Big Lies for Abortion >>MOD WARNING<<

The judiciary should eliminate ANY judge who uses personal opinion instead following the constitution and its meaning. Constructive constitution interpretation, NOT LEGISLATE ISSUES.

 

Bunk of the worst kind. The constitution was by passed. The basic principle of our republic form of government gave the states/people the ultimate authority. Judiciary change denying the state that power is clearly a violation of the constitution including the Bill of Rights. You are incorrect once again.

- - - Updated - - -

What he believes has everything to do with real life and facts.

 

New York and California had that right, as did all the states. It is a state/people matter, not the federal government's.

BTW, I like your tag line. I am 80 and used to believe that was ancient.

 

The fact is the people of this country (and really every civilized country) want abortion. It is as simple as that. You are all entitled to your opinions of what you think to be morally right but the people get to decide that. There is a process for the people to over rule SCOTUS. But a personhood amendment can never pass....or even come up for a vote.....the people do not want it. The people have spoken.

 

So who do you think should decides what and who the Constitution protects.... you?

Good luck with that...EVERYONE brings something personal to the table.....but a CONSERVATIVE court ruled on RVW

- - - Updated - - -

How? Why?

- - - Updated - - -

It's the federal government's job to uphold the Constitution and protect EVERYONE'S rights, even women's


All women who are American citizens should maintain the rights of American citizens no matter what state they live in...

to do otherwise is Anti-American and Un-Patriotic

 

I agree it gets into a grey area in the third trimester because the foundation is in place, and the movements of the fetus indicate sensory and motor nerves are connected to the primitive brain stem. Observed fetal reflexes tell us that much, but the fact that they can take place before the cerebrum is functional (like plugging in the CPU) also tells us they are primitive reflexes - not the result of actual thought. The article is based on observations that I believe to be reliable up to the last few weeks of gestation, so it takes us to the last 4-6 weeks. At that point I do not know whether there is more change taking place in the brain, or if it is just asleep. A few weeks ago I was proposing that last 4-6 weeks as a reasonable point for abortion restrictions, but pro-lifers kept arguing "Wrong - Even a 1 year old infant is not capable of meaningful thought" so I figured actual birth is enough of a safety zone to give the benefit of the doubt to the newborn. I certainly don't believe personhood starts at 1 year after birth.

Realistically, I think any woman who waited until the third trimester to get an abortion probably wants a baby (or else she would not have suffered through the first 6 months of pregnancy) but has learned that she has a significant health risk, or the baby has a significant health problem (we may see a lot of this with the Zika virus). If we try to control her decision at that point, we risk putting our concerns about the potential misuse of the system ahead of our concerns for protecting the woman (e.g. Ireland and Savita Halappanavar).

I think the fetus might have the biological capacity for personhood within those last 4-6 weeks of gestation, but it still would not justify putting a woman's life at risk by forcing her to continue supporting the pregnancy.

The other reason I would err on the side of the pregnant woman is that (like you) I find it hard to imagine a woman arbitrarily deciding to get an abortion in the last 4 weeks of pregnancy. Even when it is legal it hardly ever happens for trivial reasons. I would suspect be concerned about the life this newborn would lead if this woman is forced to have the child.

 

You know, surprising enough, even Justice Ginsburg complains about Roe v Wade.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...ias_abortion_law_a_road_not_taken_117773.html

 

Why then, since Roe v Wade is almost 50 years old, hasn't states and the Feds passed laws to make it legal?

Why has congress been bypassed?

 

Why bother? Nothing is gained by that

 

Personhood is independent of the body (but it does depend on a functional brain). What scientific evidence do you have that a zygote is a person?

 

Sure, let the men in robes make up brand new law.

Sure, maybe they will mess you over too.

 

Personhood is a false imposition on the human in the womb.

When do Children become persons? When they are 18 and can make all decisions as other Americans make?

Even teens are treated as if far lesser persons.

 

They have already (citizens united). But the fact is the only reason we have had abortion for the last 40 years is because the people want it. The people have spoken

 

Citizens united is a group formed exactly for political conversation. A free speech issue.

Why don't you support limits on what Hillary and even Trump can spend?

 

It is an individual people matter, not a matter for government at any level. That is what is meant by "privacy."

 

People in this world also want wealth, and not many attain that in any quantity. The point is, PEOPLE ALSO WANT FREEDOM FROM OPPRESSION. Something that is present the world over including in the US. We have an oppressive USSC, and a government usurping the rights of the state/people to control the destiny in their own state.

 

People who understand that the constitution should be interpreted by what it says, not some vague opinion of the individual judge.

Expand that to all innocent human life, and I agree. The baby is a person in the womb and deserves equal rights with the mother.

Oh? So you deny what the 9th and 10th amendments mean? Obviously you are not a constitutionalist so why do you call on it to support your assertions?

I know a conservative court ruled on R v W. But I am not a conservative. I am a liberal progressive, not a left wing extremist like those who want mothers to be able to kill their babies in the womb. I believe in humanist concerns, ie for ALL HUMANS EVEN IN THE WOMB.

I am equally concerned about all the living people living in oppression the world over. A truly needy kid in India should be helped before we worry about the relatively poor kid in the US. The money spent on killing innocent life in the US could do a lot to help rid oppression here and overseas. Grow up and learn to love all human life, in fact all life from the birds and the bees and the trees.

 

So you love all life except for women...I had already gotten that.

Did you ever stop to think there would be less starving children if there mothers had access to safe legal abortions? Yes, it's true.

 

States and the people have all rights not authorized by the constitution. Abortion is a state issue not a federal issue. The states should follow the will of THEIR constituents, not be forced to follow a judicial legislated issue.

 

If that is what a state wants then it should leave the Union of the UNITED States.

The federal law defends the Constitution and the states cannot override the Constitution.

If you want to make women slaves you'll have to go to the Supreme Court, the states can't do that

 

Person hood is human life irregardless of ability to survive on their own. People in persistent vegetable state have been know to get past that infirmative condition after years of no observable brain activity.

I have yet to see a valid argument for pro-choice murder in the womb.

 

Women are not slaves by any definition of the word. That is a ridiculous assertion. The federal government has no right authorized in the constitution to make decisions for the states/people in this republican form of government. Different groups of people have different opinions and those in any given state have the right, as a majority, to make the determine the issue not so addressed as a federal issue.

Abortion is not the only issue. The issue is judicial legislation. Judges should only be allowed to interpret the constitution with out personal of opinion or should be eliminated from the court. To do such a thing is tyranny by the judiciary. >>>MOD EDIT Rule 6 Removed<<<

 

The people disagree with you. They have abortion because they want abortion. There are many types of governments all over the world and virtually all of the civilized countries have abortion in some form. And you would not want to live in the ones that don't. The people have spoken

 

Fallacious assumption of facts not in evidence.

- - - Updated - - -

Absurd denial of reality!

 

If you want freedom from oppression then you must be all in favor of freedom FROM religion too.