No, it isn't science, it's semantics. YOU chose that definition of when life begins. Science did not. It is silent on that issue. One could just as easily argue that a human being does not exist until it's born. That is the point when it no longer needs iits mother to breath, eat, live. Or we can say that life beings when a fetus is viable. So you picked the definition that best suited your argument and declared it was science. It's bullshit. I am of the opinion that a fetus is a full human being when it is born. But I also believe that the fetus should have some rights that compete against the mothers rights as it develops. I'd be happy to have the discussion about what should be allowed when, but that doesn't interest you, because you approach this issue with a rusty scimitar not a laser. Your logic is sloppy and flawed. You see this as some game that you 'won'. It's typical right wing thought.
Congratulations, you took freedom away…
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
No, it isn't science, it's semantics. YOU chose that definition of when life begins. Science did not. It is silent on that issue. One could just as easily argue that a human being does not exist until it's born. That is the point when it no longer needs iits mother to breath, eat, live. Or we can say that life beings when a fetus is viable. So you picked the definition that best suited your argument and declared it was science. It's bullshit. I am of the opinion that a fetus is a full human being when it is born. But I also believe that the fetus should have some rights that compete against the mothers rights as it develops. I'd be happy to have the discussion about what should be allowed when, but that doesn't interest you, because you approach this issue with a rusty scimitar not a laser. Your logic is sloppy and flawed. You see this as some game that you 'won'. It's typical right wing thought.
It was for more than 50 years….. still is if they decide so.
Whythink:
""Now, however, anti-abortion forces appear to be on the cusp of being granted free rein by the Supreme Court to ban abortion to any degree they want."
This is not true.
The Supreme Court decision clearly stated that there is no Constitutional right to abortion.
It is left to the state legislatures to determine. The future of abortion is now in the hands of the people who elect these legislators.
Hyperbole is great...in moderation.
""Now, however, anti-abortion forces appear to be on the cusp of being granted free rein by the Supreme Court to ban abortion to any degree they want."
This is not true.
The Supreme Court decision clearly stated that there is no Constitutional right to abortion.
It is left to the state legislatures to determine. The future of abortion is now in the hands of the people who elect these legislators.
Hyperbole is great...in moderation.
Yes, Jarod, we know all about your propensity for lying.
Rape and incest account for hardly any abortions. So why are ...
https://www.usatoday.com › news › nation › 2019/05/24
May 24, 2019 — Just 1% of women obtain an abortion because they became pregnant through rape, and less than 0.5% do so because of incest.
it would make more sense to take the hint and have Congress address it.
its their job after all.
PHIL BOAS
Roe is history. The left is furious. They ought to be contrite.
Instead of fuming, maybe Democrats should be contrite about the unearned advantage they got from Roe v. Wade"
"Realization of an extreme ideology'
On Friday, President Joe Biden ignored this consensus and railed against today's justices who agree with it.
“Make no mistake,” said Biden. “This decision is the culmination of a deliberate effort over decades to upset the balance of our law. It’s a realization of an extreme ideology and a tragic error by the Supreme Court.”
To the contrary, I’ve presented above just a fraction of the counter-evidence that shows Biden is wrong. Just to restate, as early as the 1970s when Michael Kinsley was chasing paper at Harvard Law, it was common knowledge in Cambridge that Roe was "a muddle of bad reasoning" and judicial overreach.
American liberals have lived rent free for 50 years on the Blackmun decision. They didn't have to frame arguments. They didn't have to persuade 50 legislatures. The Blackmun court handed them the ball, the game and the whistle when it was only just beginning.
Today's court is restarting the game where it always belonged -- in the legislatures. But you can't restart this game. Roe has been law for five decades, long enough for Americans to grow accustomed to legalized abortion. Roe was an enormous head start for the left."
https://www.azcentral.com/story/opi...t-law-roe-v-wade-biden-extremists/7731452001/
Roe is history. The left is furious. They ought to be contrite.
Instead of fuming, maybe Democrats should be contrite about the unearned advantage they got from Roe v. Wade"
"Realization of an extreme ideology'
On Friday, President Joe Biden ignored this consensus and railed against today's justices who agree with it.
“Make no mistake,” said Biden. “This decision is the culmination of a deliberate effort over decades to upset the balance of our law. It’s a realization of an extreme ideology and a tragic error by the Supreme Court.”
To the contrary, I’ve presented above just a fraction of the counter-evidence that shows Biden is wrong. Just to restate, as early as the 1970s when Michael Kinsley was chasing paper at Harvard Law, it was common knowledge in Cambridge that Roe was "a muddle of bad reasoning" and judicial overreach.
American liberals have lived rent free for 50 years on the Blackmun decision. They didn't have to frame arguments. They didn't have to persuade 50 legislatures. The Blackmun court handed them the ball, the game and the whistle when it was only just beginning.
Today's court is restarting the game where it always belonged -- in the legislatures. But you can't restart this game. Roe has been law for five decades, long enough for Americans to grow accustomed to legalized abortion. Roe was an enormous head start for the left."
https://www.azcentral.com/story/opi...t-law-roe-v-wade-biden-extremists/7731452001/
Sawyerloggingon
Verified User
Question is when does a cluster of cells become a baby. Most people think after the first trimester is a reasonable cutoff point.
Melchizedek = Michael
Verified User
Republicans shot themselves in the foot ,they now have lost the wedge issue that kept the sheep women voting for them.
That's Trump view too!
Melchizedek = Michael
Verified User
Moot point abortion is illegal!
Gondwanaland
Verified User
Nope, freedom was given to many who would otherwise have been killed in the womb. besides, there's easily half the states that will continue to make it legal to murder your baby in the womb.
ExpressLane
Verified User
Sent from my laptop.ExpressLane
Verified User
Are they halfwits?Sorry,........Im keeping my nuts. I do have a friend that lost one of his nuts in a snomobile accident though years ago. I wonder if thats why his kids all turned out be be runts?
Sawyerloggingon
Verified User
"The majority contended that Friday’s ruling would not undermine other decisions by the court involving fundamental rights that the Constitution does not expressly mention, such as the right to contraception (Griswold v. Connecticut) and the rights to same-sex intimacy (Lawrence v. Texas) and marriage (Obergefell v. Hodges). Unlike those rights, Alito wrote, abortion terminates what Roe and Casey refer to as “potential life” and what the Mississippi law refers to as an “unborn human being.” “Nothing in this opinion,” Alito added later, “should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”
https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/06/supreme-court-overturns-constitutional-right-to-abortion/
Yes, and they said, under oath, that they considered Roe v. Wade to be precedent. So they are liars.
Sawyerloggingon
Verified User
SCOTUS decision did not make abortion illegal. You have been misinformed.
Melchizedek = Michael
Verified User
So I can get an abortion in Texas?