Sotomayor compares fetus to brain dead person, says fetal movement doesn't prove consciousness

This thread has not pointed to the problem of rape as any more than ONE of the number of issues involving the STATE passing laws against women's personal healthcare choices.

If you seriously can't handle that, perhaps you need to step back and reconsider your position.

 

Yep.............

 

Hmmmm

You bring it up constantly to try and justify abortion.

 

It's not my logic what's your point?

 

Well, you lauded that logic above.

So, it's a little hard to track what you're actually thinking at this point.

 

How about we discuss one issue at a time? When a thread tries to focus on one aspect of the Abortion debate, how can that discussion really go anywhere if one side isn't willing to stick that one topic?
I'm not saying you can't discuss or argue about whatever you want, but we do have different threads for each of those arguments. (And it is even completely fine if you want to leave a link to one thread in another thread)

Plus it's totally even fine if you want to start your own thread and set the tone however you want. If you want to start a thread for us to discuss multiple different aspects of abortion at the same time, that's fine too. Just stop trying to deflect and derail other people's threads.

 

There is overwhelming support FOR RvW. Something that the Republicans may find out too late

 

Try definition of brain death

 

" ... the literature is filled with episodes of people who are completely and utterly brain dead responding to stimuli . "

~ Sotomayor surely knows more about dead brains than anyone else on the Supreme Court . Literature not so much ...

 

The death part in "brain death" is kind of the problem.

 

I'm not sure if you're aware, but there is an 'underground' attempt to change the definition of democracy, republic and fascism. This is the dawning of the age of misinformation, ya know.

 

Two-thirds of the union of states must pass the constitutional question before it becomes an amendment to The Constitution.

 

Thought it was 75% required .. I could be mistaken

 

Two- thirds.
Side note: Notice that 2/3 (or 3/4) isn't a democracy. A democracy would be 50+% not 66.6...% or 75%.

 

1. 
   

1. 
   No matter as your point is valid either way. The principle involved here is "Overwhelming Majority" .. and yes this is what distinguishes between a "Constitutional Republic" and "Pure Democracy" -- aka "Tyranny of the Majority" in both Classical LIberalism and Republicanism.

The upshot is that Gov't is to have no legitimate authority to mess with Essential Liberty .. if it wants to make such law -it must appeal for a change to the social contract -- construct by which "we the people" - exercise "consent of the Governed" ... which requires (supposed to require) overwhelming approval .. at least 2/3rs .. as opposed to 50+1 or "Simple Majority Mandate"

There is no point in putting liberty "ABOVE" the legit authority of Gov't .. if by getting elected .. Gov't has that power

 

Duh, bringing up rape , mentioning rape does not prove or show in any way that I use rape to justify women having rights....

As usual , you are grasping desperately to make a point that isn't there because you have nothing else....

 

It is a common thread throughout your discussions on the matter as it is with most on the pro abortion side.

 

Yes TRUE civics and history is sorely missing in our schools.

 

As it stands now, actually there is much dissent to it especially because it was one a the worst legal rulings every issued by the SCOTUS removing the people as who should determine abortion policy in my country. The problem is a misinformed public with a MSM propagandizing the fallacious belief that over turning RvW would stop abortions in my country. And when you break down the questions to 1st, 2nd and 3rd trimester support DRASTICALLY falls.

 

I have been perfectly clear in my logic YOU need to be more clear in your questions and comments about it.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Duh, bringing up rape , mentioning rape does not prove or show in any way that I use rape to justify women having rights....

As usual , you are grasping desperately to make a point that isn't there because you have nothing else....

It is a common topic....NO WHERE do I base abortion rights on rape ....and YOUR lack of proof that I do (YOUR CLAIM) is all that's needed

 

I post only a small portion of your statements no grasping needed and yes when discussing abortion it is quite COMMON for the pro abortion side to throw in the rape card to justify abortion, all abortion. Thank your for admitting it.

 

I'm fine with that.

But, that isn't what was happening. People were suggesting that if ONE issue is discussed or even just mentioned, then it proves there are no other issues.

Another problem with the rape issue is that there are people on this board who think that if only THOUSANDS of women are seriously impacted, then it is of no consequence.

 

There is no "pro abortion" side.

There IS a side that believes the state and federal government should not be making laws against women on this issue.

 

These decisions are made by a representational democracy.

I vote for state and federal representation. Those representatives make these decisions.

Well, except for Washington, DC, where we don't allow representation in the bodies that make these decisions.

For them, we enforce taxation without representation - because, Republicans want it that way.