“ punching above my weight “ says scook as he poses as both judge and know it all.
Hahah go have a cookie - scookie

I believe i cautioned you about personal insults. its unseemly. please stop

.

You should have a cookie too destroyer and a glass of milk

You should leave off your infantile attempts at arrogant condescension.

Hah ….destroyer once again “ posing “ as Gentleman of this web site . Funny ! Hypocrite !

And of course - my encouraging scookie to have a cookie doesn’t compare to your posting history destroyer !!!
You should have a cookie too ! So funny are your silly posts .

Yet another clumsy attempt at arrogant condescension. Doing that repeatedly doesn’t make you appear bright or to be a good faith participant in what COULD be a productive discussion.

Scookie - I’m not a great athlete …but I’m not clumsy either as you write associated with your non stop insults . Hahah.

Roe- Wade: supported to STAY as FEDERAL LAW by the MAJORITY OF AMERICANS .
That’s a FACT. Same as most all I post . FACTS and the TRUTH.

I ASKED you to stop with the insults.

I'll make a deal with you. You show me where in the Constitution that it says that a woman, as protected by the Constitution, (As Roe V Wade claims) has the right to an abortion and I'll admit I was wrong and you were right. Deal?

However, if you cannot show me where it says that then you have to admit you were wrong and that I was right. OK?

.

There was no INSULT from me in my last post where you claim .
You just write that PRETENDING there was an insult .

I don't "pretend" anything.

And I notice you haven't responded to my offer for a deal. Remember, this thread is about Roe V Wade and a woman's right to kill a baby.

.

1. There was no INSULT from me in my last post where you claim .
You just write that PRETENDING there was an insult .

2. Based on YOUR posting history, I’m not interested in any “ deal “ with you.
My interest is posting the FACTS and TRUTHS……which, I do .

So in other words you know I'm right about Roe v Wade.

My previous posting history? I'm not sure I even know what that means. Would you care to explain?

Your comment about my previous posting history is nothing but a smoke screen. Nice try.

And again, as I've said many times before, I do not pretend anything.

.

Majority of Americans support Roe-Wade . Trumps court appointees want to override the Will of the People.

Taper interview on abortion details



https://www.cnn.com/

“Trump’s” appointees want to properly rule on what the constitution says, rather than legislating from the bench. If a majority is really in favor of killing babies under all conditions, as a matter of convenience, they can elect representatives who will pass a law to that effect.

It’s a policy issue that should be a subject of law, then vetted by the courts when lawsuits are filed. That’s the constitutional process.

More nonsense and excuses

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973),[1] was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction

You’re always quick to demonstrate your lack of understanding.

LAW OF OUR LAND

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973),[1] was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction.


Three conservative justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Anthony M. Kennedy and David H. Souter co-authored the court's main opinion in the 5-4 decision, writing:

"The woman's right to terminate her pregnancy before viability is the most central principle of Roe vs. Wade. It is a rule of law and a component of liberty we cannot renounce.

And it was a case of the court legislating from the bench, which is NOT their job.

26 states will make abortion illegal if Roe is overturned .

16 of those states would also make abortion illegal including rape and incest.

Disgusting that politicians to decide what a woman, a family, and their doctors cannot do in the case of these decisions.

I am pro choice, I support upholding Rowe-Wade.

The court was legislating from the bench. Laws are passed by state or federal legislators, signed by governors or the president and vetted by the courts, not the reverse. You being pro abortion or me being pro life doesn’t affect that. It’s not the court’s job to legislate.

This is FACT Scook
26 states would be able to make abortion illegal if Roe is overturned .
16 of those states would also be able to make abortion illegal including rape and incest.

Disgusting

ALL states would be able to make abortion legal or illegal and congress could pass a law at the federal level.

You follow the far left doctrine of proclaiming the sanctity of the constitution in cases that support your bias and narrative and ignore it when it suits you.

A…..I’m not “ far left” , I’m a centrist with a few so called liberal positions including our environment.

B…. As I ACCURATELY stated , 26 states would make abortion illegal and 17 would even outlaw in cases of rape and incest. Disgusting .

And as I accurately said, you proclaim the sanctity of the constitution but ignore it when it suits you.

If Roe is overturned that will put the abortion question right back where it belongs. In the hands of the people of ALL 50 states who, by elections, can decide for themselves if they do or do not want abortion to be legal in the state they live in. That's called DEMOCRACY.

EACH state can make laws to make abortion legal or illegal, and can over time, reverse their laws as the people of that state see fit. It's the same for all 50 states.

.

You can't even spell it.

Roe - Wade

Roe verses Wade and Casey verses Planned Parenthood.

.

Disgusting control freaks forcing abominable rules upon women and their families

I agree that the states, where this issue is legally dealt with, should make reasonable provision for the physical health of the mother, and in cases of rape and incest, while remembering that a life is still being taken.

It’s despicable and abominable to be murdering human babies for convenience, after a woman DOESN’T exercise control over her body. It would be a productive effort to make adoption a reasonable thing for regular, non-wealthy people to do - there’s a big demand that’s not being accommodated, very much to the detriment of the babies and would be parents.

It’s pretty obvious that supporting adoption in a meaningful way is something that would undermine the left’s doctrine of unlimited abortion - they seem to think it’s better to spend their time attacking an adoption support organization and illegally harassing and threatening Supreme Court justices.

:cry:

Notice that you blame the WOMAN in your post.
Also notice that you don’t come out AGAINST inclusion of rape and incest in abortion laws, you instead call it “ reasonable provisions “ ….
Word games from scook.

I’m PRO CHOICE . No jargon, no word games .

If you see word games anywhere in my post, there's something wrong with you.

I'm pro-life, with reasonable safeguards. You're pro murder of babies - no jargon or word games, I'll give you that. I find your cavalier attitude toward killing babies to be troubling and despicable.

As for blaming the woman, if a woman is concerned about having choice about her body, a good choice would be to not have unwanted babies. Birth control is cheap and available, and actually exercising control over what is done with and to her body is a very good practice to avoid becoming pregnant.

There are honest people arguing both sides of the issue, but wholesale killing of human beings isn't an ethical way of dealing with what is almost always irresponsible behavior.

“ cavalier attitude “ says scook.

You’re wrong as usual - I’m pro choice , nothing “ cavalier “ about it .
Just my position…….which is also the majorities position.

Certainly cavalier about human life, and I don’t think the majority supports your extreme lack of concern about murdering babies.

Abortion is just another nice word for murder. 53,000,000 babies have been murdered since Roe was adopted. It's been estimated that 70,000,000 million people died in WWII. So we are on track to murder more people (babies ARE people) than died in WWII... Anyone that feels pride in that is sick and should burn in hell..

Here's an interesting tid-bit of information. According to Planned Parenthood, 438 out of every 1000 abortions are African American. Just a little less than 50%. Yet African American's only account for 18% or the population. Perhaps if there was more responsibility taken that statistic might be more in line with national percentages. I mean, why use protection if you can just go and have an abortion whenever you want. Just sayin'

.

Approx 600,000 abortions per year. Who’s to adopt all those unwanted babies ?
Who’s going to pay the welfare ?
Life begins at conception ? A mass of cells with potential to form a human isn’t quite murdering babies .

A mass of cells? Pretty well organized mass, given that barring a significant anomaly, ALWAYS turn into what you recognize as a human person.

You must have missed my post about the horrible adoption process - lots of normal, non-wealthy families want to adopt but it’s an impossibly difficult, heartbreaking and expensive process. Maybe work on that problem, as I have previously suggested and you are as usual pretending not to have heard, instead of murdering innocent children.

Oh now it’s “ murdering children “ ……a mass of cells.
Roe-Wade CONSTITUTIONAL FEDERAL LAW until trumps court appointees go against the Will of the majority of Americans .