Abortion ban amendment shot down in Kansas doesn't bode well for Repubss

Well I think we call that an AMBUSH. And murder.

You can't preemptively invite someone over with the plan that if they come, I am going to kill them. People go to jail for that.

 

The fetus isn't a child.

 

*protect the liberty of the child, yes.

 

it is.

 

If they are no longer invited, it's not an ambush.
People usually exercise the castle doctrine when the invitation is rescinded. Otherwise they are invited, and everything works out.

 

Looks as though you rolled over on to the Christian porcupine you climbed into bed with 42 years ago when Reagan got down with Jerry Falwell.

Then you're little more than a "useful idiot" in the Republican Party. Stand up, say you're not religious, then try for power in the Party—you'll find yourself about as welcome as ants at a picnic.

Yeah, it should have been a clear statement back then that abortion laws were unconstitutional.

 

It's a fetus till its excluded from being called that.
Why isn't a newborn a fetus, why arnt you a fetus?
I know the answer, I wanna hear yours. When does it lose the fetus designation? If a fetus can't function as a child why call it a child?
Children can do things a fetus can't for instance.

 

I still don't understand how the chicken-littles who proclaimed red states would trampled on women's right to choice are holding up this example as proof.

Am I the only one confused here with the backwards logic?

 

No, here's how it works (brief version)... embryo, fetus, **BIRTH**, infant, child.

We can put a value on the fetus without misidentifying it as s person.

 

embryo, fetus, infant, toddler, child, preteen, teen, young adult, adult, middle aged, elderly - death

its valued as exactly what it is as what is undisputable through science. thanks!

There is no other ingredient that is injected through this development. Only development. It is always from embryo through to elderly.

As such I see no difference in the value. Any traits you demand a person have to develop is arbitrary. You may as well demand to see 10 fingers and 10 toes before you declare it a person for all I care.

 

If you truly believe what I highlighted in bold, then shouldn't all the GOP abortion bans be unconstitutional just as Roe v Wade was made unconstitutional? If you truly want freedom, the individual freedom, then the GOP should allow abortion without any interference from state AND federal government. Right?

 

The people CHOOSE how they want to be governed by electing those who enact their will via democracy.

Don't get confused.

 

Naturally...

 

Common sense? Filibuster if Dems don't destroy it. I suspect now that the ice has been broken more states will take action to pass reasonable abortion laws - maybe not immediately, but soon.

 

Sedition requires one to act against the established, lawful order. Democrats never did that, unlike Trump who tried to steal the 2020 election.

Hopefully, you'll nominate someone who won't threaten to damage our political structure.

 

Anti-abortion types won't put up with women getting mifepristone and misoprostol in the mail, and financial help to get to states where abortion is legal. They'll try for a national law.

 

Women will not put up with government telling them when they must have children. That means rights of the fetus are limited while it remains in the woman.

Kansas should tell you something.

 

I know this is a shocker for you, but some woman...actually a lot of women...are pro life.



This isn't as "one sided" a subject as you want to believe it is. And you can add the transgender **** in there as well.

And now it will be decided by the vote instead of DICTATED by the feds. Since you know...a good portion of the people don't agree on this.

I suspect that most all states will allow abortion under certain circumstances but that they will not be late term abortions nor will it be used as a form of birth control from tinder dates gone wrong.

 

Some bad news for ya, mate...



https://news.gallup.com/poll/245618/abortion-trends-gender.aspx

Women aren't pro-life.

 

That's why LIKE KANSAS it gets taken to the ballot. National laws have only a slim chance. State by state is more promising, as Kansas demonstrated.

 

State laws, federal law—it doesn't matter. Women won't put up with being told when to have children.

 

Your first poll is almost 50/50
The second poll was 50/50 up until the last year
What I'm seeing by you pills is a divided opinion.

Sorry if that bursts your bubble or whatever point you thought you had.

And I wouldn't even say that abortion should be illegal in all circumstances...lol. I think if the fetus or the mother's health is danger then it's warranted

 

I don't know why some folks don't get it. We're not going to be successful stopping abortion, grabbing guns or waging a "war on drugs."

 

KJP: Supreme Court overturning Roe was "an unconstitutional action," you know.

Just when you think this WH couldn't say something dumber than the last thing they said that was astoundingly stupid.

College Graduate, Masters Degree, Columbia.
​

"Karine Jean-Pierre argued yesterday that the Supreme Court violated the Constitution in reversing their own decision in Roe in an attempt to fend off a question about the timing of Joe Biden’s EO on abortion costs. When a reporter wondered aloud why it took Biden three months after the leak of the Dobbs draft and then six weeks after its official publication to issue this EO, Jean-Pierre insisted that Biden’s been all over it since “day one.”

She uses phrases with no apparent understanding of their meanings.

"“Day One” would have been May 3. In fact, it might have been December 1, 2021, when the oral arguments at the Supreme Court took place and the direction of the court appeared clearly aimed at Casey if not Roe as well. Biden’s EO is a day late, and in light of the Hyde Amendment, literally every dollar short."

It will indeed run afoul of Hyde, "which prohibits HHS dollars from funding abortions or benefits tied directly to abortions." The very "first time HHS attempts to shift funds for the purposes of Biden’s EO, they will find" their dumb asses "in court over it. The entire effort will likely get enjoined while the case gets tried and then goes up the appeal chain, right back to the Supreme Court" with a "budget statute as explicit as it is in the Hyde Amendment."

Her childish “unconstitutional” claim "sounds like the response of a high-school debater who thinks “unconstitutional” means “anything I don’t like.” "No serious thinker, even those who support Roe and Casey, would accuse the court of acting “unconstitutionally” in reversing an earlier decision. Nothing in the Constitution forbids the Supreme Court from reversing prior decisions. Furthermore, the court has been doing that — sparingly, of course — for almost as long as it’s been around. Stare decisis is a practice, and a good practice, but it’s not a law, let alone a constitutional requirement in Article III."

"This accusation is even more absurd when applied to Roe, which famously established a constitutional right based on absolutely no mention of the issue in the Constitution in the first place. If anything, the Roe court acted" improperly "by legislating an abortion policy, an act that properly belonged to either Congress or more constitutionally the states. Abortion policy isn’t mentioned in the Constitution, so the Ninth and Tenth Amendments apply to that question."

It's fitting that a president this stupid should have a spokesperson who is this dense.

 

Under Dobbs, which is widely supported by Conservatives and the Right, women may freely abort until they pass the 15th week: are folks that agree with that standard "Pro-Life" or "Pro-Abortion" by the standards measured in the poll you reference?