Dobbs is rightfully being compared to Dred Scott. In Dred Scott, a pro-slavery court grabbed on to the flimsiest legal pretenses imaginable to justify the pro-slavery result that they had pre-determined. In Dobbs ... a pro-slavery court grabbed on to the flimsiest legal pretenses imaginable to justify the pro-slavery result that they had pre-determined.
Thomas doesn't want to reconsider Loving v Virginia because he's married to a white woman and it's established as precedent in his mind lol!!!
the way I see it, if a baby had a soul before it was born, it would have incarnated into a different body if there was an abortion. To suggest that god, or the universe, or whatever you call it doesn’t realize which babies are aborted and which are not seems silly to me. Time is just an illusion so our simple minds can make sense of reality. Soul contracts are only put in place if the baby were to actually live, something that would already be known to god and our higher selves. Abortion has far less to do with babies lives, and far more to do with allowing government to have control over someone’s body. It’s just as screwed up as allowing the government to mandate what you inject into your body.
A hot Friday night, and the president and Pelosi just completely riled the rubes up. A perfect recipe for rioting and looting. Never let a good crisis go to waste.
One between us and two adopted. You said it would have ended your life. No it would have been an inconvenience. Why would it have ended your career? A baby could always be put up for adoption. Why was the decision so tough? Because you knew you were ending an innocent human life?
It is not for the state to define when life starts. Scientists don't. Lawyers can't. If you cannot know when life starts, you cannot say an abortion is murder. That you say it is a baby "from the get go" is an opinion. Not à fact. How dare the state tell women what to believe ?
Good grief, how many times do I have to repeat that I am "pro-choice" and oppose today's ruling before people like you figure that out? Do I have to write it in crayon in the sky? Evidently, you also missed the thread I started where I argued why EVERYONE - including women - possesses the inherent right to self-proprietorship which extends to a woman's right over her own body. I quoted the English Leveller Richard Overton's assertion of this right in the Opening Post and for a time in my signature, and I posted a link to it earlier in this thread. Here it is again, with the money quote: An Arrow Against All Tyrants and Tyranny (1646) To every individual in nature is given an individual property by nature not to be invaded or usurped by any. For every one, as he is himself, so he has a self-propriety, else could he not be himself; and of this no second may presume to deprive any of without manifest violation and affront to the very principles of nature and of the rules of equity and justice between man and man. Mine and thine cannot be, except this be. No man has power over my rights and liberties, and I over no man's. I may be but an individual, enjoy my self and my self-propriety and may right myself no more than my self, or presume any further; if I do, I am an encroacher and an invader upon another man's right — to which I have no right. For by natural birth all men are equally and alike born to like propriety, liberty and freedom; and as we are delivered of God by the hand of nature into this world, every one with a natural, innate freedom and propriety — as it were writ in the table of every man's heart, never to be obliterated — even so are we to live, everyone equally and alike to enjoy his birthright and privilege; even all whereof God by nature has made him free... http://www.yorku.ca/comninel/courses/3025pdf/Arrow_against_all_tyrants.pdf I'll tell you what people like me believe: 1) Individuals do have a right not to wear masks 2) Individuals do have a right not to get vaccinated, and whether they should or should not get vaccinated is up to them, not you 3) No public or private entity has a "right" to violate the natural and constitutional rights of any individual 4) Everyone - men and women - possesses the inherent right to self-proprietorship, which includes the right to bodily autonomy/sovereignty There's no irony or hypocrisy to be found here. I've been consistent about this. So now that you know what I actually think, perhaps you've also learned that everyone on the Right isn't a social conservative. I get the impression a lot of Lefties ignorantly believe that but they're wrong.
Dobbs is correctly being compared to Dred Scott. In Dred Scott, a pro-slavery court latched on to any flimsy legal excuse possible to bring about their desired pro-slavery outcome. In Dobbs ... a pro-slavery court latched on to any flimsy legal excuse possible to bring about their desired pro-slavery outcome.
Never mind. There are plenty of kitchen tables and Brown paper envelopes full of cash. Let's hope the Mother is granted the right to life. All sorts of "doctors" will be ready and waiting to help those who are now aborting without expertise or support.
And I answered you. Apparently not Are you asserting that a zygote is a human being? Look up the definition of both zygote and human being before you respond.
Hyperbole, clearly you don't understand that all it does is put the issue in the state legislators hands
who knows? I’m sure everyone’s situation is completely different. It shouldn’t matter, the government should have zero jurisdiction over what someone does with their body. That is the ultimate tyranny.
Part of it.. But like many you think a medical procedure is safer and better then a preventative alternative to bad decisions..
They certainly aren't. We have a case here that is established for over 50 years that was overturned, yet gun laws were turned down because of precedent that was 10 years ago. Not saying I disagree with the ruling of gun laws, but the court's rationale on established precedent is selective.
