U.S. Supreme Court set to overturn Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision

[Stone_Wings]

Wants government control, calls everyone that wants freedom a slave. You have nothing else. Just "Slave". That's your only comeback, your only reply, your only answer to questions... "Slave". LMAO! Brazil my ass. I know I've used this one before, but you're so far fucking right leaning that you may as well cut off your left leg. You're far too invested in this to be who you say you are and come from where you say you do. You created an account on a video game forum to ONLY post in this topc. You can't answer incredibly simple questions. You're nothing but a fake. Absolutely nothing left to say to you.

 

[Rena_to84]

bit of "False dilemma" and "strawman" mixed up into one right there. Obviously I object the premise, as baking in your desired answer into the question isn't productive.



Scientifically? the brain doesn't start developing until about the 3rd trimester. This is around the time almost everyone agrees abortion is highly suspect. Before that, nothing of a person has been created, as the whole of the person is in the brain. That's the scientific argument. Religious arguments obviously don't care too much about science. But we shouldn't be making laws based on religious thinking.

In Mahometan countries, it's forbidden to murder the baby as soon you detect heart beats. That's A LOT of people around the world.
Problem is you're drunk with modernist pseudo-"philosophy" (that trash is mostly gnostic alchemical writing made for power-grabbing, it's the opposite of philo sophia, of seeking the truth).

Now, for some fun: I'd like to see a single leftist here speak ill of the Mahometans. 3, 2, 1, Go!

Abortion is significantly safer than pregnancy and childbirth.

Murdering the baby is NEVER safer than having the baby in a healthy pregnancy, stop talking about what you don't know.

Excuse me, yeah. A lifetime of living in a country where women don't die unnecessarily clouded my perspective.

How many female babies were murdered during this time?
You have absolutely no idea about what you're talking. You're regurgitating what you read in the NYT. It's ridiculous.

Before I sleep, let me get this out:

Saying the murder of a baby equals saving a life is not only illogical, it's Satanism. Everyone should be aware of this.

 

[Lacius]

Murdering the baby is NEVER safer than having the baby in a healthy pregnancy, stop talking about what you don't know.

Pregnancy and childbirth carry much higher rates of mortality for the woman than legal abortions. I know you have an "abortion is a no good very bad thing" mentality, but that doesn't mean you get to make up your own facts.

Abortion isn't the murder of a baby. An embryo/fetus is not a baby, for one. In addition, an abortion is not the killing of a fetus; it's the termination of a pregnancy. A consequence of the ended pregnancy just happens to be the death of the fetus. If you want to find a way to keep a fetus alive after it's removed from the body of a woman who has a right to bodily autonomy, be my guest.

How many female babies were murdered during this time?

Zero. They weren't babies, and it wasn't murder.

If I needed a kidney transplant to survive, and you were a compatible match, you should have a right to not have to donate a kidney to me. If I die as a consequence, it doesn't mean you murdered me; it just means I couldn't survive without a piece of your body.

With respect, you post like someone who hasn't thought this through.

 

[tabzer]

I wonder how conservatives would feel if whether or not one could legally own a gun were up to the states.

Conservative logic, guns can't be limited because of mah rights, and criminals ignore laws. Also Conservative logic, we can limit human bodies, sexuality, gender, and everything else but it's not big government if it's all being done by the state.

Conservative logic: "Abortion isn't a constitutionally protected right because the word 'abortion' doesn't appear in the Constitution, but I have a constitutional right to own weaponry that isn't explicitly mentioned in the Constitution and didn't even exist when the Second Amendment was written."

This is a dumb and disingenuous circle-jerk. The second amendment is about weaponry, and despite what it does say, there are still regulations. The fourteenth amendment is not about abortion. Understanding that doesn't make people dumb conservatives. If you ask me, your constitution and its representatives are unreliable.

 

[Deleted member 586536]

How many female babies were murdered during this time?
You have absolutely no idea about what you're talking. You're regurgitating what you read in the NYT. It's ridiculous.

who gives birth? Female or Male.
Females give birth.
Do females only produce female offspring?
No.
Don't "what if it was a female"
it's clear by that statement alone you treat women like objects, and that's fucking disgusting. You could of thought for two seconds about how either a male or female could be given birth to. And yet you specifically, fucking ignored that adult females give birth to either one, just make a gross "whataboutism"
We're not putting guns up to children heads. We're not slapping them until dead, because we're not fucking killing babies, it's fetuses. Give it enough time and yes the blueprint will develop into a baby. But only do it early in the process.
Get off your damn "wHaT AbOuT tHe ChIlDrEn"
If you truly fucking thought about the fucking child, you would be far aware that caring for a life is pretty fucking important, but that would mean:
Safe location that is stable for the entire time the child grows up
plenty supply to food and water
relationships are stable between mother and father

I grew up in a mess of a situation. My mother was not ready to have me,she wanted an abortion, I was already developed too far, so she couldn't and it shows she wasn't ready, she did the best she could, but her financial and relationships were a complete mess to no fault of her own. I have fucking PTSD because of the unsafe environment I grew up in.
I would not wish a child to go through the same thing I did, I would not force a women to have a child if she's certain she isn't ready. Because the amount of damage and suffering you will do to that kid as a result, is incalculable. And the amount of guilt that mother will feel, will remain forever present.
So get off your fucking high horse.

 

[Lacius]

The second amendment is about weaponry,

Is it? I don't recall that word being in the Constitution.

and despite what it does say, there are still regulations.

Conservatives often argue there shouldn't be regulations. That's kind of the point of the whole debate over background checks and other regulations.

The fourteenth amendment is not about abortion.

The amendment is broad. I suggest you read it.

Edit: And per your logic, the Second Amendment isn't about technology that didn't exist at the time or isn't explicitly mentioned.

This is a dumb and disingenuous circle-jerk.

Sorry. @The Catboy and I are banging out as many circle jerks as possible before the fall of Roe, and the entire legal precedent for the right to privacy used in cases like Lawrence v. Texas, makes it so states can make our circle jerks illegal.

 

[Xzi]

The second amendment is about weaponry, and despite what it does say, there are still regulations.

The second amendment warns us about the very tyrants now attempting to strip away our rights, one by one. As usual, conservatives are intentionally blind to the obvious connection.

The fourteenth amendment is not about abortion.

Constitutional originalism is no different than extremism. If we're really going down that path, conservatives on the supreme court will be bringing back the three-fifths compromise next. According to nearly every founding father, the constitution was always intended to be a living document, not set in stone.

 

[tabzer]

Is it? I don't recall that word being in the Constitution.


Conservatives often argue there shouldn't be regulations. That's kind of the point of the whole debate over background checks and other regulations.


The amendment is broad. I suggest you read it.


Sorry. @The Catboy and I are banging out as many circle jerks as possible before the fall of Roe, and the entire legal precedent for the right to privacy used in cases like Lawrence v. Texas, makes it so states can make our circle jerks illegal.

If you have nothing to add, you didn't have to say anything. The people who wrote the constitution were more interested in guns than abortions. Just because the document itself is conservative doesn't make the person who knows how to read it a moron or a conservative. If the problem is with the constitution itself, then that should probably be addressed.

 

[The Catboy]

Saying the murder of a baby equals saving a life is not only illogical, it's Satanism. Everyone should be aware of this.

Yeah, that proves you definitely aren’t a doctor and your follow up claim is clearly a lie too

 

[Xzi]

If you have nothing to add, you didn't have to say anything. The people who wrote the constitution were more interested in guns than abortions. Just because the document itself is conservative doesn't make the person who knows how to read it a moron or a conservative. If the problem is with the constitution itself, then that should probably be addressed.

No shit it's a "conservative" document, it was written in the late 1700s. The founding fathers never intended us to be living with that exact same set of rights and laws in 2022, they expected better of us and wanted better for us. And maybe if General Sherman had pushed his campaign a bit further, we wouldn't have so many fucking confederates still around to impede any sort of social, societal, and governmental progress.

 

[tabzer]

No shit it's a "conservative" document, it was written in the late 1700s. The founding fathers never intended us to be living with that exact same set of rights and laws in 2022, they expected better of us and wanted better for us. And maybe if General Sherman had pushed his campaign a bit further, we wouldn't have so many fucking confederates still around to impede any sort of social, societal, and governmental progress.

I didn't need all of that. A simple "like" would have sufficed.

 

[Xzi]

I didn't need all of that. A simple "like" would have sufficed.

I don't disagree with the statement itself, but I do disagree with the premise of it, so no like for you. A living document such as the constitution should've made conservatism obsolete by now. Libertarianism not so much, as they wouldn't be opposed to further expanding human and workers' rights.

 

[tabzer]

I don't disagree with the statement itself, but I do disagree with the premise of it, so no like for you. A living document such as the constitution should've made conservatism obsolete by now. Libertarianism not so much, as they wouldn't be opposed to further expanding human and workers' rights.

To be clearer, I am not disagreeing with your lack of satisfaction with the constitution or with how it is living up to its status as "a living document".

The premise is simple. The 14th amendment is about representation, the 2nd amendment is about guns, and SCOTUS lacks the ability to interpret the intention of the founding fathers on subjects that they weren't ever concerned. Bowing out probably would have been more progressive and less damaging , long term, if it was done in the first place. Now you all have to work even harder to rewire your system after decades of building on an unstable foundation. Kind of ironic as the 14th amendment is indirectly making you work even harder.

 

[Lumstar]

Conservatives are making a mountain out of a molehill. Terminating a fetus with murderous intent is (theoretically) not impossible, but have you EVER heard of a case where that actually was the goal?

Not to mention ending pregnancy early doesn't even necessarily result in death. If a birth defect is discovered very late, you might have to deliver prematurely to perform a live-saving (imagine that!) procedure.

 

[YamiZee]

While you sleep, I'm gonna kill you to exercise my freedom of killing any "non-sentient and non-intelligent life". It's gonna be fun, isn't it?

Sleeping people are still sentient and intelligent, at least while they're dreaming. Also my family and friends would be quite sad for losing me from their lives. That's not something an unborn fetus can claim. If you're gonna kill me in my sleep, at least do it without informing me of it. Afterall, I do have the mental capacity for the fear of death, unlike the dwellers of the womb.

 

[RandomUser]

We're talking about women's bodily autonomy here, it's not the government's place to interfere with that. Neither on the state nor federal level. Women who don't have access to these services will just travel to states that do. This will also make legal abortion states targets for far-right terrorism.

To be fair, male born babies do not have the rights to their bodily autonomy. Also again at the age of 18 perhaps for up to 7 years, if a draft were to be active.

I'm actually surprised that the supreme court is considering on overturning this law. This could actually hurt women, especially if it is medically necessary.

Conservatives are making a mountain out of a molehill. Terminating a fetus with murderous intent is (theoretically) not impossible, but have you EVER heard of a case where that actually was the goal?

Not to mention ending pregnancy early doesn't even necessarily result in death. If a birth defect is discovered very late, you might have to deliver prematurely to perform a live-saving (imagine that!) procedure.

Something like a cesarean surgery?

 

[YamiZee]

Cause the freedom to kill babies and snuff out someone else's life is what true freedom is all about.

Snuff out "someone else's" life. How can you call a life form that has neither the sentience nor the intelligence of a human, a "someone", a "person"? A life form that is objectively less wrong to kill than a rat, or a cow, or even a shrimp, all of which have functioning brains that respond to stimuli? Cows and rats especially containing their own social circles. A fetus is nothing more than an unintelligent parasite that feeds off it's host. We kill pests and parasites, why wouldn't we kill a human fetus that serves the same function.

 

[Lumstar]

Snuff out "someone else's" life. How can you call a life form that has neither the sentience nor the intelligence of a human, a "someone", a "person"? A life form that is objectively less wrong to kill than a rat, or a cow, or even a shrimp, all of which have functioning brains that respond to stimuli? Cows and rats especially containing their own social circles. A fetus is nothing more than an unintelligent parasite that feeds off it's host. We kill pests and parasites, why wouldn't we kill a human fetus that serves the same function.

While I do believe fetuses shouldn't be abused, people are approaching it from a horribly wrong perspective.
Forcing a mother to, for example, carry a deceased or terminally ill fetus is not protecting life.

 

[RichardTheKing]

Personally, I despise how much power women have over reproduction; in a lot of areas a woman can get an abortion without her husband's or partner's knowledge, let alone consent - what if he wanted a child? Shouldn't it be a decision made by the TWO of them, not just one forcing the decision on the other?

Additionally, a woman can force child support on the baby's father, even if he didn't know he had impregnated her - one-night stands, stolen sperm, female-on-male rape, pregnancy entrapment (she tampers with his condom without him knowing, lying about being on the pill, etc.). Yeah, that's real fair, especially since in a lot of areas the man has a limited time to prove why he shouldn't pay, else the payment will be forced upon him - when it SHOULD be the woman having a limited time to prove why he should pay, with him able to defend himself, else no payment will be forced on him.

As for whether abortion should be legal or not...yeah, it should be, but it shouldn't be solely up to the woman.

 

[deinonychus71]

And I bed people enjoy talking to you so much they cross the street to avoid you. It is life, Roe v. Wade is gone, get over it. And masks don't do shit, the end.

I see you ran out of arguments. Not that you had any to begin with.