Over 200 Lawmakers Ask SCOTUS to Reconsider Roe v Wade

There is no such person as a "pro-abort lawyer." However, there are lawyers who support the rights of Americans to religious liberty and to physical sovereignty, both of which the dirty theocrats want to take away.

Out of the women whose lives I really know about who have had unplanned pregnancies, one chose to have an abortion, and two chose to bring their pregnancies to term, one of whom is a Type I diabetic, who was confined to bed rest for months and then had a dangerous and horrific birth experience. She was married and had an IUD, which somehow failed. She also was not a member of a religious cult.

Nobody needs filthy theocrats from cults nosing around in their crotches. Following a religion should be an individual choice,


It is not a theocratic concept that all "persons" have a right to the equal protections of our laws.

That fact is in our Constitution.

So, it becomes a biological question of when a child's life (and Constitutional rights) begin.

Religion is neither needed nor required to answer that question.

I agree with that.
 
There is no such person as a "pro-abort lawyer." However, there are lawyers who support the rights of Americans to religious liberty and to physical sovereignty, both of which the dirty theocrats want to take away.

Out of the women whose lives I really know about who have had unplanned pregnancies, one chose to have an abortion, and two chose to bring their pregnancies to term, one of whom is a Type I diabetic, who was confined to bed rest for months and then had a dangerous and horrific birth experience. She was married and had an IUD, which somehow failed. She also was not a member of a religious cult.

Nobody needs filthy theocrats from cults nosing around in their crotches. Following a religion should be an individual choice,


It is not a theocratic concept that all "persons" have a right to the equal protections of our laws.

That fact is in our Constitution.

So, it becomes a biological question of when a child's life (and Constitutional rights) begin.

Religion is neither needed nor required to answer that question.

If every fertilized egg was a child, any abortion would only result in a live birth at any gestational age. Why don't you have people at every place in which an abortion is performed who are capable of accepting the hand-off and rushing the "child" to an incubator?

The resolution of this "question" does require a theological or philosophical belief. I have a belief as to what goes on in the sequence of events by which a fertilized egg becomes a human being that simply does not agree with yours. And I haven't even had an abortion. People who have had an abortion obviously must have a different perspective than your's.
 
If every fertilized egg was a child, any abortion would only result in a live birth at any gestational age. Why don't you have people at every place in which an abortion is performed who are capable of accepting the hand-off and rushing the "child" to an incubator?

The resolution of this "question" does require a theological or philosophical belief. I have a belief as to what goes on in the sequence of events by which a fertilized egg becomes a human being that simply does not agree with yours. And I haven't even had an abortion. People who have had an abortion obviously must have a different perspective than your's.

Such biology fail.

Rhetorical question.

Do you (did you) have a biological father?
 
Last edited:
I think they will.

Especially when they are asked to reconcile a fetal HOMICIDE law or conviction with Roe.

Hopefully, they'll throw out the fetal homicide law, so we don't have more women like Purvi Patel being prosecuted for having miscarriages.

Still haven't addressed the case of Ms. Patel and how Vice-Fuhrer Pence had her thrown in prison for having a miscarriage.
 
1. Our laws are not infallible.

That said, . . .

2. The law (cited just a few posts ago) already defines "children in the womb" as "children."

That said, . . .

Both biologically and legally, we are in fact, talking about "children."

Again, so when do we start prosecuting women for miscarriages? If you accept a fetus is a person, and that woman did SOMETHING wrong, you have to start prosecuting her, correct?
 
Some Men (sic) have compelling reasons to fuck women, impregnate them or not and then leave them to find another that is willing to put out.

Does that make it right?

Sure it does... thank God we have abortions to fix the mistakes.
 
I wish that just one of you who support that theory would take the time to explain in detail, how one State could (legitimately, intellectually, honestly and Constitutionally) establish that a child in the womb is a human being / PERSON , entitled to the Equal protections of our laws, etc. . .. But in the very next State they might not be?

How long do you think that kind of leftarded idiocy would take to get back to the fucking SCOTUS?

Guy, the problem you people have is that as long as it's in the woman's body, it's HER decision, period. Unless you are willing to start locking women up for not only abortions but miscarriages, start testing discarded tampons for abortificiant drugs, then you are just passing a feel-good law that will be ignored.

Prostitution is illegal in most states, but you'd have no problem finding a massage parlor, an escort service, a strip joint or a streetwalker who will happily exchange sex for money. the Cops don't enforce these laws unless they become a nuisance, like a crack whore hanging around outside a school.

The reality is before Roe v. Wade, women had no problem finding people willing to perform abortions. SCOTUS thought they were just striking down unworkable laws no one was obeying anyway, just like they did in Griswald when they struck down the contraception laws. The Catholics whined about both, but really didn't make a big deal. "Five Hail Marys, go forth and sin some more" Then the Evangelicals, who considered Abortion a "Catholic Thing", decided they needed an issue to get asses into pews when segregation wasn't working for them anymore.
 
I wish that just one of you who support that theory would take the time to explain in detail, how one State could (legitimately, intellectually, honestly and Constitutionally) establish that a child in the womb is a human being / PERSON , entitled to the Equal protections of our laws, etc. . .. But in the very next State they might not be?

How long do you think that kind of leftarded idiocy would take to get back to the fucking SCOTUS?

Guy, the problem you people have is that as long as it's in the woman's body, it's HER decision, period. Unless you are willing to start locking women up for not only abortions but miscarriages, start testing discarded tampons for abortificiant drugs, then you are just passing a feel-good law that will be ignored.

No, it's not period. RvW makes it the government's business post viability.
 
The final decision as to whether to have an abortion or not absolutely must remain with the woman, not politicians or clergy of any sort, none of whom is qualified to make it.
 
The final decision as to whether to have an abortion or not absolutely must remain with the woman, not politicians or clergy of any sort, none of whom is qualified to make it.

I know the question is rhetorical but I woukd like to see your anseer.

Do you (did you - if he has passed) have a biological father? Or not?
 
The final decision as to whether to have an abortion or not absolutely must remain with the woman, not politicians or clergy of any sort, none of whom is qualified to make it.

The final decision to rob a bank lies with the robber. . . . Does that mean we should keep everyone else out of the robberd business?
 

BTW- 207 lawmakers is less than half of the 535 members of congress. Apparently most lawmakers don’t want RvW overturned.
Democrats love dead babies.

Republicans are religious fanatics. Ayatollah Trump.
You Leftists weep over a dead terrorist while you cheer babies being slaughtered.
 

BTW- 207 lawmakers is less than half of the 535 members of congress. Apparently most lawmakers don’t want RvW overturned.
Democrats love dead babies.

Republicans are religious fanatics. Ayatollah Trump.
You Leftists weep over a dead terrorist while you cheer babies being slaughtered.

Gonna be a great election year.
 
The Pro Life issue is exhibit A of just how STUPID religious people are, and why we should ignore them.

We live on a finite planet that is in STAGE 1 of human overpopulation = fresh water shortages all over the globe causing fires.

"Christian solution" = let all crack whores bring every pregnancy to term....

THANKS..... manufacture more votes for the Democrats....


Pro Israel Christians = the DUMBEST LIFE FORMS in the universe
 

BTW- 207 lawmakers is less than half of the 535 members of congress. Apparently most lawmakers don’t want RvW overturned.
Democrats love dead babies.

Republicans are religious fanatics. Ayatollah Trump.

Not all Republicans are religious fanatics, but it does seem all religious fanatics are Republican.
 
This

fetus.jpg


Is not this

baby.jpg


No woman that has had an abortion killed a child.
 

Forum List

Back
Top