Ohio Governor John Kasich Signs Extreme Anti-Abortion Measures

[martybegan]

Our Supreme Court, which is the ultimate decider of Constitutionality and matters regarding civil rights, ruled that a woman has an unimpeded right to an abortion and the government has no right to interfere with that right.

They also decided that segregation was A-OK a while ago. They were wrong then, they were wrong with Roe V Wade as well.

Roe v. Wade struck down state laws banning abortion in 1973. Over 20 cases have addressed abortion law in the United States, all of which upheld Roe v. Wade. Since Roe, abortion has been legal throughout the country

Plessy was upheld for over 1/2 a century. Time does not make things right.

 

[Bfgrn]

They also decided that segregation was A-OK a while ago. They were wrong then, they were wrong with Roe V Wade as well.

Roe v. Wade struck down state laws banning abortion in 1973. Over 20 cases have addressed abortion law in the United States, all of which upheld Roe v. Wade. Since Roe, abortion has been legal throughout the country

Roe v Wade, by itself, disproves your statement that a woman has an unimpeded right to an abortion and the government has no right to interfere with that right.

You are either too ignorant to realize this or too dishonest to admit it.

It is the law of the land.

Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion

 

[martybegan]

Roe v. Wade struck down state laws banning abortion in 1973. Over 20 cases have addressed abortion law in the United States, all of which upheld Roe v. Wade. Since Roe, abortion has been legal throughout the country

Roe v Wade, by itself, disproves your statement that a woman has an unimpeded right to an abortion and the government has no right to interfere with that right.

You are either too ignorant to realize this or too dishonest to admit it.

It is the law of the land.

Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion

Just like Citizen's United right?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Roe v. Wade struck down state laws banning abortion in 1973. Over 20 cases have addressed abortion law in the United States, all of which upheld Roe v. Wade. Since Roe, abortion has been legal throughout the country

Roe v Wade, by itself, disproves your statement that a woman has an unimpeded right to an abortion and the government has no right to interfere with that right.

You are either too ignorant to realize this or too dishonest to admit it.

It is the law of the land.

Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion

Roe v Wade, by itself, disproves your statement that a woman has an unimpeded right to an abortion and the government has no right to interfere with that right.

What part of this do you not understand?

 

[Borillar]

Kind of like gay marriage?

No one is going to force you to marry someone of the same sex, so no, it's not like gay marriage.

no one is forcing anyone to have abortions either, but I believe you lefties would if you could

Nope. Just like to have the freedom to choose. Of course, freedom is a foreign concept to righties.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

What is wrong about counseling rape victims about abortion? They have the option to abort, surely the lifers don't want to force them to have a rape baby?

Oh wait - they do.

Well, yes... can't have any rape-babies running around.

 

[Bfgrn]

Roe v Wade, by itself, disproves your statement that a woman has an unimpeded right to an abortion and the government has no right to interfere with that right.

You are either too ignorant to realize this or too dishonest to admit it.

It is the law of the land.

Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion

Roe v Wade, by itself, disproves your statement that a woman has an unimpeded right to an abortion and the government has no right to interfere with that right.

What part of this do you not understand?

What don't you understand? This not something recent. If abortions weren't legal and protected by the law, why hasn't any state outright banned abortion?

 

[martybegan]

It is the law of the land.

Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion

Roe v Wade, by itself, disproves your statement that a woman has an unimpeded right to an abortion and the government has no right to interfere with that right.

What part of this do you not understand?

What don't you understand? This not something recent. If abortions weren't legal and protected by the law, why hasn't any state outright banned abortion?

because of a terrible supreme court decsion, thats why.

This is a perfect example of the liberal/progressive mindset. Once thier government betters tell them something is legal, then it is forever legal, and no one should have an opinion otherwise.

What a lemming.

 

[Avatar4321]

That's not an argument. That is merely a statement of your desire to arbitrarily impose your particular and peculiar beliefs on everyone else and force them by law to adhere to your beliefs.

In other words, you don't want to deal with the fact that a child has a right to life so you are just going to pretend it's not an argument because you don't like it.

If a child has no right to life, neither to any of us. Quite frankly, even if you don't care about the children, does anyone really want to give any government the power end anyone's life without due process? Do you want to give the government power to declare you a non- or sub-human?

They are bad enough even with the philosophical underlining of the Founding that all of us have been endowed by our Creator with certain innumerable rights.

However, since you've decided not to be an honest broker, I don't see how anyone can discuss the matter with you. You'll have to stop lying to yourself first. No matter what I say, I can't control what you tell yourself.

 

[Avatar4321]

Kind of like gay marriage?

No one is going to force you to marry someone of the same sex, so no, it's not like gay marriage.

no one is forcing anyone to have abortions either, but I believe you lefties would if you could

Doesn't change the fact that they are targeting women what a time in their life when they can be emotionally vulnerable trying to scare them into abortion.

When my wife first got pregnant, she had some of the pro-abortionists approach he encouraging abortion. My wife found the suggestion offensive and told them that. It shut them up quickly. The fact that they thought terminating my daughter would be something my wife wanted is absolutely foolish. She's more pro life than I am.

 

[Avatar4321]

take a breath...you see it as nothing but expelling clumps if that helps you people sleep at night, that is your right..others see it different..that sucks you for you but too bad

I think people who murder children should be punished. Don't you?

Good question. Why is it that abortion haters won't come out and say what punishment should be handed out to women who have abortions? They claim abortion is murder. But they don't want to prosecute women who have abortions as murderers. Why?

Because we realize they are just as much victims as the children when those who profit off killing their children prey on them when they are at an emotionally vulnerable time of their life.

 

[Avatar4321]

What is it that you right wing abortion haters will do for the women who you want to force to have a child they don't want?

Will you set up a college fund? Make sure the kid is educated and fed? Has health care for life?

Just what will you do for the unwanted child? Will you take it in and raise it? Give the child a job?

Come on now, you can't just force women to have children they don't want and then abondon that child and mother when it is born.

That wouldn't be very Christian of you. But you all do that every day. Bitch all day long on a message board about abortion. But not one of you are marching in protest at an abortion clinic. Not one of you are adopting an unwanted child.

Why is that?

This bill does nothing to restrict abortion, it mearly makes someone who wants one as an elective procdure pay for it their fucking selves.

Are you aok with abortions as long as they are paid for by the woman having an abortion?

If that is your position, then you are a minority abortion hater. Most on here want all abortions stopped. Regardless of who pays for them.

Some people have realized that in order to solve the problem long term, baby steps have to be taken some times.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It is the law of the land.

Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion

Roe v Wade, by itself, disproves your statement that a woman has an unimpeded right to an abortion and the government has no right to interfere with that right.

What part of this do you not understand?

What don't you understand? This not something recent. If abortions weren't legal and protected by the law, why hasn't any state outright banned abortion?

Your stated:

A woman has an unimpeded right to an abortion and the government has no right to interfere with that right

Roe v Wade specifically allows states to regulate and even ban abortions after the 1st trimester.

Thus, Roe v Wade, itself, disproves your statement.

You have been proven wrong.

 

[Avatar4321]

omg, EXTREME anti abortion measure...............what will the people ever do?

I guess don't go to that state to kill your children..tskt sk

It is no longer HER uterus, it has been deemed property of the STATE. This is a BIG and invasive of a person's liberty as BIG government can get.

Hey Steph, are YOU going to pay ALL the bills for a woman's special needs during a pregnancy? Frequent visits to her doctor and gynecologist, special nutrition and vitamins, new wardrobe, make sure she quits smoking, cover lost income etc?

What if her pregnancy goes wrong and debilitates the mother?

Again, it's not the uterus that is the issue. It's the state's power to protect the innocent life inside the uterus.

 

[Avatar4321]

The right is pushing hard for this and I think personally that there will be a big backlash eventually because of this.
It just feels like the gop see's the writing on the wall and they are pushing everything they can before its over.
This concentrated effort tends to end badly.

If there is backlash for protecting the lives of children, then our society is in an even worse position than I could imagine.

im confident that if the majority was voiced, however, they would stand for life. Unfortunately the Court has essenteially taken away the power of the people to make the decision.

 

[Avatar4321]

The left thinks they should be able to force gun control on the people in this country but abortions shouldn't have any type of restriction what-so-ever on it...

they are two faced hypocrites of the worst kind.

and THE OP is the biggest one on this board..low life pos

Would you shut up already. Nobody buys your game you play. Go serve some lunch.

You had a half way decent post for discussion and then you turn around and go back to this nonsense of insulting and denigrating people who have the audacity to disagree with you.

 

[whitehall]

Another oxymoron posted by the left. I think I'll make a list. I'll add "extreme anti-abortion" to "atheist monument".

 

[Coyote]

What is wrong about counseling rape victims about abortion? They have the option to abort, surely the lifers don't want to force them to have a rape baby?

Oh wait - they do.

What is a "rape baby"? Is that somehow not the same a baby?

Apparently a child who is a product of rape is somehow less human than any other child in the mind of some.

Instead of traumatizing by carrying a baby, these people want to traumatize them by killing it.

So....a woman who is made pregnant against her will has no rights in the matter? She is nothing more than a vehicle for housing a baby until it's born?

 

[Avatar4321]

omg, EXTREME anti abortion measure...............what will the people ever do?

I guess don't go to that state to kill your children..tskt sk

It is no longer HER uterus, it has been deemed property of the STATE. This is a BIG and invasive of a person's liberty as BIG government can get.

Hey Steph, are YOU going to pay ALL the bills for a woman's special needs during a pregnancy? Frequent visits to her doctor and gynecologist, special nutrition and vitamins, new wardrobe, make sure she quits smoking, cover lost income etc?

What if her pregnancy goes wrong and debilitates the mother?

Drama---the state isn't out to control a uterus. We're not talking about mandatory hysterectomies here. FYI--people are concerned about the life INSIDE the uterus.

Unfortunately, there is a segment of our population that is too large that has decided that there is no life inside the uterus. I pray for any of the children they may have, that those children can survive long enough for them to see what a mistake they've made and not choose abortion.

 

[M14 Shooter]

omg, EXTREME anti abortion measure...............what will the people ever do?

I guess don't go to that state to kill your children..tskt sk

It is no longer HER uterus, it has been deemed property of the STATE. This is a BIG and invasive of a person's liberty as BIG government can get.

Hey Steph, are YOU going to pay ALL the bills for a woman's special needs during a pregnancy? Frequent visits to her doctor and gynecologist, special nutrition and vitamins, new wardrobe, make sure she quits smoking, cover lost income etc?

What if her pregnancy goes wrong and debilitates the mother?

Again, it's not the uterus that is the issue. It's the state's power to protect the innocent life inside the uterus.

Roe v Wade ruled that, after the 1st trimester, the state has a compelling interest in doing so, and may therefore regulate/ban such things.