Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Joe Biden, Me Too..

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    It's like when pro-abortionists whine about how a group of men (law makers) shouldn't be telling women whether they can or can't kill their unborn babies and yet are more than happy when a group of men (SCOTUS) told women whether they can or can't kill their unborn babies.
    Which that Supreme Court case was based on lies and outdated science. Embryology and medical science has come a long way since than where survivability is being pushed back to limits unimaginable just 20 years ago. My youngest was born at a mere 30 weeks and spent 2 months in the hospital till he was able to leave and would have likely never made it just a few decades ago.
    Last edited by lilpixieofterror; 06-21-2019, 07:45 AM.
    "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
    GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
      No, he didn’t. He recognized that the vast majority of abortions occur during the first trimester, before the fetus is viable, and the issue is one of the woman’s choice. It’s only after fetal viability that the “health and safety of the women” needs to be taken into account.
      He admitted that 90% of the abortions have nothing to do with the health of the mother. Learn to read.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        It's like when pro-abortionists whine about how a group of men (law makers) shouldn't be telling women whether they can or can't kill their unborn babies and yet are more than happy when a group of men (SCOTUS) told women whether they can or can't kill their unborn babies.
        As John Hart Ely pointed out in his critique of Roe v. Wade (which I know I keep bringing up, but only because it's so endlessly quotable on the issue):
        In his famous Carolene Products footnote, Justice Stone suggested that the interests to which the Court can responsibly give extraordinary constitutional protection include not only those expressed in the Constitution but also those that are unlikely to receive adequate consideration in the political process, specifically the interests of "discrete and insular minorities" unable to form effective political alliances. There can be little doubt that such considerations have influenced the direction, if only occasionally the rhetoric, of the recent Courts. My repeated efforts to convince my students that sex should be treated as a "suspect classification" have convinced me it is no easy matter to state such considerations in a "principled" way. But passing that problem, Roe is not an appropriate case for their invocation.

        Compared with men, very few women sit in our legislatures, a fact I believe should bear some relevance-even without an Equal Rights Amendment-to the appropriate standard of review for legislation that favors men over women. But no fetuses sit in our legislatures. Of course they have their champions, but so have women. The two interests have clashed repeatedly in the political arena, and had continued to do so up to the date of the opinion, generating quite a wide variety of accommodations. By the Court's lights virtually all of the legislative accommodations had unduly favored fetuses; by its definition of victory, women had lost. Yet in every legislative balance one of the competing interests loses to some extent; indeed usually, as here, they both do. On some occasions the Constitution throws its weight on the side of one of them, indicating the balance must be restruck. And on others-and this is Justice Stone's suggestion-it is at least arguable that, constitutional directive or not, the Court should throw its weight on the side of a minority demanding in court more than it was able to achieve politically. But even assuming this suggestion can be given principled content, it was clearly intended and should be reserved for those interests which, as compared with the interests to which they have been subordinated, constitute minorities unusually incapable of protecting themselves. Compared with men, women may constitute such a "minority"; compared with the unborn, they do not. I'm not sure I'd know a discrete and insular minority if I saw one, but confronted with a multiple choice question requiring me to designate (a) women or (b) fetuses as one, I'd expect no credit for the former answer.

        Emphasis added.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          He admitted that 90% of the abortions have nothing to do with the health of the mother. Learn to read.
          Yes, that’s correct. The health of the woman, psychological or physical, is only an issue under R v W during the second or third trimester. During the first trimester the state may not regulate abortion for any reason, it is the woman’s choice. And this is when 90% of abortions occur.
          “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
            Yes, that’s correct. The health of the woman, psychological or physical, is only an issue under R v W during the second or third trimester. During the first trimester the state may not regulate abortion for any reason, it is the woman’s choice. And this is when 90% of abortions occur.
            You're an idiot. Even in the first trimester there are reasons for having an abortion which can include medical health reasons, like ectopic pregnancies. These are all counted in the stats which show that less than 10% of abortions are because of the health of the fetus or mother.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              You're an idiot. Even in the first trimester there are reasons for having an abortion which can include medical health reasons, like ectopic pregnancies. These are all counted in the stats which show that less than 10% of abortions are because of the health of the fetus or mother.
              Of course there can be medical reasons to abort in the first trimester, no one said otherwise. The point was that there needn't be a medical reason in the first trimester. Learn to comprehend.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                Of course there can be medical reasons to abort in the first trimester, no one said otherwise. The point was that there needn't be a medical reason in the first trimester. Learn to comprehend.
                Which is besides the point. The point was that LPOT said 90% of abortions are NOT because of the health of the mother. And you admitted that. over and over now. dumbass.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                  Which is besides the point. The point was that LPOT said 90% of abortions are NOT because of the health of the mother. And you admitted that. over and over now. dumbass.
                  Reading comprehension still a problem I see. Keep working at it, Sparko.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                    Reading comprehension still a problem I see.
                    Apparently it is for you. But we always knew that.

                    Let me say it slower for you...

                    Nobody cares whether it is "legal for any reason in the first trimester" - that has nothing to do with the reasons women have abortions.

                    The statistics showing why women have abortions at any time, show that they only do it for the health of the mother less than 10% of the time.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                      Apparently it is for you.
                      I'm betting he won't comprehend that.
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                        Of course there can be medical reasons to abort in the first trimester, no one said otherwise. The point was that there needn't be a medical reason in the first trimester. Learn to comprehend.
                        Why? Because your death cult says so?
                        "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                        GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                          Learn to comprehend.
                          iron e.jpeg
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                            You're an idiot. Even in the first trimester there are reasons for having an abortion which can include medical health reasons, like ectopic pregnancies. These are all counted in the stats which show that less than 10% of abortions are because of the health of the fetus or mother.
                            Again: The first trimester is not the issue.

                            The argument under R v W is that the health of the woman, is an issue ONLY during the second or third trimester. The first trimester, when the vast majority of abortions occur, may not be regulated for any reason. It is the woman’s choice whether or not to have an abortion during the first trimester, her health is not an issue.
                            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                              Again: The first trimester is not the issue.

                              The argument under R v W is that the health of the woman, is an issue ONLY during the second or third trimester. The first trimester, when the vast majority of abortions occur, may not be regulated for any reason. It is the woman’s choice whether or not to have an abortion during the first trimester, her health is not an issue.
                              You are talking about legality, we are talking about motivation. Two different things. You are actually supporting LPOT's argument by saying that there is no regulation in the first trimester, which is why there are a lot more abortions happening on whims. The result is that less than 10% of all abortions happen because of the health of the mother.

                              I can't believe you and JimL are this idiotic.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Tassmoron View Post
                                The first trimester, when the vast majority of abortions occur, may not be regulated for any reason. It is the woman’s choice whether or not to have an abortion during the first trimester, her health is not an issue.
                                Thank you for finally conceding that the "vast majority of abortions" are medically unnecessary.
                                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                142 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                391 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                113 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                197 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                365 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X