New poll: Majority of Americans oppose Supreme Court ruling on abortion

Then it shouldn't be hard for the pro-abortion folks to get the laws they want passed in all fifty states. I know Democrats will be shocked but the Supreme Court doesn't exist to represent the people. Don't laugh. That's what the Congress is supposed to do but doesn't. Liberals know better than the people. The Supreme Court exists to protect the Constitution, which Democrats and the Deep State hate.

 

This isn't a decision we should make at all. I have no right to judge another woman's decision, and neither does anyone else, certainly not the government.

And fyi, you're quite wrong if you think of me as an "abortion advocate" ... I'm a choice advocate. There's a difference.

 

Ask them.

 

Is that the amendment that specifically provides a woman the right to an abortion?

 

Your answer doesn't surprise me much considering most Democrats don't believe in individual responsibility. If a child isn't disposed of by abortion Democrats want to take care of the child from cradle to grave ensuring they have a life long loyal Democrat at the expense of tax payers.

 

There are many Americans who disagree with this and are tired of being seen as baby killers second only to China. We have been for the past 50 years a nation of baby killers. That has now ended.

 

Dobbs Ruling Triggers Penised Women to Get Vasectomies.

We'll out breed them.

​

"Do these under-thirty men understand that the procedure is forever, that they will never be able to have their own children? A Pew survey finds that 44% of adults aged 18-49 say it’s not very likely or not at all likely they will ever have children. But let them find the right woman who wants children, and you have to wonder about those percentages. Are men really that reluctant to have a child?

The future belongs to those that reproduce:

​

 

Well you are going to have to make the decision how to vote just like everyone else now that it’s up to “democracy” to decide. I don’t believe anyone should make the decision what I put in my body or anything either, but they do. That’s the reality of things.

I did not refer to you as an abortion advocate. I was referring to the poster who claimed abortion did not exist at the country’s founding. She advocates for abortion based on it getting rid of the right people. If you look at abortion through the lens of secular humanism that’s a valid position and one that should be advocated for if societal health is the goal.

If one truly believes a fetus is never a human life, “pro choice” is a cop out. From a secular humanist perspective if a fetus is never a human life, advocating for abortion is the only logical position.

 

Morality laws like drugs, nudity, assisted suicide and abortion which includes the killing of a human, absolutely belong at state level. Basically you are saying that only your opinion matters when it comes to the acceptability of destroying a human life. And what I'm getting from your post is that a totaltarian rule is better then adhering to the constitution.

 

Expounding the potential ramifications of a principle isn't hyperbole.

I thought the notion of actually overturning RvW after 50 years and two generations of women had never a need to question it was "hyperbole" but here we are.

To me it's absurd and if one absurd thing can happen who's to say what the next absurd thing might be?

 

It's not just men. My sister absolutely loathes kids. Always has. She found a man that feels the same and they're very happily married.

Not everybody thinks the same way and wants the same things.

That's hard for some people to get their heads around, I know.

The position stated in the article you linked is arrogant in the extreme. The presumption among social-conservatives that they know what people are thinking better than the people who are actually doing the thinking themselves is the typical, patriarchal nonsense that so many of us long to be escaping from.

I wish they'd get over themselves.

 

If the state begins forcing women to have children then we should absolutely care for those children.

Let’s say a child with severe disabilities is born because of these pro-birth laws. The mother and doctors would have recommended abortion but the law will not allow it. Should she be responsible for the million in medical treatments and costs while the people that mandated this birth do nothing?

 

I would also add that the men (no they're not "penised women") mentioned in the article are doing exactly what conservatives endlessly harp on about. They are taking responsibility for themselves and their futures.

If they know they don't want kids it's absolutely right for them to take action to avoid that, especially if they are aware that "mistakes" can no longer be corrected.

I would think you'd be applauding them.

I was born in the 1960s and have an adult child but if I was in my 30s now, rather than my 60s, I'd be sorely tempted to join them knowing how uncertain enshrined human rights are starting to look for us going forward.

 

It’s insane to see people that classify themselves as pro small government or pro freedom not only want to tell people what they must do with their body but also think people must be forced to live.

It’s evil

That you believe it is totalitarian to allow people to make bodily choices is just fascinating.

 

Both I and the link are perfectly clear that you are free to do as you wish and we celebrate your choice.

 

The left has been quite clear that some women have penises.

consider them applauded by me.

Exactly, extremists have talked a lot of young people out of reproducing.

Others, undaunted, will continue to reproduce and the future is theirs.

​

 

But you don't for one minute try to understand why the choice might be being made.

 

No, circumstances have! People are often more career focused these days. Maybe because they want to be. Maybe because they need to be due to the cost of living. Maybe that's just what happens to maturing democratic societies? Look at Japan for instance.

Well that's up to them. Nobody's forcing them NOT to reproduce but the right seem to be just fine with forcing women in the opposite direction which by the way is going to end up with a lot of kids without families. That won't look anything like your ideal as pictured above.

 

Will states also force women to have unprotected sex?

 

I noticed you didn’t answer the question. Would you like to try again?

I can edit it for you if the mental gymnastics will stop?
Let’s say this woman has been raped or her birth control failed. Does that help?

 

Some will force twelve year old girls who've had "unprotected sex" with their fathers or uncles to bring the fetuses that result to term though.

There are myriad reasons girls and women don't want to bring a fetus to term. That should be their choice, not someone else's

 

It's not going to make any difference. There's a lot of pure zealotry out there.

 

It’s a good thing that the constitution doesn’t give two rats butts to the opinion of the public. These judges ruled in a constitutional manner and I’m thankful they did

 

That IS honest discussion. This country is now in the business of stripping constitutional rights from half the population. If there's any justice (which I highly doubt), outlawing vasectomies will follow right after states start banning women's contraceptives. Not to mention outlawing condoms, since those are contraceptives as well.

You accuse me of hyperbole if that suits what you wish to think, but this is happening. Get back to me when you can get pregnant, and are forced to carry a fetus to term even though it's a risk to your own life.

 

Wow, that's a brilliant answer ...

You can't prove me wrong, so you just disagree because you want to? You claimed my argument was "already shot down" but you provide no proof. So typical.

You must be arguing just for the sake of being disagreeable. If you have nothing to contribute other than attacks on the comments of others, why are you even on this forum?