Forums >
Off-Topic Discussion >
One step closer
I know we had this thread a few days ago discussing South Dekota and their new abortion rights law.Today I just read where the state of Miss. has done the same thing.It is my opinion that now that the supreme court as Justice Roberts and Alito that what they are doing is not over turning Row v Wade but by placing it in the hands of the states they will let them do it for them thus taking it out of the federal goverment hands and they will let the states do what the want with out interferring with them thus seperating state and federal laws that is what the issue will be that the federal goverment has no right to overturn state laws thus ending Row v Wade. Some one said in the last thread,what is next our rights to vote,yes that is exactly what.Every 20 years certain parts of the voters right act comes up for renewal,why after all of this time this is still not a law but an act? young people of America it is time for you to take a stand in your future. and your rights as American citizens. Mar 01 06 01:06 pm Link Exotic Photography wrote: LOL... it always cracks me up on the "right" to abortion. The pro-aborts sold that one real well. Placing the legality of killing another person on the same level as freedom of religion and speech and having the sheeple buy it... Genius, pure evil genius. Mar 01 06 01:10 pm Link Mike Cummings wrote: I understand your point, but understand this...as a woman, a fetus needs me to survive. If I choose not to let it use my body and terminate the pregnancy it IS my choice AND my right. I am NOT pro-abortion, but I will decide what is right for MY body. Mar 01 06 01:27 pm Link Suzi wrote: Yep, I agree 100%. Mar 01 06 01:33 pm Link And I am not pro abortion, but SHE should decide what is right for HER body. Mar 01 06 01:38 pm Link Suzi wrote: So what you are saying it is ok to kill someone because you choose to discontinue the relationship with them you started. A child uses your resources to survive, so is it ok to kill a child? Mar 01 06 01:44 pm Link Mike Cummings wrote: Do your research on when the heart starts beating and when the brain starts functioning. It isn't someone else's body, it's dividing cells. It is not a SOMEONE until it is viable on it's own. Your agruement is foolish. Mar 01 06 01:49 pm Link Suzi wrote: 22 days for the heart, about 6 weeks for the brain. Most woman don't suspect they are pregnant until after they miss a period. Mentrual cycle is normally 28 days correct. So most abortions will happen AFTER the heart beats. Mar 01 06 02:07 pm Link exactly, thank you for making my point for me. Most abortions are done BEFORE that time. Ugh! edit: I don't like to argue, but I would rather have see the option of a woman choosing abortion then many of the other alternatives that come later on. There are TOO many stories of abuse and neglect even by foster and adoptive parents to make me believe that making abortion illegal is the right thing for our society. I would support sterilization first. Mar 01 06 02:26 pm Link It seems that people still don't understand what Roe v Wade actually did. It in no way is a law, act or anything else that allowed abortion. It WAS a judicial decision that struck down all states' law prohibiting abortions, thus abrogating states' rights for federal. All this had to do with the "right to privacy" which at most is only implied (not specified) anywhere in the Constitution. A reversal of Roe v Wade will only reassert states' right again. It doesn't reactivate any of the old states' laws. Those would have to passed again, allowing for the possibility of public referendum. S Dakota is simply proffering a test case which will require that the Supreme Court reconsider their earlier decision. Mar 01 06 02:58 pm Link Lens you are right and what they are doing is putting it back in the hands of the states who are making it illlegal,thus the states are taking away a womans right to choose to have a abortion.And now the federal goverment will not touch it and when and if it gets back there they will kill it. Mar 01 06 04:36 pm Link The point is, the people have much more control over state and local political decisions than they do over federal. If the time comes, in your state, that they consider such a law as was passed in SD, then by petitiion, you can force a public referendum on the subject. Then the people DO have the say in deciding whether that law shall pass. I'm hearing constantly from folks like Nancy, Diane, and Hillary, that the "overwhelming majority" of Americans favor abortion. We just may find out if that's true! Mar 01 06 04:44 pm Link That is absolutely true. Mar 01 06 05:49 pm Link Mike Cummings wrote: What cracks me up is how men feel they have authority on the transformation of a woman's body. This is not an issue for men. Mar 01 06 08:33 pm Link Area291, You're pandering. And it certainly does involve a man if he is the father of the baby (sorry, fetus).. Mar 01 06 08:54 pm Link Suzi wrote: Although I'm not going to comment one way or the other on the right to life or a woman's right to choose, statistically abortions appear to be closely split between less than 8 weeks and 9 weeks or more. In 1995, of a total of 625,301 abortions performed, 340,109 were perfromed at 8 weeks or less. and 285,192 were done at 9 or more weeks. Source: http://www.abortionfacts.com/statistics … cedure.asp Mar 01 06 08:59 pm Link Lens N Light wrote: Inform yourself. View the national statistics on the percentage of men vs. women who don't care for their child after birth. There's a difference between pandering and reality. If you understood the reality of abandonment, whether in fetus or full birth form, then you would hardly call it pandering. Mar 01 06 09:22 pm Link I am intimately aware of the reality of abandonment; I choose not to discuss it. As to the mens' issue (no pun intended), I am talking about the father who wants the baby and wants to raise it in a loving environment (yes, that's possible without the involvement of the mother), and especially, the husband whose wife has decided to destroy their baby. I'm saying only that they should be seriously heard. Mar 01 06 10:49 pm Link Suzi wrote: Before what time? 22 days??? I don't think so. Mar 02 06 02:27 am Link Just a thought... I believe that a Woman should decide what to do with her body...so, if she does not want to have a kid then she should be responsible and not get pregnant, and there are many known ways to prevent this (including abstenence) if you can't stand the heat...stay out of the kitchen. In the same token once life is created no one should deprive that creature of continuing to live...from day one it is still a life, and EVERYONE should be responsible...and if the parents don't want that life...then give it for adoption, there are many couples wanting to have family and they can't...there are always options to not kill the inocents. OK..I am out of here..good nite! Mar 02 06 02:55 am Link |