Is Roe V Wade going to be overturned?

[Samm]

@JayJay

Why should life be the default for the unborn?

We have had abortion almost from the dawn of man.

So no…I need not make a compelling case.

It’s a thorny issue because one life is wholly dependent upon another.

You have to make the compelling case that the unborn’s “rights” should “always” prevail.

Because life is the natural biological process. That’s the default. Without it, nothing on earth would be alive. Abortion, on the other hand, interferes with that process. It is the antithesis of default.

We have also had murderer since the dawn of time, so that argument is pathetically moot.

[Dem]

This is not human, it is human cells, and has the potential to be human. But it is not human.

The same way skin cells, hair follicles, etc are not human. Fertilizing an egg doesn’t make it human.

[Samm]

What is it then?

[Dem]

A fertilized egg.

[PAmoderate37]

@Samm

Because life is the natural biological process. That’s the default. Without it, nothing on earth would be alive. Abortion, on the other hand, interferes with that process. It is the antithesis of default.

We have also had murderer since the dawn of time, so that argument is pathetically moot.

The problem with this view is the vast majority of sexual activity is for personal gratification and has nothing to with procreation.

[Samm]

@Dem

A fertilized egg.

Of what species?

[Samm]

@PAmoderate37

@Samm

Because life is the natural biological process. That’s the default. Without it, nothing on earth would be alive. Abortion, on the other hand, interferes with that process. It is the antithesis of default.

We have also had murderer since the dawn of time, so that argument is pathetically moot.

The problem with this view is the vast majority of sexual activity is for personal gratification and has nothing to with procreation.

Sexual pleasure is not material to the discussion regarding life and killing unborn babies.

[PAmoderate37]

@Samm

Sexual pleasure is not material to the discussion regarding life and killing unborn babies.

Of course, it is. If people only had sex when they wanted to make a baby, there would be no or barely any abortions. You can’t just ignore what leads to people wanting abortions.

[Dem]

@Samm

@Dem

A fertilized egg.

Of what species?

Of the human species. But it would be no more correct to call a strand of hair human.

[WuWei]

@JayJay

Actually it didn’t take that long…and only in the United States did it require a war to do it.

Not true

[tnt]

@Samm

Stop with the personhood crap. Personhood has nothing whatsoever to do with science.

But it has to do with law.

@Samm

And you should quit your habit of referring to murder as well. The term is homicide … The taking of a human life.

See?

it’s not homicide if it’s legally not a person.

[tnt]

We’re not going to agree on abortion.

So let’s start brainstorming on how we can be ready for all these babies being born, many in very poor states.

What can we do to be ready for this?

[WuWei]

@JayJay

Science has nothing to do with when personhood is established.

That is a legal definition.

Not true. That legal definition uses science.

[Orygun]

@Samm

And you should quit your habit of referring to murder as well. The term is homicide … The taking of a human life.

Sure- tell your compatriots.

,

@matt1618

Right, that is fine. California can pass its infanticide bill

@gooddad409

Isn’t it amazing what a Hissy Fit the libs are having over the possibility of not being able to murder unborn babies in some states

@SixFoot

We get it, a lot of libs talked their baby mama into murdering their child. That’s a terrifying power of manipulation to suddenly not have access to anymore.

@GWH

Not a one of those 9 are screaming about not being able to kill babies. Fail.

@Guvnah

Right. It’s OK to kill your own child in private.

Ending Roe won’t compromise your access to continue that practice.

@reggie_jeffrey

The next step abortion will go back to the syates and the states that are for whats right will make abortion which is murder illegal.

@zantax

Yeah, he isn’t a fan of murdering babies.

[tnt]

@tnt

We’re not going to agree on abortion.

So let’s start brainstorming on how we can be ready for all these babies being born, many in very poor states.

What can we do to be ready for this?

This should be a separate thread.

[Rodeo]

@conan

It’s not just that…libs were pushing abortion right up till birth. That’s when backlash really started. That and demanding public to fund it.

I was a “safe but rare” guy when it came to abortion. I believe a giant chunk of the country was and maybe still are where I was. There are going to be circumstances that arise … in those moments a safe environment needed to be available.

Now lefties have made a lot of claims about right wing extremists in this discussion…

You lefties wanna know when you lost me…when you took advantage of those of us who were in the safe but rare camp …when the NY State legislature gave a standing ovation to abortion right up to the moment of birth. When that idiot Governor in Virginia started talking about make a delivered baby comfortable and having the talk with the parents. Leftists forced a Supreme Court just into hiding this weekend, vandalized churches and thru a Molotov cocktail thru a window at an anti abortion headquarters office.

Who are the extremists again?

[Supreme_War_Pig]

@JayJay

@Rodeo

@tnt

Is the goal to stop abortions or to inconvenience those who want them?

How about to follow the Constitution and the law…you ever thought something could be seen nice and simply.

We have this grand document of freedom and we keep screwing with it when it doesn’t say exactly what someone conveniently wants it to say.

I m no constitutional scholar but it seems the idea of powers not specific to the feds shall pass to the states is a pretty simple idea.

You pretend to be Consitution-minded but you again, like many others, excised the last clause of the 10th Amendment from your quote of it,

It doesn’t end with “to the states”.

It ends with “or to the people”.

Not only the tenth, but the ninth…you know, the ink blot.

[WuWei]

@Samm

@WuWei

Regardless, there was a right. And now it is retained.

As @TheDoctorIsIn mentioned, there are two generations that never knew a country with out it.

No. There was the illusion of a right. Laws were passed on that fallacy, but it was never a right. It was like the king’s new clothes. And the generations that grew up believing it was a right were just as misinformed as we were as kids believing that Coumbus discovered America. The truth does not change. We simply become better informed.

No, it was not an illusion.

[WuWei]

@Smyrna

@conan

Even then I don’t support the state having that right. I want to limit the state powers almost as much as federal power…almost.

If not each state, who should decide this IYO?

The woman
The man
The doctor

[WuWei]

@Samm

That is so very wrong. Libertarian does not mean uncaring or amoral.

That’s true. It also doesn’t mean your morailty applies to me.