don't know the truth. Discrimination  against faggots working with children is very much called for. As for the neo-pagans and their demands for baby murdering human sacrificial rites , that has always been a key part of their spiritual beliefs the world over; the more humans  offered up for butchery, the more safe they feel from their assorted demons. If they can only get judges appointed to bring back tossing them into volcanoes, they will be able to have orgasms again.


----------



## Picaro (Jun 28, 2020)

Are the neo-pagans now claiming abortions aren't performed by doctors now? lol


----------



## Picaro (Jun 28, 2020)

Pete7469 said:


> BTW Libturds, it will still be cheap and easy to dispose of your genetic garbage in shit holes like Commiefornia. So if Texas gets to make abortion nearly impossible, just take your malignant parasite asses the fuck out of our beloved state and get your eggs scrambled in LA or Oakland.
> 
> You've got no business having children or polluting our state.
> 
> .



At the very least if they demand an abortion they should also have their tubes tied while they're killing the baby. Who wants these sociopaths raising children later on?


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Picaro said:
> ...


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jun 28, 2020)

‘The Louisiana case stems from a constitutional challenge to a law passed in 2014 by the state's Republican-led legislature that required physicians who perform abortions to hold “active admitting privileges” at a hospital within 30 miles of their facility.’ _ibid_

A law passed in bad faith having nothing to do with the ‘health and safety’ of women, and everything to do with further eroding the right to privacy.

In _Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt_ the Court struck down a similar Texas law with the same unlawful, bad faith provision, placing an undue – and un-Constitutional – burden on the right to privacy.

If the Louisiana law is allowed to stand, Republican lawmakers hostile to the right to privacy will be able to enact _de facto_ abortion bans through onerous, draconian regulatory measures intended to drive healthcare providers out of business, depriving women of their fundamental right to decide whether to have a child or not.


----------



## Lysistrata (Jun 28, 2020)

Picaro said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Picaro said:
> ...



You are a nutjob. Not all LGBTs are pedophiles and there are heterosexuals who are pedophiles. I'm glad that they finally identified the guy who murdered that 8-year-old girl 38 years ago. He beat, raped, and killed her. Too many little girls have been murdered, and not by women. Too bad this monster died before punishment. 

This whole thing about "neo-pagans"  making "demands for baby murdering human sacrificial rites" either comes from an old horror movie or some crazy "preacher." I've known some pagans and they were really good people.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 28, 2020)

Roberts will never overturn Roe.  He's a Bush guy first, plus Obama's got him by the balls


----------



## Lysistrata (Jun 28, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘The Louisiana case stems from a constitutional challenge to a law passed in 2014 by the state's Republican-led legislature that required physicians who perform abortions to hold “active admitting privileges” at a hospital within 30 miles of their facility.’ _ibid_
> 
> A law passed in bad faith having nothing to do with the ‘health and safety’ of women, and everything to do with further eroding the right to privacy.
> 
> ...



I read the oral argument in _Whole Woman's Health _a while back. The "conservatives" on the court only asked procedural questions, but the Texas solicitor general got hammered by the other justices. The law only applied to the performance of abortions, but as the AMA, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and many other health groups told the court in amicus briefs, colonoscopies are rated as more risky. Then he was asked about women who could not get to the only clinic that would remain open. He replied that they could go to New Mexico, which does not have this type of law. Texas presented no statistical evidence or any other evidence that abortions were riskier. The "safety" argument was so totally bogus, but the Texas attorneys had to think of something to defend the law, and they came up with that. They certainly couldn't make an argument based on sectarian religion, so they essentially lied to the court.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jun 28, 2020)

Lysistrata said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > ‘The Louisiana case stems from a constitutional challenge to a law passed in 2014 by the state's Republican-led legislature that required physicians who perform abortions to hold “active admitting privileges” at a hospital within 30 miles of their facility.’ _ibid_
> ...


Correct.

Now the hated Justice Kennedy is gone, and the authoritarian right will again attempt to hobble the right to privacy.


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)




----------



## Lysistrata (Jun 28, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



I think that there is a religious-rights question here, as well, which concerns me. I am sure that Texans are not all of the same faith, and the anti-abortion folks tie the issue to their religious views constantly, not anything to do with safety and protecting the safety of Texas women.


----------



## there4eyeM (Jun 28, 2020)

The feeble attempt of a minority of religious extremists to expiate themselves before their image of deity by opposing women's choice will fail in our republic.


----------



## Picaro (Jun 28, 2020)

Lysistrata said:


> You are a nutjob.



Says a sociopathic nutjob who likes killing babies, thinks it's a 'right'.



> Not all LGBTs are pedophiles and there are heterosexuals who are pedophiles.



Faggots commit from 30% to 50% of all sex crimes against children, and we know from the FBI's NAMBLA investigations the faggots will also rape little girls if no boys are handy; faggots make up around 2% of the population. Discriminating against faggots and their friends will cut the chances down by those percentages, and your anecdotal stories otherwise don't do anything to change that, just you babbling excuses for letting a demographhic with serious mental health issues you seem to identify with have access to children for no reason other than you think it's trendy and fashionable to suck up to kiddie rapists.



> This whole thing about "neo-pagans"  making "demands for baby murdering human sacrificial rites" either comes from an old horror movie or some crazy "preacher." I've known some pagans and they were really good people.



It comes from you neo-pagans and your religious rites; pagan materialism is the root belief system of left wing Useful Idiots and right wing Social Darwinists; you're all alike, murderous psychotics who get vicarious kicks via mass murders of babies and other humans.


----------



## Picaro (Jun 28, 2020)

Lysistrata said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...



lol rubbish. You just think atheists have the right to murder babies for the crime of inconvenience, is all. That's your 'religious question', the freedom of neo-pagan 'atheists' to kill categories of humans without fear of Dose Evul Xians interfering with your cult rituals. Once you commie pagan sociopaths have the masses desensitized to the assemly line murders of babies and faggots raping children, you can desensitize them to anything, and that's what we see today.


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

A woman paying a doctor to kill and remove her child should be prorected by laws that require the doctor (sic) to meet certain medical requirements. 

The ability to obtain admission privileges being one of them.

It doesn't have a fucking thing to do with religion.


----------



## skews13 (Jun 28, 2020)

Chuz Life said:


> *All eyes on Roberts ahead of Supreme Court's abortion ruling*
> BY JOHN KRUZEL - 06/21/20 06:00 PM EDT 14,769
> 12,485
> Chief Justice John Roberts is under the microscope as the Supreme Court prepares to issue its first major ruling on abortion rights in the Trump era, which will give the clearest indication yet of the court’s willingness to revisit protections that were first granted in Roe v. Wade.
> ...



You are in a no win situation. In the remote case that the court decides to allow states to jail women and doctors for abortions, and the daily headlines of women bleeding to death from back alley abortions. All you're going to do is make those women and doctors martyrs, which will backfire on you ten fold. 

It will not end abortions in other states, who will then go in the opposite direction, to the point of crowd funding transportation to women that could not otherwise afford it, which in and of itself becomes national news every night.

The only thing that will be left is for cell phone video of you lunatics chasing cars down the interstate trying to stop women being driven across state lines to receive one.


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

skews13 said:


> Chuz Life said:
> 
> 
> > *All eyes on Roberts ahead of Supreme Court's abortion ruling*
> ...



You are arguing points that this thread and the article in the OP says nothing about.

Still, children are supposed to be constitutionally entitled to the equal protections of our laws.

If you disagree with that?

I don't really care about anything more that you have to say abput it.


----------



## Frankeneinstein (Jun 28, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> _“All eyes on Roberts…”_
> 
> Meaning, Roberts will feel the wrath of the reprehensible, authoritarian right if the Chief Justice votes to uphold the Constitution, votes to safeguard the right to privacy, and votes to limit the power of the state – prohibiting government from forcing women to give birth against their will through force of law.


Probably get the Kavanaugh treatment


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

Another article on this subject.

Supreme Court Abortion Case: Media Worry About ‘Devastating Blow’


----------



## OldLady (Jun 28, 2020)

My eyes will be on Kavanaugh, who vowed to Senator Collins that he respects precedent too much to overturn Roe v. Wade.  Of course, this case wouldn't technically overturn Roe v. Wade, but the effect would be the same for many women living in Louisiana.  I'm going to be looking for his opinion.  There is clearly recent precedent in this case established in the Texas case.


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

Why would anyone oppose a requirement for Hospital Admission Privileges for medical situations like this?


----------



## Magnus (Jun 28, 2020)

I'll bet if it is revealed that Rump paid one of his hoes to have an abortion or his daughter had one, then suddenly overnight, abortions will be a-ok!

Heck, the so-called Conservatives are ok with grabbing pussy, paying off porn-stars, cheating, lying, racist remarks, etc. So much for the old moral majority party. So why not abortion?

They just need their tinpot fuhrer to lead the way.


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

Magnus said:


> I'll bet if it is revealed that Rump paid one of his hoes to have an abortion or his daughter had one, then suddenly overnight, abortions will be a-ok!
> 
> Heck, the so-called Conservatives are ok with grabbing pussy, paying off porn-stars, cheating, lying, racist remarks, etc. So much for the old moral majority party. So why not abortion?
> 
> They just need their tinpot fuhrer to lead the way.




I'll take your bet AND your money.


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

Magnus said:


> I'll bet if it is revealed that Rump paid one of his hoes to have an abortion or his daughter had one, then suddenly overnight, abortions will be a-ok!
> 
> Heck, the so-called Conservatives are ok with grabbing pussy, paying off porn-stars, cheating, lying, racist remarks, etc. So much for the old moral majority party. So why not abortion?
> 
> They just need their tinpot fuhrer to lead the way.



I'll take your bet AND your money.

This is an issue of biology and the Constitution.

The morality aspect that says it is wrong to "murder" someone (especially a child) has already long been established.


----------



## Coyote (Jun 28, 2020)

Chuz Life said:


> Why would anyone oppose a requirement for Hospital Admission Privileges for medical situations like this?



In order to get admitting privileges, the hospital requires that the physician will be likely to meet a minimum number for admissions.  The vast majority of abortions are uneventful and do not require admission to a hospital, so most will be denied admitting privileges.  And the purpose of such laws, they have nothing to do with best practices.


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Chuz Life said:
> 
> 
> > Why would anyone oppose a requirement for Hospital Admission Privileges for medical situations like this?
> ...



That's not what the OB/GYN's and other clinics with admitting privilege requirements are saying.

*"OB-GYNs have come out in support of the bill authored by a woman: Democratic Louisiana state senator Katrina Jackson.

“For those who say, ‘You’re limiting the ability to access abortion,’” she told the National Catholic Register in January, “I would tell them it doesn’t lessen access to an abortion, it lessens access to unsafe abortion, and unsafe, unregulated abortions are not constitutional.”*


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 28, 2020)

Mac-7 said:


> dont let it worry you libs
> 
> Roberts has gone totally native
> 
> he will vote against saving innocent human life



abortions will happen no matter what the law is... Just making them harder to get won't stop them.


----------



## Coyote (Jun 28, 2020)

Chuz Life said:


> Why would anyone oppose a requirement for Hospital Admission Privileges for medical situations like this?


Maybe you shouldn’t depend on propaganda for info ... Carhart does not have a record of botched abortions.  









						Late-Stage Abortion Provider Won’t Succumb to Protesters Who Forced Him Out of His Last Maryland Clinic
					

LeRoy Carhart has since 2010 commuted weekly from his home in Nebraska to Maryland to provide late-term abortions.




					theintercept.com


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Chuz Life said:
> 
> 
> > Why would anyone oppose a requirement for Hospital Admission Privileges for medical situations like this?
> ...



Actual transcribed 911 calls are considered to be propaganda to you?

That's fucking funny.


----------



## Coyote (Jun 28, 2020)

Chuz Life said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Chuz Life said:
> ...


The National Catholic Register...I am sure that is unbiased.

Here are some other opinions:








						Admitting privileges laws do not appear to benefit abortion patients
					






					www.ansirh.org
				



_We conducted a case series study to examine how, in the event that hospital care is necessary, women presenting for abortion were transferred or referred to emergency departments. We also assessed whether the process changed after clinics obtained admitting privileges. *We found that an abortion provider having admitting privileges doesn’t appear to change how abortion patients receive hospital care.*

We found that few patients needed to be transferred to the hospital by ambulance. In addition, patients often sought follow-up care after they had returned home and in these cases admitting privileges do not apply.  In such cases patients often go to their closest emergency department and not the hospital at which the abortion provider has admitting privileges. If abortion providers determine there is a problem that requires hospital care when the patient first presents for abortion care, clinics already have protocols in place for communicating with hospitals. The majority of patients referred to hospitals were due to ectopic pregnancy or have other health risks._





__





						Opposition to Requirements for Hospital Admitting Privileges and Transfer Agreements for Abortion Providers
					





					www.apha.org
				



_—*neither transfer agreements nor hospital admitting privilege requirements for abortion providers are grounded in evidence-based practices, especially considering that no hospital can deny a patient emergency care, regardless of the admitting status of the patient’s original physician* at that hospital. Rather, these types of requirements serve only to limit abortion providers’ ability to offer the highest-quality reproductive health care for women, including safe abortion services.

No states have laws governing how hospitals and/or their regulatory boards (as individual entities independent of government bodies) implement a fair and objective process of admitting privileges or transfer agreements. Consequently, while hospitals cannot refuse any patient emergency care, they are free to deny admitting privileges to any health care provider via a process that is vulnerable to political interference and may not be based on patient safety or evidence-based standards of care. For example, a physician practicing medicine and providing abortion services in Texas had his hospital admitting privileges revoked in 2014 specifically because he was providing abortions outside of the hospital, which the hospital claimed would be “disruptive to the business and reputation of [University General Hospital Dallas].”[8]_


----------



## Coyote (Jun 28, 2020)

Chuz Life said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Chuz Life said:
> ...


What is fucking funny is when they lack context.


----------



## Magnus (Jun 28, 2020)

Chuz Life said:


> Magnus said:
> 
> 
> > I'll bet if it is revealed that Rump paid one of his hoes to have an abortion or his daughter had one, then suddenly overnight, abortions will be a-ok!
> ...


LOL. You actually brought the Constitution to this debate?

You do realize that abortion is legal under our Fourteenth Amendment as ruled by the Supreme court, right? Or maybe not. You guys are trumptards after all.

As for morality? I already addressed that in my earlier post. If Rump is all for it, you trumptards will be too.

Now let's address the main topic -  requiring abortion-performing doctors to be authorized to admit patients at a nearby hospital.  This same law was addressed by the Supreme Court just 4 years ago. The state was Texas and the Supremes came down on the side of libs.

So what has changed? Other than the state? Nothing. Abortion is still legal under the Constitution and you do need doctors to perform this critical service. And the doctors do need hospital admitting privileges.

As I said, all this debate from the right wing-nuts will be moot if it is revealed that your tin-pot fuhrer is all for it.  Next time try doing some research before posting. Will help you to look less of a fool.


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Chuz Life said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Lol.

So, your source is an abortion provider?

So much for your position against bias and propaganda. Way you sink your own battleship.


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

Magnus said:


> So what has changed? Other than the state? Nothing. Abortion is still legal under the Constitution and you do need doctors to perform this critical service. *And the doctors do need hospital admitting privileges.*



Self pwned much?


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

Where are my fellow anti-abortion / pro-life friends on this issue? Do you agree that a State has the right to require admitting privileges of any doctors (sic) that kill children for a living?

How do you anticipate the Court's decision?


----------



## Coyote (Jun 28, 2020)

Why doesn't the state require admitting privileges for podiatrists that remove bunions?


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why doesn't the state require admitting privileges for podiatrists that remove bunions?



How about we compare the search results for botched abortions verses botched bunion removals?

You might be right.

It might make sense to have podiatrists meet the same requirements. Though, I think we both know better than to expect the search results to be comparable in any way.


----------



## Canon Shooter (Jun 28, 2020)

Picaro said:


> After-birth abortions up to the age of two years old are trendy among the sickos now; if they win on this we'll see a lot more peddling  of that psychotic 'progressivism' by next year. According to pagan 'science', babies up to two years old are no different than a month old fetus.



Can you cite examples of two year old babies being killed under the guise of abortion?


----------



## Chuz Life (Jun 28, 2020)

Here ee go!





__





						+"botched" bunion 911 - Bing video
					






					www.bing.com
				








__





						+"botched" abortion 911 - Bing video
					






					www.bing.com
				




Wow.

You Almost had a point there. 

Didn't  you.


----------



## WillPower (Jun 29, 2020)

The witches who were screaming "BABY KILLER" at us returning Viet Vets probably all had abortions at one time or another.   Too stupid to see the irony of it but then again, nobody with a room-temperature or higher IQ is a leftist.  Roberts could go either way.  He took a lot of grief from his former conservative allies on the Dreamer decision so maybe he goes with the flow to win back some love from the right wing.


----------



## candycorn (Jun 29, 2020)

WillPower said:


> The witches who were screaming "BABY KILLER" at us returning Viet Vets probably all had abortions at one time or another.   Too stupid to see the irony of it but then again, nobody with a room-temperature or higher IQ is a leftist.  Roberts could go either way.  He took a lot of grief from his former conservative allies on the Dreamer decision so maybe he goes with the flow to win back some love from the right wing.



And you think someone with a lifetime appointment cares about political fallout?  Let us know when your IQ gets above 0 degrees C


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jun 29, 2020)

Lysistrata said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...


Fortunately religious beliefs can’t be used to ‘justify’ violating citizens’ rights.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jun 29, 2020)

OldLady said:


> My eyes will be on Kavanaugh, who vowed to Senator Collins that he respects precedent too much to overturn Roe v. Wade.  Of course, this case wouldn't technically overturn Roe v. Wade, but the effect would be the same for many women living in Louisiana.  I'm going to be looking for his opinion.  There is clearly recent precedent in this case established in the Texas case.


That’s the problem: the right to privacy can be eliminated via regulatory policy, a _de facto_ overturning of _Roe_.


----------



## keepitreal (Jun 29, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Picaro said:
> ...



911, What is your emergency  

  This thread premise is ridiculous


----------



## Mac-7 (Jun 29, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> abortions will happen no matter what the law is... Just making them harder to get won't stop them.


Thats typical lib

the left only respects laws that they happen to agree with

only respects life that does not inconvenience them and kill life that they do not want


----------



## Picaro (Jun 29, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Fortunately religious beliefs can’t be used to ‘justify’ violating citizens’ rights.



that includes faux atheist beliefs, and it doesn't say atheists get to murder babies and pagans get to sacrifice humans, Aztec don't get to toss virgins into volcanoes, Nazis don't get to toss Jews into ovens, Commies don't get to starve kulaks to death, etc. The Bill Of Rights and 'equal protection' clauses were written from a Christian perspective, not a commie pagan sociopath perspective.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 29, 2020)

Mac-7 said:


> Thats typical lib
> 
> the left only respects laws that they happen to agree with
> 
> only respects life that does not inconvenience them and kill life that they do not want



Reality check, buddy... if a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, she'll find a way to not be pregnant.


----------



## OldLady (Jun 29, 2020)

Chuz Life said:


> *All eyes on Roberts ahead of Supreme Court's abortion ruling*
> BY JOHN KRUZEL - 06/21/20 06:00 PM EDT 14,769
> 12,485
> Chief Justice John Roberts is under the microscope as the Supreme Court prepares to issue its first major ruling on abortion rights in the Trump era, which will give the clearest indication yet of the court’s willingness to revisit protections that were first granted in Roe v. Wade.
> ...


 I will be interested when the ruling comes down.  Since you have put this in Breaking News, I expect you will update us and somehow alert us that the decision is in.


----------



## OldLady (Jun 29, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> ‘The Louisiana case stems from a constitutional challenge to a law passed in 2014 by the state's Republican-led legislature that required physicians who perform abortions to hold “active admitting privileges” at a hospital within 30 miles of their facility.’ _ibid_
> 
> A law passed in bad faith having nothing to do with the ‘health and safety’ of women, and everything to do with further eroding the right to privacy.
> 
> ...


I recall reading at the time that this law in Texas, before it had been overturned, had already put a number of clinics out of business.  I don't know if they were able to revive or not.  As my grandmother always said, there's more than one way to skin a cat.  And they sure skinned that one.

To me it makes more sense to have a conversation about putting a cap on how far into the pregnancy it can be an on-demand procedure and at the same time, somehow educating the public that closing  Planned Parenthood and other clinics only makes unwanted pregnancies more common.  Birth control readily available and affordable is the best way to eliminate abortions.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jun 29, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Reality check, buddy... if a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, she'll find a way to not be pregnant.


You might as well legalize every wrong thing on the premise that libs will just do it anyway


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jun 29, 2020)

OldLady said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > ‘The Louisiana case stems from a constitutional challenge to a law passed in 2014 by the state's Republican-led legislature that required physicians who perform abortions to hold “active admitting privileges” at a hospital within 30 miles of their facility.’ _ibid_
> ...


True.

But for most on the right this isn’t about ending abortion – it’s about keeping viable a political weapon to use against opponents and a hot button issue to keep the base engaged, energized, and voting.

It’s about compelling conformity and punishing dissent – not ending abortion.


----------



## Magnus (Jun 29, 2020)

*Supreme Court Strikes Down Louisiana Abortion Restrictions*

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday struck down a Louisiana law that could have left the state with a single abortion clinic.

The vote was 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. voting with the court’s four-member liberal wing but not adopting its reasoning. The chief justice said respect for precedent compelled him to vote with the majority.









						Supreme Court Strikes Down Louisiana Abortion Law, With Roberts the Deciding Vote (Published 2020)
					

The case, over a state law requiring doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, is the first abortion ruling since two Trump appointees joined the court.




					www.nytimes.com
				




Good. That's settled. So, Rump is 0 to 3 so far.


----------



## OldLady (Jun 29, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...


Don't agree with you there.  It's not about politics to 99% of people on either side of this argument, imo.


----------



## OldLady (Jun 29, 2020)

Magnus said:


> *Supreme Court Strikes Down Louisiana Abortion Restrictions*
> 
> WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday struck down a Louisiana law that could have left the state with a single abortion clinic.
> 
> ...


And Kavanaugh didn't show respect for precedent like he swore to Senator Collins he would.  
Boy is she getting a lot of emails this morning saying WE TOLD YOU SO.

But I haven't found his dissent yet.  Maybe it was for other reasons.  There was more than one issue on the table, I believe.


----------



## OldLady (Jun 29, 2020)

I wonder if Justice Kavanaugh has an email address?  You know, contact your Justices address.

I'd like to send him a pithy email this morning.


----------



## WillPower (Jun 29, 2020)

candycorn said:


> And you think someone with a lifetime appointment cares about political fallout?  Let us know when your IQ gets above 0 degrees C



Who said anything about "political" fallout?  But thanks for proving my point about leftists being dumber than cattle.  Roberts built a conservative portfolio all thru his career....Bush43 believed it....so did his associates and social circle....and now this.  Hopefully he is SHUNNED from here forward and has to hang out with the trash he's cuddled up to.


----------



## WillPower (Jun 29, 2020)

OldLady said:


> I wonder if Justice Kavanaugh has an email address?  You know, contact your Justices address.
> 
> I'd like to send him a pithy email this morning.



"pithy"?   You leftists created a mortal enemy in Kavanaugh....he hates everything about those who trashed his reputation and you'll never get a favorable vote from him......and rightfully so. Shows your side never realizes their are consequences for their sleazy ways.


----------



## XponentialChaos (Jun 29, 2020)




----------



## Magnus (Jun 29, 2020)

OldLady said:


> Magnus said:
> 
> 
> > *Supreme Court Strikes Down Louisiana Abortion Restrictions*
> ...


Yeah, Collins sure was wrong about Kavanaugh. Here is Ron Brownstein commenting on the very same thing...


----------



## Magnus (Jun 29, 2020)

WillPower said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if Justice Kavanaugh has an email address?  You know, contact your Justices address.
> ...


You mean, we should have ignored the rape charges against him as you did with your tinpot-fuhrer? 

Yeah, what were the Dems thinking? We should be more like the Repubs. Anything goes. Wanna grab pussy? No problem. Cavort with porn stars, sure. The same for rape charges. Anything in the pursuit of power. 

Yeah, Dems have a lot to learn from the Repubs.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 29, 2020)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Roberts will never overturn Roe.  He's a Bush guy first, plus Obama's got him by the balls



Mic drop!

Roberts is being blackmailed.


----------



## Coyote (Jun 29, 2020)

WillPower said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > And you think someone with a lifetime appointment cares about political fallout?  Let us know when your IQ gets above 0 degrees C
> ...



Respecting precedence in a ruling is part of being a good judge, conservative anD liberal.  You don’t want good judges.  You political partisans.


----------



## WillPower (Jun 29, 2020)

Magnus said:


> You mean, we should have ignored the rape charges against him as you did with your tinpot-fuhrer?
> 
> Yeah, what were the Dems thinking? We should be more like the Repubs. Anything goes. Wanna grab pussy? No problem. Cavort with porn stars, sure. The same for rape charges. Anything in the pursuit of power.
> 
> Yeah, Dems have a lot to learn from the Repubs.



Kavanaugh was clean as a vanilla milkshake growing up.  And you Rats knew it, but hit him with the sleaziest trash ever seen in DC.....more important you slimed his family, associates, everybody who knew him....despicable scum.  BTW, you want to talk rapists, how about we start with Willy Jeff and Plugs Biden?  Your Hollywood pals are the sickest fucks on the planet and those of you who ain't perverts are thieves and murderers.  You can't learn anything from us....we don't want to be within a country mile of ya's.


----------



## WillPower (Jun 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Respecting precedence in a ruling is part of being a good judge, conservative anD liberal.  You don’t want good judges.  You political partisans.



When have Kagan and DeSotomayer EVER voted against the commie cause?  Give up?  Never.  Not once...party line like the hideous looking robots they are.  If the old Jew happened to get hit by a meteor before January, Roberts betrayal won't mean a damn thing.


----------



## Coyote (Jun 29, 2020)

WillPower said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Respecting precedence in a ruling is part of being a good judge, conservative anD liberal.  You don’t want good judges.  You political partisans.
> ...


What commie cause cases have even come up?


----------



## WillPower (Jun 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> What commie cause cases have even come up?



And there it is....you don't even know you're a communist do you?  Your liberal causes all went to hell and you went further and further left until....BINGO you went all the way.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 29, 2020)

Mac-7 said:


> You might as well legalize every wrong thing on the premise that libs will just do it anyway



Not at all.  THere are some things that EVERYONE agrees is wrong.  These are easy to make laws against.  

The problem is, a majority believes abortion should be legal under SOME circumstances.  This makes enforcing a straight up law against it impractical.  People will break the law, cops won't bother to investigate, prosecutors won't prosecute and juries won't convict.


----------



## Coyote (Jun 29, 2020)

WillPower said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > What commie cause cases have even come up?
> ...


That is a total non-sequiter.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jun 29, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> The problem is, a majority believes abortion should be legal under SOME circumstances.


So do I

if the womans life is in danger she should be allowed to kill the child instead

I know others want to kill the baby if the woman was raped

I dont agree with that one but many do


----------



## Magnus (Jun 29, 2020)

WillPower said:


> Magnus said:
> 
> 
> > You mean, we should have ignored the rape charges against him as you did with your tinpot-fuhrer?
> ...


What, you don't want to talk about your tinpot-fuhrer and his philandering ways? No talk about pussy-grabbing, raping starlets etc? You would rather talk about Bill Clinton? LOL


----------



## easyt65 (Jun 29, 2020)

Justice Thomas savaged both Roberts with a blistering dissent with factual rebuke of using Un-Constitutional precedence instead of the Constitution to make decisions.









						Thomas tears into abortion precedent, says Roe v. Wade should fall in dissent on Louisiana case
					

The pitched dissent made clear that Thomas is ready to tear down the court's protections for abortion completely in his most explicit comments yet that precedents all the way back to Roe v. Wade should fall.




					www.foxnews.com
				




.


----------



## Mr Natural (Jun 29, 2020)

Oh well,  it’s not as if there’s a shortage of people we need to worry about.


----------



## Persistence Of Memory (Jun 29, 2020)

Chuz Life said:


> *All eyes on Roberts ahead of Supreme Court's abortion ruling*
> BY JOHN KRUZEL - 06/21/20 06:00 PM EDT 14,769
> 12,485
> Chief Justice John Roberts is under the microscope as the Supreme Court prepares to issue its first major ruling on abortion rights in the Trump era, which will give the clearest indication yet of the court’s willingness to revisit protections that were first granted in Roe v. Wade.
> ...


The key rule here is PRECEDENT. Abortion was decided 50 yrs ago. Roberts is a Precedent kind of guy.

Anyone who thinks a President is going to pick someone who votes the presidents way all the time, is sadly mistaken. Not supposed to work that way for a good reason.

Take a little F white pill solves all this GD BS.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 29, 2020)

Magnus said:


> WillPower said:
> 
> 
> > Magnus said:
> ...



What BS!! Not even Gloria Alred or democrat Presidential candidate Avenetti would take those "cases"


----------



## NotYourBody (Jun 29, 2020)

Pete7469 said:


> BTW Libturds, it will still be cheap and easy to dispose of your genetic garbage in shit holes like Commiefornia. So if Texas gets to make abortion nearly impossible, just take your malignant parasite asses the fuck out of our beloved state and get your eggs scrambled in LA or Oakland.
> 
> You've got no business having children or polluting our state.
> 
> .



Texas is such a shit hole. Windy, dirty, flat, hot, ugly. I lived there for a few years. It's gross. And misogynistic. I'm not sure why any women want to live there.

It's a good place for the GOPhers. Although it does seem to be looking a lot bluer than in the past. 

They might be able to change the political landscape, but unfortunately not the geography.


----------



## Magnus (Jun 29, 2020)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Magnus said:
> 
> 
> > WillPower said:
> ...


Really? And yet your tinpot-fuhrer paid compensation to the women. Not just once but multiple times. 

Are you telling me that Rump is so generous that he is willing to pay money to whoever sues him?

You trumptards sure are funny.


----------



## Coyote (Jun 29, 2020)

NotYourBody said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> > BTW Libturds, it will still be cheap and easy to dispose of your genetic garbage in shit holes like Commiefornia. So if Texas gets to make abortion nearly impossible, just take your malignant parasite asses the fuck out of our beloved state and get your eggs scrambled in LA or Oakland.
> ...


It also ranks 8th in teen pregnancies.


----------



## NotYourBody (Jun 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> NotYourBody said:
> 
> 
> > Pete7469 said:
> ...


Good grief. They are failing their teens.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 29, 2020)

Mac-7 said:


> So do I
> 
> if the womans life is in danger she should be allowed to kill the child instead
> 
> ...



You miss my point entirely...  The fact is, there is UNIVERSAL agreement that murder is bad.  That's why we can enforce homicide laws.   

There is NOT universal agreement that abortion is bad.  Some people actually think abortion is an acceptable form of birth control.  You might not think that.  I personally wish it wasn't so, but it is the case.  

Even when abortion was illegal, those laws were largely ignored and in the very rare cases where they were prosecuted,  women were never charged at all, and providers were not prosecuted for "Murder".


----------



## candycorn (Jun 29, 2020)

WillPower said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > And you think someone with a lifetime appointment cares about political fallout?  Let us know when your IQ gets above 0 degrees C
> ...


You did, shit brains.



WillPower said:


> But thanks for proving my point about leftists being dumber than cattle.  Roberts built a conservative portfolio all thru his career....Bush43 believed it....so did his associates and social circle....and now this.  Hopefully he is SHUNNED from here forward and has to hang out with the trash he's cuddled up to.



Trash? You mean you're going to invite him over? Because that's what you guys have become...trash.


----------



## beautress (Jun 29, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> _“All eyes on Roberts…”_
> 
> Meaning, Roberts will feel the wrath of the reprehensible, authoritarian right if the Chief Justice votes to uphold the Constitution, votes to safeguard the right to privacy, and votes to limit the power of the state – prohibiting government from forcing women to give birth against their will through force of law.


I do not recall the Constitution of the USA saying one damn thing about murdering human beings.


----------



## San Souci (Jun 29, 2020)

Chuz Life said:


> *All eyes on Roberts ahead of Supreme Court's abortion ruling*
> BY JOHN KRUZEL - 06/21/20 06:00 PM EDT 14,769
> 12,485
> Chief Justice John Roberts is under the microscope as the Supreme Court prepares to issue its first major ruling on abortion rights in the Trump era, which will give the clearest indication yet of the court’s willingness to revisit protections that were first granted in Roe v. Wade.
> ...


Roberts is a traitor.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2020)

beautress said:


> I do not recall the Constitution of the USA saying one damn thing about murdering human beings.



Fetuses aren't people.  We've never treated abortion as murder.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jun 30, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> There is NOT universal agreement that abortion is bad.


And ties must go to the abortionists?

there is no longer universal agreement on many this that a civil society once took for granted

Laws against theft for instance.   Liberal DAs such as one in Dallas have declared that theft under $750 is no longer a punishable offense

What?

so the fact that some women will ignore laws that protect the life of unborn children is  not proof that the law is wrong


----------



## Mac-7 (Jun 30, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> We've never treated abortion as murder.


Its past time that we should

another name for a fetus is an unborn child

which it certainly is


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2020)

Mac-7 said:


> And ties must go to the abortionists?
> 
> there is no longer universal agreement on many this that a civil society once took for granted
> 
> Laws against theft for instance. Liberal DAs such as one in Dallas have declared that theft under $750 is no longer a punishable offense



Not really a good comparison... Some jurisdictions have decided that property crimes aren't punishable by jail because we don't have enough space in the jails.  So restitution is an acceptable alternative. 

NOW- you do hit on an interesting point.  Once you have made abortion illegal, how do you enforce it? Are you going to make doctors inform on their patients?  Investigate every miscarriage as a potential homicide? Put women in jail for having them when we don't have enough room for the thieves right now? 

This is hardly a moot point.  There is a country that has EXACTLY the kinds of laws you want.  The Philippines has outlawed abortion in all cases except for a threat to the life of the mother.    They also have 500,000 to 800,000 illegal abortions a year.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 30, 2020)

Mac-7 said:


> Its past time that we should
> 
> another name for a fetus is an unborn child
> 
> which it certainly is



Fetuses aren't children.  They aren't viable outside the womb.  

You guys could barely get a conviction for Fetus Murder for Gosnell, after throwing everything you had at him. The court cut down 100 cases of Fetus Murder down to three, then gave him a sweet sentencing deal to keep him from appealing it.


----------



## SaxxyBlues (Jun 30, 2020)

Ahh the good old days:


----------



## WillPower (Jun 30, 2020)

Magnus said:


> What, you don't want to talk about your tinpot-fuhrer and his philandering ways? No talk about pussy-grabbing, raping starlets etc? You would rather talk about Bill Clinton? LOL



Trump never had to rape a woman....good looking when he was young, rich, famous.  Clinton is a trailer trash UGLY punk few women wanted anything to do with.....Hillary wouldn't even horizontal bop with him.  He turned her into a lesbian!  So Willy Jeff terrified women, raped them, bit their lip during the rape so they couldn't escape.  Clinton was a regular on Epstein's Lolita Express having sex with 13 year olds....he should be hanged on the South Lawn for that only despite his several acts of overt treason against the United States.  You're too stupid to know the difference between a man like Trump and a curr mutt like Willy.


----------



## WillPower (Jun 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Respecting precedence in a ruling is part of being a good judge, conservative anD liberal.  You don’t want good judges.  You political partisans.



BTW, when is enough finally enough?

61,628,584 murdered American babies since 1973....that's TEN TIMES the Jews Hitler murdered.



			https://nrlc.org/uploads/factsheets/FS01AbortionintheUS.pdf
		


Population of Canada?  37.59 million (2019)


----------



## San Souci (Jun 30, 2020)

Magnus said:


> I'll bet if it is revealed that Rump paid one of his hoes to have an abortion or his daughter had one, then suddenly overnight, abortions will be a-ok!
> 
> Heck, the so-called Conservatives are ok with grabbing pussy, paying off porn-stars, cheating, lying, racist remarks, etc. So much for the old moral majority party. So why not abortion?
> 
> They just need their tinpot fuhrer to lead the way.


The Left are all baby murderers. Abortion is murder. 60 MILLION babies murdered since that illegal decision in 1973. I hope  Mrs. "Roe" is burning in Hell.


----------



## Mr Natural (Jun 30, 2020)

San Souci said:


> *The Left are all baby murderers*. Abortion is murder. 60 MILLION babies murdered since that illegal decision in 1973. I hope Mrs. "Roe" is burning in Hell.



Not a single conservative has ever had an abortion.


----------



## San Souci (Jun 30, 2020)

Mr Clean said:


> San Souci said:
> 
> 
> > *The Left are all baby murderers*. Abortion is murder. 60 MILLION babies murdered since that illegal decision in 1973. I hope Mrs. "Roe" is burning in Hell.
> ...


Not sure. Probably some "Pro-Murder" conservatives out there. Just as there are some Pro-Life Libs.


----------



## beautress (Jun 30, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> beautress said:
> 
> 
> > I do not recall the Constitution of the USA saying one damn thing about murdering human beings.
> ...


They are human beings in their initial stage.

I've been watching several dozen hatchlings for the past 3 weeks. They wouldn't be alive without having experienced conception through pecking their way out of the eggshell, and it took some time in their specie timeclock parameter, but from conception they were chicken beings.

It's a fact of life, and abortionists extinguish it and teach young women to feel good about their deed with "come back soon" written on their black, small little hearts.


----------



## beautress (Jun 30, 2020)

Mr Clean said:


> San Souci said:
> 
> 
> > *The Left are all baby murderers*. Abortion is murder. 60 MILLION babies murdered since that illegal decision in 1973. I hope Mrs. "Roe" is burning in Hell.
> ...


That's because after they assist in the murder process of ridding themselves of their own human obligation according to the scriptures, they just became disattached "progressives" with a growing hatred for those who do the right thing and give life to the little human being entrusted into their care by their sexual act participation. IOW, they throw the spiritual baby out with its bathwater and become beholden to their supporters in the abortionist community who teach them to never give a second thought to their shared mistake.


----------



## SaxxyBlues (Jun 30, 2020)

The War on Poverty in the Pages of LIFE: Appalachia Portraits, 1964
					

Fifty years after LBJ declared a War on Poverty in America, LIFE presents a series of photos by John Dominis from eastern Kentucky in 1964.




					www.life.com
				




Which is more correct, elective abortion at six weeks or living in poverty?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 1, 2020)

WillPower said:


> BTW, when is enough finally enough?
> 
> 61,628,584 murdered American babies since 1973....that's TEN TIMES the Jews Hitler murdered.



Fetuses aren't children. 

Just as many fetuses were aborted before 1973 as after.  Doctors performed abortions and then wrote something else down on the chart, if they kept charts at all.  

The birth rate did not drastically decline in 1973, and actually went up after 1975.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 1, 2020)

beautress said:


> They are human beings in their initial stage.
> 
> I've been watching several dozen hatchlings for the past 3 weeks. They wouldn't be alive without having experienced conception through pecking their way out of the eggshell, and it took some time in their specie timeclock parameter, but from conception they were chicken beings.



You do realize that most hatchlings don't survive that long, right?  Most are kicked out of the nest, some of the eggs are eaten by predators, etc.  



beautress said:


> It's a fact of life, and abortionists extinguish it and teach young women to feel good about their deed with "come back soon" written on their black, small little hearts.



Here's the thing. It was probably okay to make women baby machines back in the bad old days, when infant mortality was something like 50%. You had five kids because only two would make it to adulthood. 

Today- Most childhood diseases have been defeated, so we really kind of have to reduce our birth rates. The planet is already overpopulated.  We have abortion because we got rid of Polio and small pox..


----------



## Mac-7 (Jul 1, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Not really a good comparison... Some jurisdictions have decided that property crimes aren't punishable by jail because we don't have enough space in the jails. So restitution is an acceptable alternative.


Not everywhere is demanding restitution

Dallas is a deep blue minority majority city run by lunatics in the democratic party

the DA there simply looks the other way at theft under $750 

which of course is insane


----------



## there4eyeM (Jul 1, 2020)

The female of the species determines giving life. Taking that determination away would be forcing her to bear. No one has that right.


----------



## WillPower (Jul 1, 2020)

there4eyeM said:


> The female of the species determines giving life. Taking that determination away would be forcing her to bear. No one has that right.



Bullshit.  When she agreed to have sex without protection she gave up the right to legally murder her offspring.  She can deliver the child and hand it over to one of the thousands of childless couples who'd love to raise her baby as their own.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 1, 2020)

Mac-7 said:


> Not everywhere is demanding restitution
> 
> Dallas is a deep blue minority majority city run by lunatics in the democratic party
> 
> ...



Actually, you need to read the fine print.  









						Texas prosecutors want to keep low-level criminals out of overcrowded jails. Top Republicans and police aren't happy.
					

Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot ignited a firestorm of controversy when he announced he wouldn't prosecute some low-level crimes, including certain theft offenses. But he's among many prosecutors turning their focus away from nonviolent offenses.




					www.texastribune.org
				





But part of his plan included a decision not to prosecute thefts of personal items under $750 *that are stolen out of necessity.* Immediately, Creuzot came under fire from state officials and police leaders who said the policy was irresponsible and would encourage criminal activity.

Creuzot said he didn’t arbitrarily pick that $750 threshold — that’s the value of stolen items that state law dictates will result in people being charged with no more than a Class B misdemeanor.

Of course, we are talking about shoplifters here, and in most cases, the property is recovered, so no foul.


----------



## Mac-7 (Jul 2, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> But part of his plan included a decision not to prosecute thefts of personal items under $750 *that are stolen out of necessity.*


Its the usual liberal soft-on-crime bs

the reason there are so many thefts is because *THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH IT*

 Thanks to liberals criminals have a get out of jail free card in their pocket

 Ideally for the democrat voters they wont get caught

 but if they do so what?

either way they know nothing is going to happen to them


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 2, 2020)

Mac-7 said:


> Its the usual liberal soft-on-crime bs
> 
> the reason there are so many thefts is because *THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH IT*
> 
> ...



Okay, let's get real. If it's a white kid, they don't get prosecuted anyway.  

So now we get black kids getting the same treatment.  

Wow. That's awful.


----------

