Biden to campaign on “restoring” ROE V WADE.

[M14 Shooter]

If Roe does what you say...

There's no if.
Allow me to educate you. Again.

A woman's right to bodily autonomy is not absolute:
Roe:
3. State criminal abortion laws, like those involved here, that except from criminality only a life-saving procedure on the mother's behalf without regard to the stage of her pregnancy and other interests involved violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy. Though the State cannot override that right, it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a 'compelling' point at various stages of the woman's approach to term.

Roe allows a state to regulate, and even prohibit, abortions:
Roe:
(c) For the stage subsequent to viability the State, in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.

My point, proven.

Now, tell us:
Why do you support a ruling form the USSC which held women do not have an absolute right to bodily autonomy , and that states have the power to regulate abortions, even to the point of prohibition?

FYI: I expect you to run away soon, as you always do when you are proven wrong.
You may as well concede and get it over with now.

 

[M14 Shooter]

That mimic Roe. Thanks for the distinction without a difference

Thank you for again demonstrating your ignorance.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Something trol-lesh is going on here.

Lesh doesn't know a third of what she thinks she knows; when her ignorant, bigoted prattle gets proven wrong, she runs away.

 

[Rawley]

(e) Abortion presents a profound moral question. The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. The Court overrules those decisions and returns that authority to the people and their elected representatives. Pp. 78–79.

There you go.
The power belongs to the states, and thus, not the federal government.
Thus, a federal law regarding constitution violates the 10th amendment.

LOL A bit scary that someone's convinced you that by this overruling of Roe and Casey, the Court somehow held Congress cannot pass any laws or regulations regarding abortion.

One would think they might make even a passing comment that they were invalidating literally hundreds of Federal laws and regulations with this decision.

Please feel free to further demonstrate your willful ignorance.

I already won, you a poopyhead.

 

[Lesh]

There's no if.
Allow me to educate you. Again.

A woman's right to bodily autonomy is not absolute:
Roe:
3. State criminal abortion laws, like those involved here, that except from criminality only a life-saving procedure on the mother's behalf without regard to the stage of her pregnancy and other interests involved violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy. Though the State cannot override that right, it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a 'compelling' point at various stages of the woman's approach to term.

Roe allows a state to regulate, and even prohibit, abortions:
Roe:
(c) For the stage subsequent to viability the State, in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.

My point, proven.

Now, tell us:
Why do you support a ruling form the USSC which held women do not have an absolute right to bodily autonomy , and that states have the power to regulate abortions, even to the point of prohibition?

FYI: I expect you to run away soon, as you always do when you are proven wrong.
You may as well concede and get it over with now.

Then why the need for Dobbs?

Why have so many states enacted anti-abortion laws SINCE Dobbs?

Why did states have “trigger laws” they could not enforce until Dobbs?

Why are YOU so anti Roe?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Then why the need for Dobbs?

There you go, demonstrating your ignorance AGAIN
Dobbs removed the federal standard set in Roe, giving states the plenary power to set their own standard.

Now, tell us:
Why do you support a ruling form the USSC which held women do not have an absolute right to bodily autonomy , and that states have the power to regulate abortions, even to the point of prohibition?

 

[M14 Shooter]

LOL A bit scary that someone's convinced you that by this overruling of Roe and Casey, the Court somehow held Congress cannot pass any laws or regulations regarding abortion.

I cannot help the fact you do not like the truth.
The truth, however, it remains.

 

[Rawley]

I cannot help the fact you do not like the truth.
The truth, however, it remains.

In your vast experience interpreting Supreme Court opinions, you find that they often invalidate hundreds of Federal laws and regulations in a single opinion without even so much as mentioning them?

 

[M14 Shooter]

In your vast experience interpreting Supreme Court opinions, you find that they often invalidate hundreds of Federal laws and regulations in a single opinion without even so much as mentioning them?

If you can prove a point, you can do so w/o asking questions.

Feel free to hate the truth.

 

[MagicMike]

Christianity was never built on child sacrifice.

So.....all that stuff about "God" sacrificing his only begotten son on the cross for the sins of mankind....is horse poo-poo too?

 

[Rawley]

If you can prove a point, you can do so w/o asking questions.

Feel free to hate the truth.

Nah, I find your fantasy of what your think Dobbs held to be fascinating.

Odd that the Court hasn't dismissed this case, given your opinion that in Dobbs, they prohibited the Federal gvt from regulating abortion.

Supreme Court Will Address “Abortion Distortions” at the FDA

Abortion poisons everything it touches. Its advocates tell themselves nonsense like the offspring of human beings are not human, or even alive, until they emerge from the womb. Many states that make killing a preborn child without the mother’s consent a crime protect killing a preborn child with...

www.heritage.org

 

[M14 Shooter]

Nah...

I accept your concession.

Odd that the Court hasn't dismissed this case,

Because you apparently don't understand how the courts work, I suppose.

 

[Rawley]

I accept your concession.

Because you apparently don't understand how the courts work, I suppose.

Do explain to the ignorant unwashed masses- Why hasn't the Court dismissed this appeal as moot since they have taken all power away from the Federal gvt to regulate abortion?

 

[Crepitus]

We're well aware of what those "cookies" do to your perception of reality.

Nothing.

What are you guys putting in yours that you would think something that?

 

[Lesh]

There you go, demonstrating your ignorance AGAIN
Dobbs removed the federal standard set in Roe, giving states the plenary power to set their own standard.

Now, tell us:
Why do you support a ruling form the USSC which held women do not have an absolute right to bodily autonomy , and that states have the power to regulate abortions, even to the point of prohibition?

But wait… you claimed that Roe already made abortion a states rights thing.

Now you say Dobbs removed the federal mandate

Sounds like you’re just babbling

 

[M14 Shooter]

But wait… you claimed that Roe already made abortion a states rights thing.
Now you say Dobbs removed the federal mandate
Sounds like you’re just babbling

Thank you for, again, demonstrating you ignorance -- and your inability to read.


Now, tell us:
Why do you support a ruling form the USSC which held women do not have an absolute right to bodily autonomy , and that states have the power to regulate abortions, even to the point of prohibition?

 

[hadit]

Nothing.

What are you guys putting in yours that you would think something that?

We see politicians appointing justices to the Supreme Court in line with the law. You apparently see wild conspiracies and attempts to "stack" the court, as if legally appointing new justices to replace those who retire or die on the bench is somehow nefarious.

Ergo, there is apparently something in your cookies that alters your perception of reality.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Is it illegal to drink while you are pregnant and intentionally give your baby alcohol fetal syndrome?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Biden Campaign Plans Rallies, Op-Eds, TV Ads to Demand Mass Murder of American Babies.

The Joe Biden campaign plans to put abortion "at the forefront of its reelection campaign," vowing to "restore" Roe v. Wade and the "reproductive freedom"

thenationalpulse.com

It is a states rights issue. Wasnt that determined By SCOTUS? Why should California care what Texas does?

Blue states now have WAY LAXER abortion laws.

Of course he is. it's a winning issue. This constitutionally protected right should be restored immediately.

 

[Lesh]

Thank you for, again, demonstrating you ignorance -- and your inability to read.


Now, tell us:
Why do you support a ruling form the USSC which held women do not have an absolute right to bodily autonomy , and that states have the power to regulate abortions, even to the point of prohibition?

And here you say it again after you just said Dobbs was needed to codify states control over abortion.

I would ask you to reconcile that stupid juxtaposition but you’re an idiot so…