- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Roe v Wade officially overturned
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:05 am to whatiknowsofar
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:05 am to whatiknowsofar
quote:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
I don't see the right abortion in any of the first 9 amendments.
Maybe you lunatic lefties will finally see that national divorce is preferable.
1
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:08 am to cahoots
quote:True. Anti abortion advocates largely will scream to the heavens about a 100 cell organism being aborted, but want way less assistance for people born into extreme poverty, etc.
but it does show that most people only care so much
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:11 am to sabes que
I am pro abortion and 100% on board with this decision
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:12 am to The Third Leg
quote:
Inflation roaring out of control, we’ve printed about all we can for the foreseeable future, and a global recession is unfolding.
Sounds like a great time to make a shitload of fiscal liabilities through the courts.
R.I.P, ‘Merica. Mama tried.
All the issues you mentioned are political issues to be handled by the political branches of government, namely the executive and legislative branches. The supreme court is a legal body, politics is outside its scope of responsibility. They on law based upon the constitution. What the Court did today was its job, something it should have done decades ago, namely overturn an unconstitutional decision made in 1973.
Your problem, a problem common to all leftists, is you don't know the difference between a political and legal issue.
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:13 am to AUCE05
Cool, hope you’re ready to raise funding for things like WIC.
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:13 am to Ronaldo Burgundiaz
Will this court rule in a similar way for Oberfell vs Hodges and Loving vs Virginia and leave those decisions up to the states because marriage isn't in the Constitution? We may find out real soon.
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:14 am to sabes que
quote:
but want way less assistance for people born into extreme poverty, etc.
Not sure how it's like in other states, but what more assistance do they need besides free healthcare (Medicaid), free food (WIC/EBT), and free childcare (Calworks out here, but LA has CCAP)
The only real complaint that normal conservatives have is with WIC/EBT, but most of that is poor people continuing the cycle by having new cars, iPhones, etc. while having EBT.
This post was edited on 6/24/22 at 11:17 am
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:14 am to SoonerK
quote:
Imagine being this stupid and then showing the world by posting here just how stupid you are.
He was 100% correct. The protocol for an endangered mother is delivery. Whether you abort the child before or not is irrelevant.
It’s science. Stop denying basic science.
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:17 am to Sl0thstronautEsq
quote:
Just because something doesn't happen frequently, doesn't mean we can just ignore it.
Sure but you also don’t base overarching legal policy on it either.
The argument that we must have full-blown, legal abortion on demand due to instances of rape and incest is a poor one.
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:17 am to Packer
IYO, will this increase or decrease the amount of money that is spent on those programs?
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:17 am to sabes que
quote:
True. Anti abortion advocates largely will scream to the heavens about a 100 cell organism being aborted, but want way less assistance for people born into extreme poverty, etc.
The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...
The assistance you cite is not a right, but is provided nonetheless.
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:17 am to McVick
quote:I don't know, but for some weird reason I don't believe Loving vs Virginia will be up for a debate
Will this court rule in a similar way for Oberfell vs Hodges and Loving vs Virginia and leave those decisions up to the states because marriage isn't in the Constitution? We may find out real soon.
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:18 am to McVick
quote:
Will this court rule in a similar way for Oberfell vs Hodges and Loving vs Virginia and leave those decisions up to the states because marriage isn't in the Constitution? We may find out real soon.
probably
but I honestly can't see many states making gay marriage illegal again
but maybe I'm naive
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:18 am to McVick
quote:
Will this court rule in a similar way for Oberfell vs Hodges and Loving vs Virginia and leave those decisions up to the states because marriage isn't in the Constitution? We may find out real soon.
Thomas in his concurrence said the SC should revisit Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. He did leave off Loving since I guess he wouldn't want his marriage invalidated.
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:19 am to Palantir
quote:
Will this court rule in a similar way for Oberfell vs Hodges and Loving vs Virginia and leave those decisions up to the states because marriage isn't in the Constitution? We may find out real soon.
I don't know, but for some weird reason I don't believe Loving vs Virginia will be up for a debate
It's almost as if one of the Justices wouldn't want their marriage dissolved.
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:21 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
Roe v Wade officially overturned
quote:
Imagine being this stupid and then showing the world by posting here just how stupid you are.
He was 100% correct. The protocol for an endangered mother is delivery. Whether you abort the child before or not is irrelevant.
It’s science. Stop denying basic science.
Well most medical professionals would strongly disagree with you.
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:21 am to McVick
quote:
Will this court rule in a similar way for Oberfell vs Hodges and Loving vs Virginia and leave those decisions up to the states because marriage isn't in the Constitution? We may find out real soon.
Probably not, because Obergefell and Loving stand up on equal protection grounds and not merely "substantive due process" grounds like Roe.
This post was edited on 6/24/22 at 11:23 am
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:22 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
The argument that we must have full-blown, legal abortion on demand due to instances of rape and incest is a poor one.
Nowhere did I make that argument. As I've previously stated, I have no issue with the SC overturning RvW and allowing each state to make their own decision.
My original comment about rape-related pregnancies was in response to someone who said, "So don’t get pregnant. People act like pregnancy is a virus you somehow catch."
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:23 am to SoonerK
quote:
It's almost as if one of the Justices wouldn't want their marriage dissolved.
Racial discrimination in terms of government licensing is actually in the constitution
Posted on 6/24/22 at 11:23 am to SoonerK
quote:
OK. A woman's water breaks early in the pregnancy and she develops an infection inside the uterus.
Ok, so induce delivery of the baby or perform a c-section
What about this situation requires that the doctors rip the baby apart with forceps and throw it in the trash? how does the act of killing the baby intentionally save the mother any more than an emergency c-section would?
Page 17 of 64
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News