"Justice Thomas: SCOTUS should reconsider contraception"

Yours, is an argument of false equivalence. Rape and assault, are crimes. So it would be idiotic, for anyone to believe that their having a right to privacy, would entitle them to break the law, in that privacy. I mean, that is really one ridiculous argument, you are making. I left shooting heroin out of the equation because, though it is technically illegal, it did not become so, through legislative, or Constitutional, means, but through Nixon's arbitrarily "scheduling," any drugs that he did not wish Americans to have access to. I am not saying that heroin use should be legal, only that it is a less clear-cut, more disputable, and so unnecessarily complicating issue, to inject into this argument.

What I take to have been the goal of your linguistic legerdemain, was to skirt the main issue of the debate, and take for granted, that abortion is "murder." Your point only obfuscates the primary question, which is when a fetus (or some would include an embryo, and even a zygote) is considered a fully- fledged human being, entitled to protections, under the law.

I would submit that it is only a relatively small, radical faction of very vocal warriors, on both sides, who advocate for the extreme positions, either that we should consider a woman's egg as a person, from the moment of conception, or that it should be of no legal concern of anyone's, until the moment of its egress from the woman's body. For most, reasonable, people, gestation is a process, throughout which, the fetus comes into its personhood. It is therefore not inconsistent, to apply law to the various stages of fetal development, in a piecemeal fashion. That could certainly include-- from a pragmatic perspective, to which I know, some are opposed-- treating actions differently, in different circumstances, for which there is ample precedent of our laws doing. In this case, I am suggesting that being the actual mother of the growing fetus, is a different circumstance, than for anyone who is not.

 

You're the expert.

 

name them

 

Me.

 

you're not a Christian?

or you do not believe it's Christian to be against abortion and homosexuality?

not sure what you are saying

 

Nope. I am firmly against organized religion of any shape, form, type etc etc. They all want power, money, and to control other human beings.

And you will never see me advance a religious argument in favor of pro-life.

 

ok, I thought you were saying you were one of the pro-lifers on the religious right that was against abortions, but not for religious reasons.... I misunderstood you.. sorry

 

LOL... not to change topics, but can you imagine how impossible that great feat would have been with the "capabilities" and attitudes of today's GOP?? These are the sort of people that were afraid of the big White God in the sky that only came out at night..

 

I am pro-life. I'm not a part of any religion. My reason for being pro-life is purely scientific and historically based.

 

how so scientific? you mean after they first feel pain or somethign?

http://www.slate.com/id/2120872/

"a member of President Bush's Council on Bioethics, describes in his book The Ethical Brain, current neurology suggests that a fetus doesn't possess enough neural structure to harbor consciousness until about 26 weeks, when it first seems to react to pain. Before that, the fetal neural structure is about as sophisticated as that of a sea slug and its EEG as flat and unorganized as that of someone brain-dead."

 

Well, nobody wants to get too deep into the mind of old Uncle Thomas....

 

Distinct Human DNA. Fact.

 

The idea that life begins at conception is religious, it is called a "soul", for atheists, it is nothing but a chemical reaction.

 

You don't need to read his mind.

 

Don't need to. He wrote what was in his mind.

Cute on the "uncle" though.

 

so you think we're nothing more than our dna?

I believe if one vessel is not able to support life, we just hop to the next

 

And what does that have to do with what I said?

 

That is a spiritual/religious argument. Got anything to counter my scientific fact?

 

That life begins at conception, so now you don't believe in that statement. ?

 

I already posted the scientific view, but people do have religious views on it too, thus why it should be their choice, not yours, not mine, not the governments

I was asking if all you think we are is dna? that would explain your answer of "Distinct Human DNA. Fact."

 

Technically the egg and sperm DNA does not combine into distinct DNA until a few days after impregnation. So, scientifically that is when a new life starts.

 

The national standard is currently anchored in a constitutional fiction. Justice Thomas wants it anchored in something real, like the Privileges and Immunities Clause rather than the fictitious "Substantive Due Process" clause which doesn't exist.

REPUBLICANS HAVE TRIED THIS SEVERAL TIMES, BUT the Democrats blocked it:

​

They are much too busy with J6 Trump Revenge Porn and previously they were too busy with trying to impeach Trump twice, once after he was out of office.

Republicans Can’t Stop Talking About Over-the-Counter Birth Control. “The controversy has put Democrat candidates in the odd position of opposing a policy proposal that voters are inclined to support: the availability of birth control without a doctor’s prescription.”

It's a big cash cow for Planned Parenthood

Over-the-Counter Contraception Is Immensely Popular. But Democrats Have Doomed It.

"Rather than working with Republicans to craft a compromise measure—say, one that protected insurance coverage for contraception but also paved the way for over-the-counter pills—and helping to secure a rare bipartisan win for women’s health care, leftist's actively advocated against conservative colleagues’ efforts."

It's all about the Benjamins.

"Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, suggested, without evidence, that making pills available over the counter would hike costs for individual women to $600 a year. Republican politicians pushing for OTC pills, she said, would somehow “drag women back to the 1950s.”

"In 2014, Planned Parenthood’s political arm bought ads in multiple states. “In its first TV ad buy of the 2014 cycle,” noted HuffPost, “Planned Parenthood’s political arm is warning voters in North Carolina and Colorado that Republican Senate candidates’ support for over-the-counter birth control is not what it seems.” . . .

"This was a dark moment in Democrat politics: Even as they ramped up efforts to portray Republicans as the harbingers of a Handmaid’s Tale scenario and to portray themselves as hip to the needs of marginalized groups, Democrats sacrificed an opportunity to help women struggling to obtain birth control prevent unintended pregnancies. Instead, at the expense of undocumented immigrants, low-income women, victims of domestic violence, and others, they opted to help middle-class women save $10 a month—and prop up insurance providers, pharmaceutical companies, and the Democrat fundraising machine in the process."

They are all about the graft. Planned Parenthood is a big provider of birth control prescriptions and a Big Big Democrat Donor.

 

Yeah. Paying for it is a net win in the long wrong.

 

Liberals are just mad that Thomas stepped off the Democratic plantation long ago. Thomas knows that it was the Democrats that fought for slavery. Thomas also knows that it was the Democrats that fought against women's suffrage. Thomas also knows that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican. The parties didn’t just “switch”, that’s total BS. The term “Democrat” should offend everyone. “Democrat” and “evil” go perfectly together. The Democratic Party doesn’t care about colored people. They only kiss their *** for a vote so they can keep pushing the white liberal agenda.

 

Typo or sarcastic pun?