![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
So, by all means, let's ignore the Constitution when it serves your agenda. While we're at it, let's interpret it to allow for offing poor old grandpa when he becomes inconvenient.
__________________
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), 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. |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
But when the Supreme Court finds that the decision was in error and was bad law (completely unrelated how many people approved or disapproved of the policy, or the policy itself), now it’s what, unconstitutional?
You support the policy and I, for the most part, don’t. I think that, like anyone, a woman has a right to self defense, so no question that if the pregnancy threatens death or serious health problems, it can be terminated. I understand rape and incest, though still lament the ending of a human life. I don’t support murdering babies because they’re inconvenient.
__________________
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Tell you what - you get raped by some guy and let’s say men could get pregnant and see how anxious you are to have it . Men making laws about women ……and the murdering babies bit doesn’t line up with a group of cells with no heart or brain formed yet . |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Another disingenuous response. Yes, I understand rape and incest, but still lament the ending of a life.
You know very well that under the lay you support, fully viable babies have been partially delivered and had their spinal columns snipped to kill them. That’s murder and it’s despicable.
__________________
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Judge holds trump in contempt of court
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|