Demongyz

Why? Or a gunman showed up to Kavenagh's house with a gun and intent to kill.

I support easier and cheaper adoptions. I support feeding children. I don't think we should increase taxes, I think we should spend money more wisely. How many kids could we feed with $40B?

-Stalin

I typically vote on 1A and 2A so never a Democrat. I'm personally anti-abortion, but don't vote based on abortion. I'm happy that it's going to be banned in many states and not happy that they will be killing 5 year olds in others, but the federal system exists for a reason and I support that.

Jennifer Rubin is a lying hack.

Plants too!

Even RBG thought Roe was trash. It's not based on law. The 2nd amendment should be cause for the SCOTUS to overturn any law restricting firearms. If a state decides to ban invitro fertilization, I suppose they could, but the feds could not. It seems to be a bit misguided, it's not like killing babies, it's creating babies. I think a state should be able to ban doctors from performing trans surgeries just like I think a state can allow it. I'm against mutilating people because of their gender dysmorphia, but I suppose that is their choice. The difference as I see it between the two is that a fetus has unique DNA separate from both parents. It is a human life and thus should be protected.

Morality will never be on the side of killing babies.

Are babies alive after a miscarriage?

Religion doesn't need to be a part of the decision. 1st there was no federal law on abortion passed by congress, Roe V Wade created law and that isn't the job of the court. It had to fall. It is the states that set the law, the feds need to be reduced to what is outlined in the constitution and nothing more.

Yes, and that's the way it is. In some states they will allow abortion with no extenuating factors up until the point of birth.

Begrudgingly, I agree. It's the saddest thing I can think of.

Unless it comes to a vaccine? The federal government doesn't have to consider a fetus a person, but states can. If a pregnant woman gets punched in the stomach and loses the baby should the assailant be prosecuted for murder? I'm not saying mothers should give up organs to save their child, but I would say a good mother would. No, people should not be forced to donate organs, but they should. No, I don't think a mother should be forced to carry the baby to term if it would mean the death of the mother, but I would recommend attempting to deliver the baby alive instead of decapitating it then delivering it. End the pregnancy, not the life in all possible cases.

I may be wrong about more babies being born, I hope I'm right. I expect they will still provide the care needed for miscarriages, I can't imagine why they would not.

Kentanji Brown Jackson doesn't even know what a woman is.

Your state doesn't have to do anything. They can choose to do as they will. Also, wouldn't one hope that fetuses would get proper healthcare in all states without the option of murdering them? You are absolutely wrong. The Republic is the only reason why minorities have any rights at all.

Harry Reid did this for everything but Supreme Court, then McConnel and Trump expanded it to Supreme court in 2017 according to this article. https://marketrealist.com/p/can-you-filibuster-a-supreme-court-nomination/

This wouldn't be so bad for states to be able to do what they want. I don't know why New York and California should tell people how to live in South Dakota.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZcZIMhjD0k Here you go.

What are you talking about? Harry Reid did this. Edit: I'm wrong, they did it for everything but Supreme Court, you are correct, It was Trump and McConnell. Everyone is boneheaded.

Except the opinion states they aren't going to even though Thomas believes it's none of the Feds business.

West Wendover Nevada will have abortion clinics next to the casinos for all the Utahites to get abortions. I wonder if they will make adoptions easier and cheaper, that would be great. Maybe the US can reproduce at a fast enough rate to replace the population going forward.

This happened in 1960 and it wasn't a big deal then. Similarly, in Hawaii, official results showed Nixon winning by a small margin of 141 votes, with the state being called for him early Wednesday morning. Acting Governor James Kealoha certified the Republican electors, and they cast Hawaii's three electoral votes for Nixon. However, clear discrepancies existed in the official electoral tabulations, and Democrats petitioned for a recount in Hawaii circuit court.[76] The court challenge was still ongoing at the time of the Electoral Count Act's safe harbor deadline, but Democratic electors still convened at the ʻIolani Palace on the constitutionally-mandated date of December 19 and cast their votes for Kennedy.[76] The recount, completed before Christmas, resulted in Kennedy being declared winner by 115 votes. On December 30, the circuit court ruled that Hawaii's three electoral votes should go to Kennedy. It was decided that a new certificate was necessary, with only two days remaining before Congress convened on January 6, 1961, to count and certify the Electoral College votes. A letter to Congress saying a certificate was on the way was rushed out by registered air mail. Both Democrat and Republican electoral votes from Hawaii were presented for counting on January 6, 1961, and Vice President Nixon who presided over the certification, graciously, and saying "without the intent of establishing a precedent",[77] requested unanimous consent that the Democratic votes for Kennedy to be counted.[78][79] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_presidential_election Nixon picked the Dems against himself. What a champ!

Perhaps. At least they were attempting to take actions that were illegal. I don't know if any of this matters much, pretty much everything that happens in DC is illegal. Pennsylvania changed their voting procedures illegally according to their constitution. Texas sued them and the Supreme Court wouldn't hear the suit. I guess it's probably not within their scope, but I'm not a legal expert. The fact of the matter is Trump lost and flailed around like a loser. In my mind he can join Hillary and Al in the sore loser group and that is enough. If we can find Trump caused the violence and tried to overthrow the government, great, other than that it's business as usual.

You are wrong. 100% totally wrong. Also, I'm sure you are totally right, you probably have multiple doctorates in how to misconstrue clear text and make a ton of money being full of *****.