Question for Pro-choicers

[Brent]

The Constitution does not protect any "right" to abortion.

If anything, the 14th Amendment prohibits abortion.

You cannot honestly believe that Pro-abortion (ie NOW, Planned Parenthood, NARAL, Emily's List etc.) forces will give one damned inch to limit one single abortion. Tell my you are not that foolish. They fight tooth and nail and lie through their teeth about abortion from claiming it is not human to lies about pro-life individuals. It is big business for them and they are not willing to give up one damned dime of it.

Amen.

 

[OrnotBitwise]

The Constitution does not protect any "right" to abortion.

If anything, the 14th Amendment prohibits abortion.



Amen.

The Supreme Court says you're wrong and they are the final authority in such matters. By definition, the right to abortion -- in the first trimester -- is indeed constitutionally protected. The constitution changes and so that may change, but it is indisputably true now.

 

[Brent]

The Supreme Court says you're wrong and they are the final authority in such matters.

"To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy."
- Thomas Jefferson

http://www.landmarkcases.org/marbury/jefferson.html

We have an amendment process to alter the Constitution. If the founders intended the Constitution to be flexible, they wouldn't have bothered with the amendments.

 

[maineman]

gosh...it must suck to be you knowing that Tom Jefferson's words were not heeded and that the Supremes DO get the final say!

Don't like living in America with that sort of judical power? Move.... and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out!

 

[robdastud]

Let is imagine the scenario that there is indeed a "gay gene," and that this gene is discovered sometime in the future. Let's also imagine this gene is detectable during pregnancy. Should a woman have the right to abort her baby because the baby, when he/she grows up, will turn out to be homosexual? Wouldn't that be discrimination which should be prohibited?

I, for one, would condemn such an abortion, as I condemn any abortion.

Every human being deserves a chance at life, and nobody should be judged before they're even born according to how we "think" they will turn out. Any baby, regardless of disability, is a gift from God. Destroying these infants is an INSULT TO THE LORD and people who commit such a terrible act should, in my opinion, be destroyed.

The only people who have forfeited their right to live are violent criminals, i.e. rapists, child molesters, and murderers; and anyone who has committed high treason. The unborn, by stark contrast, have done nothing to deserve being aborted. Abortion is the destruction of innocent human life.

No dodging the question, please.

its not a disability to be gay, it could be a gift... LOL.

 

[robdastud]

Immanuel,

No, I am not saying homosexuality is a disability. When I wrote that sentence I had other conditions on my mind, such as Down's Syndrome. I knew a woman who, when she became pregnant, swore she would abort her baby if he/she had Down's. I for one think that is awfully sad. ALL babies are a gift from God; to abort them is an insult to His creation.

Edit: come to think of it, perhaps homosexuality is a sort of disability. All human beings are spirituall disabled by the sinful nature; everyone has their own faults. One of such faults is homosexuality. That is to say, some people are inclined towards sexual sins, whereas others might be inclined towards lying, or arrogance, or selfishness. Get what I'm saying?

lol your waaaayyyy out there in right field...