Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights per draft opinion (Update: Dobbs opinion official) (3 Viewers)

[LovesMusic7360]

Not long ago Kari Lake proclaimed Arizona's abortion law was a great law and wanted it the law of the state.

Now that she has gotten her way, she is lobbying for it to be repealed.

As I have been saying since 2022, the overwhelming vast majority of women aren't going to vote for the man who proudly boasts that he got rid of Roe V. Wade. Nor are those women going to vote for a forced birther politician.

Turns out, republican belief in "pro life" was all just lies to get votes. Who is surprised? I sure am not.

How many forced birthers will do the same about face?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/ka ... r-BB1ltx3I.

Arizona Republican Senate candidate Kari Lake is actively lobbying state lawmakers to overturn a 160-year-old law she once supported that bans abortion in almost all cases, a source with knowledge of her efforts told CNN.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Who would we prosecute for a standard miscarriage? God, nature, time? We don't try and prosecute mother nature or a persons heart when an 80 years old dies of a heart attack.
Maybe I am missing the point, very possible and likely, but comparing an act that happens as a force majeure to a deliberate act of walking into a clinic to terminate another life is not the same in my book.

So, there are a number of factors that increase your probability of having a miscarriage. Being overweight or underweight. Smoking or being exposed to smokers. Stress. Being over 45 or under 15. Etc.

So, do we prosecute an older woman for being foolish enough to get pregnant after the age of 45 knowing that she would likely miscarry? Or the man for failing to wear a condom to prevent that? After all they know the risks, the willfully brought to life a human that had little chance of surviving?

How about a waitress who works in a restaurant that allows smoking? Does she get prosecuted? Or does the owner of the restaurant? Or the actual smokers? If she miscarried they probably killed that human life.

We've already had the case of a woman being arrested in Texas under their ridiculous new law who had a natural still birth. She was arrested and then released. Could you imagine going through one of the most painful experiences of your life and then getting arrested? I'm pretty sure if my wife got arrested after her miscarriage, I'd end up in jail myself for doing something stupid.

We already arrest woman for stillbirths throughout the country... I suspect you'll see that increase to cover miscarriages earlier in the pregnancy.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

Do we investigate an 80 year old dying of a heart attack or does the corner file it under 'natural' causes.
Natural causes happen all the time.

Yes, I am 100% behind overhauling the welfare state and encouraging the nuclear family structure. Fatherless homes and kids are the main problem with our society. We should encourage, how is the question and the answer is something I don't have yet, fathers to be active and present and reduce single motherhood by drastic amounts. That in theory will solve, violence, poverty and education.

80 year olds dying hardly has the same political context as his stillborn scenarios because the right will try to extend anti-abortion measures to insane levels.

Although well intended, the whole 'nuclear family solution' is as unrealistic as it is quaint. Time to solve problems on how society has evolved moving forward rather than pine for some Rockwellian ideal that is never coming back (and disguised a lot of underlying issues, anyway).

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Would you support moving the draft age to 25 as well as the age to vote?

No, I support getting rid of it entirely.

What about if you and your ex don't like each other and she or he files a restraining order for no reason.....happens every day. That will prevent you from getting an AR?

All of the gun proposals I have heard or emotional responses. In order to disarm a population, the government at the very least should prove that the need for a gun is not present by disarming all the criminals. Until that happens, you are asking people to give up protecting themselves. Especially the minority communities with all the police hunting them down in the streets.

If this happened, would you be ok with giving up all of your guns?

 

[cuddlemonkey]

No. There are plenty of examples of religious freedom being curbed in this country. Animal sacrifice, human sacrifice, illegal substances being used, child marriage, honor killings ect...

There are secular reasons for that, not religious.

Sorry if I don't really believe you really care about a groups religious freedom. To me it just seems you latched on to it because of their stance on abortion. I could be wrong though and maybe you are thinking of converting to Judaism. I hope so, it is a beautiful religion and full of wonderful and kind people.

You can believe that all you want, but you're wrong. You have this habit of dodging questions until the conversation is derailed, so I'll just lay it out for you instead of having a conversation.

Our laws have a secular basis because not all religions have the same tenets. The only way to treat all religions equally is to not allow any of them to seep into law without a solid secular reason.

I would pull up some Daily show clips or a clip or two from John Oliver but I didn't have time to find them.

Sure, I will give you that. I am sure my priest that is against abortion comes from a religious perspective. I am sure a lot of people are against it based on religion since religion is often the bedrock of someone's morals. I am only saying that the desire for the pro-life movement to only be a bunch of religious wack jobs is not correct and wishful thinking.

I never argued that this was the case.

 

[Farb]

So, there are a number of factors that increase your probability of having a miscarriage. Being overweight or underweight. Smoking or being exposed to smokers. Stress. Being over 45 or under 15. Etc.

So, do we prosecute an older woman for being foolish enough to get pregnant after the age of 45 knowing that she would likely miscarry? Or the man for failing to wear a condom to prevent that? After all they know the risks, the willfully brought to life a human that had little chance of surviving?

How about a waitress who works in a restaurant that allows smoking? Does she get prosecuted? Or does the owner of the restaurant? Or the actual smokers? If she miscarried they probably killed that human life.

We've already had the case of a woman being arrested in Texas under their ridiculous new law who had a natural still birth. She was arrested and then released. Could you imagine going through one of the most painful experiences of your life and then getting arrested? I'm pretty sure if my wife got arrested after her miscarriage, I'd end up in jail myself for doing something stupid.

We already arrest woman for stillbirths throughout the country... I suspect you'll see that increase to cover miscarriages earlier in the pregnancy.

I am with you, I have no idea why anyone would prosecute a miscarriage. If the person was irresponsible, then you might convince me. Otherwise you question about waitresses, old ladies, men who don't use protection, are all silly.
As far as women being arrested after a still birth, don't' agree with and stupid, but as I said, you are seeing and over correction to a slippery slope.
If you want an abortion, go to a state that allows them. I am sure there is a charity that will aid in the expense because abortion convenience is big money in this country.

 

[Farb]

80 year olds dying hardly has the same political context as his stillborn scenarios because the right will try to extend anti-abortion measures to insane levels.

Although well intended, the whole 'nuclear family solution' is as unrealistic as it is quaint. Time to solve problems on how society has evolved moving forward rather than pine for some Rockwellian ideal that is never coming back (and disguised a lot of underlying issues, anyway).

The 'insane' levels is a correct from the insane levels of pro-abortion. Abortion is a big industry and makes a ton of money.

You honestly think our society has evolved past the point of nuclear families? Then there is nothing to salvage.

If we got to this point because of government influence why can we not stop and readjust government influence to influence the correct way. No one can argue that the nuclear family is the best way to raise a family in any society. It is how humans are on a basic, primitive level. Going against is inviting disaster, as we now see with the obvious negative effects of fatherless homes.

 

[Farb]

There are secular reasons for that, not religious.



You can believe that all you want, but you're wrong. You have this habit of dodging questions until the conversation is derailed, so I'll just lay it out for you instead of having a conversation.

Our laws have a secular basis because not all religions have the same tenets. The only way to treat all religions equally is to not allow any of them to seep into law without a solid secular reason.



I never argued that this was the case.

Explain the secular reasons for those laws against child marriage or honor killing for example?

I simply ask questions to make you have to defend your stance. I cannot help if your points are squirrely. I have the attention span of a fly, so when you veer off topic on something, I follow along as if you threw a stick and I am a dog. Sorry for that.
For example, we are discussing abortion and you bring up the jewish religion, and here we are.

 

[CoolBrees]

Minors have been determined to not be of a mind to give informed consent. So they are not physiologically capable of making that decision for themselves. It is the same reason we don’t punish them the same as adults for crimes.

To your other question: Whereas I live in a state that offers death with dignity, there is a strong argument to be made against the state sanctioning anyone’s death, condoned or not.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Explain the secular reasons for those laws against child marriage or honor killing for example?

Are you asking this question to make me defend my stance or because you don't know? Neither is a good look.

I simply ask questions to make you have to defend your stance. I cannot help if your points are squirrely. I have the attention span of a fly, so when you veer off topic on something, I follow along as if you threw a stick and I am a dog. Sorry for that.

bullshirt. This is a common situation with you. Someone asks a question and you respond with everything but an actual answer. Then they respond to what you said while asking the question again, and you answer with a question of your own. It's almost as bad as-

For example, we are discussing abortion and you bring up the jewish religion, and here we are.

- this.

I didn't bring up Judaism. UTJ posted a link about the synagogue suing over the abortion law signed in Florida and you responded to it. You said, "So who wins in the tug of war between the Jewish faith and the Catholic faith?"

I didn't bring the damn thing up. You were the first to make the connection between laws and religious freedom. Your dishonesty is astounding.

 

[brandon]

Abortion is a big industry and makes a ton of money.

The hell?

If we got to this point because of government influence why can we not stop and readjust government influence to influence the correct way. No one can argue that the nuclear family is the best way to raise a family in any society. It is how humans are on a basic, primitive level. Going against is inviting disaster, as we now see with the obvious negative effects of fatherless homes.

That’s a whole lot of [citation needed].

Explain the secular reasons for those laws against child marriage

Minors can’t give consent.

or honor killing

Vigilantism, which is what an honor killing is, deprives a suspect of due process.

Your arguments are completely shallow, without even the slightest understanding of them beyond a grade-school level.

 

[CoolBrees]

Oh crap, THAT’S an honor killing?!? Revenge?!?

I thought it was dying with dignity; assisted suicide.

Here I thought there was actual debate to be had.

Silly me.

 

[MT15]

When I think of an honor killing, I think of when the men of a family kill a daughter or wife or sister who has brought “dishonor” on the family.

 

[Saintamaniac]

When I think of an honor killing, I think of when the men of a family kill a daughter or wife or sister who has brought “dishonor” on the family.

Same here...and it's always the female that is being killed for bringing dishonor to the family.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

The 'insane' levels is a correct from the insane levels of pro-abortion. Abortion is a big industry and makes a ton of money.

You honestly think our society has evolved past the point of nuclear families? Then there is nothing to salvage.

If we got to this point because of government influence why can we not stop and readjust government influence to influence the correct way. No one can argue that the nuclear family is the best way to raise a family in any society. It is how humans are on a basic, primitive level. Going against is inviting disaster, as we now see with the obvious negative effects of fatherless homes.

I bet the abortion industry doesn't make as much as the religion industry. And, yes, I think we have evolved past the concept of the nuclear family. I'm not sure the 'primitive state' argument is correct because I doubt early man was monogamous... although I'm assuming you ascribe to the theory of evolution and not creationism.

Blaming fatherless homes is a red herring. You can learn values from anyone -- even in single parent families.

 

[Bear513]

I bet the abortion industry doesn't make as much as the religion industry. And, yes, I think we have evolved past the concept of the nuclear family. I'm not sure the 'primitive state' argument is correct because I doubt early man was monogamous... although I'm assuming you ascribe to the theory of evolution and not creationism.

Blaming fatherless homes is a red herring. You can learn values from anyone -- even in single parent families.

No not really all the idiot kids I had to teach in manufacturing over the years because they grew up with out a dad. and didn't know how to use basic tools was numerous

Thr left glorified single Parenthood the past 40 years to the point the US is number one in the world of Abortions, single parents and gun deaths

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

No not really all the idiot kids I had to teach in manufacturing over the years because they grew up with out a dad. and didn't know how to use basic tools was numerous

Thr left glorified single Parenthood the past 40 years to the point the US is number one in the world of Abortions, single parents and gun deaths

I think you took a wrong turn at TigerDroppings.

 

[Saintamaniac]

I think you took a wrong turn at TigerDroppings.

No doubt. They live on making up shirt with no facts to back them up and then getting angry at it.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

No doubt. They live on making up shirt with no facts to back them up and then getting angry at it.

You can pretty much tell when a new poster here is going to flame out when their first several posts are just angry gripes without any substance. Although, I admit, the 'only dads can teach kids about tools and that's what's wrong with this country' argument is fairly nuanced.