Unintended Consequences of Banning Abortion

First of all, I am not a communist.
If you don't like being called a Communist, stop saying Communist shit.
The current definition of communism precluded any private capitalism, and I am more of a socialist, because I think there needs to be a mix of private and public means of production.
I'm sure there are plenty of places more to your liking to which you could move. Shall I start a GoFundMe to cover your moving expenses?
But obviously all people are inherently communist in some ways because all primitive and natural social groups are always communist, like families, tribes, etc.
Uh huh. It's when it's implemented on a large scale that it always results in lakes of blood and mass graves.

Always.
 
If you abort one fetus that has not yet woken up and knows it is alive, and instead wait till later when one can afford to better support an actual child, then nothing is lost or harmed.
There it is again, the standard Commie insistence that human life has no meaning.

That is not a decision you can make for other people.
 
Humans who are conscious are self aware, and it is harmful and painful to them to die.
But that is not true of a fetus that is not yet conscious or self aware.
It does not have any care about living or dying.
Spoken like someone who's never endured a miscarriage.

You want the population reduced. You know what you have to do.
 
Two people are marooned on a deserted island, out of the 49 genders, both. A pregnancy occurs. Do tell us how abortion is going to work because they didn't want a kid and didn't follow basic sex education? Apart from their political views, there's no state and no hospital.

Politics on a deserted island has no existence.
Abortion is a complex issue; citizens deciding when life begins or whether to have a child or not is subjective and personal – such issues and decisions are not within the purview of the state.

Individuals know best how to conduct their private lives, not government.

Clearly the Christo-fascist authoritarian right rejects this fact, instead seeking to compel conformity and punish dissent using the authority of the state.
 
Here's a link on Spina Bifida, scroll down to Diagnosing Spina Bifida -


I hope that helps, I'm not a doctor, it's a profession that I didn't get into.
But it means that any life can be healthy one minute, and deadly ill weeks later.

So don't count your chickens.
 
Those who have gone through the difficulties of birth and juvenile development, have earned the right to life.
A fetus has not.
A Commie, talking about people earning things? Y'all want free shit.

Meanwhile, don't think I didn't notice that you only confer personhood only on those who have made it past the juvenile stage. Looks like you're advocating abortion to fetuses up to the age of 18.

Further meanwhile, the vast majority of Communists are emotional children, regardless of their physical age.

Do you need me to draw you a picture?
 
Hitler wanted to eradicate Zionism from Europe because he considered it a threat to Germany.
Abortion is not any sort of eradication at all, but simply a delaying of growing a family until people are more financially stable.
Early families mean persistent poverty, crime, lack of education, etc.
Later families mean more prosperity.
You sure are a bloody-minded bastard, aren't you? Definitely a death cultist.
 
Any law? What about laws that don't recognize out of state marriage licenses, or drivers licenses. They certainly don't recognize out of state law or medical licenses. What stops them from expanding the list to virtually all out of state licenses?
What about laws that don't recognize other states' concealed-carry permits? I'm guessing you have no problem with those.
 
Abortion is a complex issue; citizens deciding when life begins or whether to have a child or not is subjective and personal – such issues and decisions are not within the purview of the state.

Individuals know best how to conduct their private lives, not government.

Clearly the Christo-fascist authoritarian right rejects this fact, instead seeking to compel conformity and punish dissent using the authority of the state.
Acually it's like a tale of two cities. Before they're born the state wants full authority over them, to ensure they survive to term.

But once they're born, the state wants nothing to do with them. They don't provide for food, shelter, or healthcare.
 
Actually the senior justice (Clarence Thomas) has said they should be overturned as well.
Actually, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested the court could re-examine decisions on access to contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage.

However Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh cited landmark gay rights legislation in the states that suggested that overturning gay rights would be much more difficult than overturning Roe.
Justice Clarence Thomas suggests Supreme Court could rethink decisions on contraceptives, same-sex marriage

In the pass the supreme court has been slow to overturn major decisions but of course it does happen. The court has created a criteria to be considered in overturning a decision. The result is the high court will over turn only about one previous decision a year and most of those decisions have minor impact.

Cases are rarely overturned, because the justices are strongly in favor of the status quo. Standing by precedent—stare decisis—is a well-established doctrine of the US legal system. It’s meant to create a stable, consistent rule of law. In 1932, Supreme Court justice Louis Brandeis wrote, “Stare decisis is usually the wise policy, because in most matters it is more important that the applicable rule of law be settled than that it be settled right.”

For example suppose this conservative lead high court reverses the gay marriage ruling. It has taken the states years to adjust state laws and procedures to include gay marriage. Corporations, hospitals, heath insurance and life insurance companies have all change the rules they operate under. Now suppose a liberal dominated court reversed the ruling again. This happens in the high courts of some countries resulting lower courts, states, and provinces ignoring the high court because they know the ruling will be change when political power changes. In other words, the high court loses power and relevance in society.
 
Last edited:
Individuals know best how to conduct their private lives, not government...
Unless it's getting vaccinated, wearing a mask, buying health insurance, buying a gas-guzzling SUV, buying incandescent light bulbs, buying a high-flow toilet...
Clearly the Christo-fascist authoritarian right rejects this fact, instead seeking to compel conformity and punish dissent using the authority of the state.
Oh, I get it. You're angry because the Left has a lock on that, and you object to the right muscling in on your territory.
 

Forum List

Back
Top