Death threats will be taken seriously. I expect more than one person to be arrested for making such threats.
SCOTUS opinion leaked: Roe v Wade
- Thread starter dukkha
- Start date
Death threats will be taken seriously. I expect more than one person to be arrested for making such threats.
moon
Satire for Sanity
Termination refusal is enforced pregnancy. The very notion is barbaric.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
the science about pregnancy that hasn't changed..........since the dawn of time i'm guessing
Riots, no, protests, and more likely not until the actual ruling is released, and there probably will be death threats, but none comparable nor in number that Fauci received/receives
ExpressLane
Verified User
They will be wearing pink pussy hats.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
are you implying that women are so stupid that they don't understand that sex can lead to pregnancy?
Biden’s evolution on abortion
1974 “A woman shouldn’t have the sole right to say what should happen to her body.”
2012 “ Government doesn’t ’ have a right to tell other people that women, they can’t control their body.”
Slow Joe was against abortion before he was for abortion,
1974 “A woman shouldn’t have the sole right to say what should happen to her body.”
2012 “ Government doesn’t ’ have a right to tell other people that women, they can’t control their body.”
Slow Joe was against abortion before he was for abortion,
SmarterthanYou
rebel
so his ruling is based purely upon the Constitution?
The Constitution has everything to do with this. Citizenship is granted at birth. So unless you want to argue that a fetus is an undocumented alien, then personhood is granted at birth as well.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
So you admit that you condone the killing of living humans who have committed no crime nor have expressed any desire to die?
FreeSpeech1789
Banned
So now biological sex is the same thing as gender? Hmmmm.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Yup... You will quickly see the NPCs switch out their Ukrainian flags for pink pussy hats.
That is what it is, yes.
Nope, unless the Constitution was in England in the early 1700's. A lot of the historical context for the ruling is based on common law and English law prior to the US even declaring Independence. So any claim that the ruling is based purely on the Constitution is complete BS.
Wait - so you support Russia?
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
Jewish law does not share the belief common among abortion opponents that life begins at conception, nor does it legally consider the fetus to be a full person deserving of protections equal those accorded to human beings. In Jewish law, a fetus attains the status of a full person only at birth. Sources in the Talmud indicate that prior to 40 days of gestation, the fetus has an even more limited legal status, with one Talmudic authority (Yevamot 69b) asserting that prior to 40 days the fetus is “mere water.” Elsewhere, the Talmud indicates that the ancient rabbis regarded a fetus as part of its mother throughout the pregnancy, dependent fully on her for its life — a view that echoes the position that women should be free to make decisions concerning their own bodies.
FreeSpeech1789
Banned
Why not?
I actually don't think women should have children outside of marriage and if they can not financially care for a child they should put it up for adoption.
Just like a born child still needs to be provided with food, water, and oxygen because there is no biological difference whatsoever
SmarterthanYou
rebel
untrue..........maybe you can explain how the court 'found' such a right to privacy in the 9th Amendment.........but reads 'shall not be infringed' as giving the feds the power to 'reasonably regulate'????????