Abortion: wrong or just sort of wrong?

XLVIII DOMINATORS said:
First, the GOP has not had the luxury, as Obama has had, of a 2/3 majority in both houses. Nor has the luxury existed of a simple majority of both houses with the president of said party having their support for a divided issue. Second, the naevity of believing that a president might limit SCOTUS in its authority over such a divided issue is ridiculous as a legitimate idea. If such were the case there would be chaos abounding with settled law(s).

The only legitimate solution is overturning, and or, limiting abortion by way of the same route used to write the law in the first place and I think you know that. Making your assertion that congress could handily change Roe untenable and therefor a real non starter.
Click to expand...

First of all, I didn't make any assertion, I simply posted three ways on how a law could be overturned.

Second, when did Obama ever have a 2/3 majority in both houses?
 
STY thinks the it should be law that people should live, believe, act, think, dress, behave the way he thinks they should.
 
christiefan915 said:
Never said you did. The argument was about the number of Iraqis dead from the war, occupation, insurgency etc. until you diverted it to abortion. It would be a refreshing change if you could stay on point.
Click to expand...

HE cant, because he spins once shown to be wrong.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
deal....I'm willing to concede your right to unlimited unrestricted and even no cost abortions for the first five days of pregnancy and you agree that no abortions can happen after the 6th day unless its to save the life of the mother.....
Click to expand...

You think a zygote is a baby. You're willing to concede the murder of babies?

What magically happens on the 6th day, btw?
 
christiefan915 said:
Never said you did. The argument was about the number of Iraqis dead from the war, occupation, insurgency etc. until you diverted it to abortion. It would be a refreshing change if you could stay on point.
Click to expand...

lol....and do you recall why Iraqi deaths suddenly made their appearance on an abortion thread?....don't pretend I brought it up....
 
Thing1 said:
You think a zygote is a baby. You're willing to concede the murder of babies?

What magically happens on the 6th day, btw?
Click to expand...

yes....I'm willing to let you kill as many as you can catch by the 5th day.......

nothing magical happens on the 6th day.....that's just an arbitrary date when your license to kill expires....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
lol....and do you recall why Iraqi deaths suddenly made their appearance on an abortion thread?....don't pretend I brought it up....
Click to expand...

Yes I do. It was in response to your snark about a poster having no concern for life because he didn't buy your arguments: "let's be honest.....you don't see a fucking thing and you never have....you're the one with no concern for life....fifty million dead since 1972......"
 
Jarod said:
There is a difference between supporting/promoting an overt action, going to war...

and

Supporting the legality of someone choosing an overt action for themselves.
Click to expand...


Also, many women would get abortions with or without Roe v Wade. I doubt anyone would have invaded Iraq without the government.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
deal....I'm willing to concede your right to unlimited unrestricted and even no cost abortions for the first five days of pregnancy and you agree that no abortions can happen after the 6th day unless its to save the life of the mother.....
Click to expand...

Shut up weirdo. You have nothing offer in a deal.

If you want to make an argument that life begins five days after conception then do so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top