Roe vs Wade Overturned

[Tiberius]

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Maybe, and maybe not. I’m pretty sure that there'll be dozens of challenges to the progress made by the Court’s recent correction. Were you thinking there wouldn’t be? Relax! Trust the process.

Lol, relax, it's only women's health and life on the line, no big deal at all right? 

 

Jesus has it all under control 

 

You don't care at all 

[Tiberius]

God's will? 

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

44 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Lol, relax, it's only women's health and life on the line, no big deal at all right? 

 

Jesus has it all under control 

 

You don't care at all 

And the same can be said for the Baby’s health and life…but you already know and choose to ignore that inconvenient truth.

[Tiberius]

5 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

And the same can be said for the Baby’s health and life…but you already know and choose to ignore that inconvenient truth.

If the mother dies, they both die. 

 

Isn't that in your bible? 

[SoCal Deek]

59 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

If the mother dies, they both die. 

 

Isn't that in your bible? 

"My Bible"? 

By the way....did you just admit that we've actually been killing babies?  YIKES!

[LeviF]

Once again, I feel compelled to point out that it’s abundantly clear that the left not only hasn’t had to construct a good faith argument for abortion in half a century, but that they likely never have. 
 

It’s the same lies and tropes trotted out again, from “Bible bad!” to fascism to uncles raping their nieces. 

[SoCal Deek]

2 hours ago, LeviF said:

Once again, I feel compelled to point out that it’s abundantly clear that the left not only hasn’t had to construct a good faith argument for abortion in half a century, but that they likely never have. 
 

It’s the same lies and tropes trotted out again, from “Bible bad!” to fascism to uncles raping their nieces. 

Hey, don’t you realize, it takes a whole lot of looking the other way to stay silent while thousands of innocent African American lives are snuffed out day after day after day. But what the heck, one man’s ‘progress’ is another man’s racially targeted extermination. 

[ChiGoose]

14 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Hey, don’t you realize, it takes a whole lot of looking the other way to stay silent while thousands of innocent African American lives are snuffed out day after day after day. But what the heck, one man’s ‘progress’ is another man’s racially targeted extermination. 

If life begins at conception, then God is the single most prolific abortionist in history. 

[BillStime]

 

[SoCal Deek]

13 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

If life begins at conception, then God is the single most prolific abortionist in history. 

Maybe so…but never forget that ‘he’ is God…and you are definitely not! 

[ChiGoose]

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Maybe so…but never forget that ‘he’ is God…and you are definitely not! 

That’s correct. And it’s also correct that I don’t live in a theocracy. 

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

That’s correct. And it’s also correct that I don’t live in a theocracy. 

And down the rabbit hole we go. 

[The Frankish Reich]

3 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

If life begins at conception, then God is the single most prolific abortionist in history. 

“Adam, Cain and Noah find God punitive but soothed by the smell of burnt flesh, mostly animal."

- the late, great Scottish writer Alasdair Gray, in his introduction to a modern reprinting of the books of Jonah, Micah, and Nahum. 
 

[Boatdrinks]

On 7/17/2022 at 4:54 PM, ChiGoose said:

 

By definition, it's not an inalienable right if it can be taken away.

 

 

Part of the purpose of the constitution and the judiciary is to provide a check on the tyranny of the majority. If absolutely everything was left to popular vote, we could usher in some truly terrible things. Where exactly to draw the line between what a legislature can do and what it cannot is a place where reasonable people can (and do) disagree. But to say that everything not explicitly stated in the constitution should be up to the whims of the public means that we do not have a right to privacy. We just have privacy at the leisure of the current government.

 

Also, to say that "nobody is currently advocating for X, therefore people who can be harmed by X shouldn't worry" right after the Supreme Court says "there are no protections against X" is of little comfort to people who could be harmed by it.

 

Not only does Clarence Thomas think that Obergefell should be overturned, but half of the current conservative majority on SCOTUS dissented on that case (the other half were not yet on the Court). There is also a push by some conservative activists to undo gay marriage. Do you think it's unreasonable for married gay couples in red states to be concerned for the legal status of their relationship?

I agree 100% with the first point. I’m not - nor would I ever- advocate for everything being left to popular vote. I doubt many people would. Although we saw plenty of majority tyranny during the Covid hysteria of the last couple years and the left seemed just fine with that. They don’t seem too fond of the electoral college - another check- either. Still, we can tone down the hyperbole a bit. Most things aren’t a cause for concern whether they are explicitly named in the constitution or not. 
  As for the second part, perhaps there is cause for some concern. Perhaps not. This is part of the beauty of our Republic: diversity between states. If one is not to your liking , move to an area where the overall mindset is more suitable. What exactly is the reason for legally recognized “marriage” anyway? It’s likely to encourage offspring, which may become future taxpayers. Is it rooted in religion ? Why would anyone not fond of religious ideas want for this? All things to ponder while deciding whether or not to live in say, Missouri or California. 

[SoCal Deek]

6 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

I agree 100% with the first point. I’m not - nor would I ever- advocate for everything being left to popular vote. I doubt many people would. Although we saw plenty of majority tyranny during the Covid hysteria of the last couple years and the left seemed just fine with that. They don’t seem too fond of the electoral college - another check- either. Still, we can tone down the hyperbole a bit. Most things aren’t a cause for concern whether they are explicitly named in the constitution or not. 
  As for the second part, perhaps there is cause for some concern. Perhaps not. This is part of the beauty of our Republic: diversity between states. If one is not to your liking , move to an area where the overall mindset is more suitable. What exactly is the reason for legally recognized “marriage” anyway? It’s likely to encourage offspring, which may become future taxpayers. Is it rooted in religion ? Why would anyone not fond of religious ideas want for this? All things to ponder while deciding whether or not to live in say, Missouri or California. 

The inalienable rights are those not given to people by government but by the Creator of the Universe. This is NOT complicated. 

Edited July 18, 2022 by SoCal Deek

[The Frankish Reich]

14 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

The inalienable rights are those not given to people by government but by the Creator of the Universe. This is NOT complicated. 

Seek and ye shall find in the Declaration of Independence (not the Constitution). 
“the right to life…” Aha, our founders would have abhorred abortion had they even thought about it as a possibility. 
“liberty ….”  Aha right back at you! Our founders grounded the new breakaway nation in the Enlightenment right to be left alone. 

[ChiGoose]

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

 Aha, our founders would have abhorred abortion had they even thought about it as a possibility. 

(Citation needed)

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

The most strikingly obnoxious part of this debate is there is probably a reasonable policy that 75% of people could live with. 
 

but then you’ve got the extremists shouting past each other on one side; about the ordained miracle of two people rubbing their naughty parts together and god himself riding a tadpole like a steed into an egg 

 

verses..  

 

Abortion should be legal up to their first birthday when I see what color their eyes become….

 

A reasonable compromise on abortion as terrible of a process as it is can prevent a whole lot of negligent, irresponsible and ill fated parenting. 

Edited July 19, 2022 by Over 29 years of fanhood

[L Ron Burgundy]

8 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

And down the rabbit hole we go. 

That's a rabbit hole?  Wtf I thought that was a simple fact.

[ChiGoose]

1 hour ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

 

A reasonable compromise on abortion as terrible of a process as it is can prevent a who lot of negligent irresponsible and I’ll fated parenting. 

Yes, hypothetically, I suppose you could find a compromise where early in the pregnancy, the rights of the mother are prioritized but as the fetus approaches viability, the state has an interest in its rights.