Doc Posted February 22 Posted February 22 3 hours ago, John from Riverside said: First of all, if you take a look at the polls after elections, you will see that women’s rights is right there at the forefront It’s easy to put it on Republicans because they are ones that asked for immigration reform and then killed the bill It’s a bad look I'm talking about right now, John, not almost a year and a half ago. It's not top-10. And Joke/the Dems are totally responsible for the 8M illegals in the country since Joke took over (with probably another 3M coming this/his final year) because of what he did on Day One with his EO's. And that's why a border bill isn't necessary. 1
BillStime Posted February 22 Posted February 22 17 minutes ago, Doc said: I'm talking about right now, John, not almost a year and a half ago. It's not top-10. Our resident Independent and Doc is rather delusional today.
Tommy Callahan Posted February 28 Posted February 28 Still crazy how this all started with a dem PAC using over a 15 week limit. Where are the children? 1
B-Man Posted February 29 Posted February 29 John Kennedy Gets Pro-Abortion Professor to Make Stunning Admission By Madeline Leesman In the hearing, Prof. Caitlin Myers, a professor of economics at Middlebury College, claimed that not allowing women to obtain abortions impacts the economy because it hinders a woman’s “ability to plan if and when to become mothers,” according to her testimony. Myers was invited to the hearing by Senate Democrats. Kennedy pressed Myers on her stance after she agreed that “reproductive justice is economic justice.” “That’s not true for the baby, is it?” Kennedy said. “Well, first of all, I would refer to a fetus, not a baby,” she answered. “As an economist, I measure effects using data…I’m not here to talk about ethics, assignment of personhood, that’s not my role,” she added. “There’s no economic justice for the baby, because the baby’s dead. Right?” Kennedy retorted. “I don’t really know how to answer your question,” Myers responded. “I would refer to it as a fetus.” “Is the baby dead or alive?” “We’re referring to a fetus.” “Is the fetus dead or alive after an abortion?” Myers paused. “The fetus would be dead after an abortion,” she said. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/madelineleesman/2024/02/28/reproductive-rights-hearing-n2635837 1
BillStime Posted February 29 Posted February 29 Remember the last time the Supreme Court fkd around during a major election year?
Tiberius Posted March 1 Posted March 1 These MAGA nuts have just lost their minds https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/03/01/ivf-embryos-alabama-ruling-conservative-women/ Late last Saturday, after she’d put her two toddlers to bed in central North Carolina, Hannah Nelson spotted a troubling post in her Instagram feed: “The Alabama ruling & a Christian consideration of IVF.” “Being pro-life does not mean ‘have babies through whatever means necessary’,” a Christian influencer had written of the recent ruling by Alabama’s Supreme Court that frozen embryos are children — a decision invoking God that quickly upended IVF treatment in the state, panicked many women there and elsewhere and sent legislators scrambling to respond. Nelson, who conceived her son through IVF, is not normally political online. Her Instagram profile reads “Jesus follower. Wife. Mama. Optimist. School counselor.” But that post by Allie Beth Stuckey, who has more than a half-million followers, shocked and saddened her, and she felt compelled to push back. “There is an ethical and Christian way to do IVF,” she wrote. “I am curious why you’re against that means of creating a family.” Across red-state America, other conservative Christian women have had similar reactions since the Feb. 16 court ruling. Like Nelson, they usually post online about faith and family. In the past two weeks, though, they’ve become outspoken, even angry advocates. They’ve decried the Alabama ruling on their social media pages, galvanized to defend both their values and in vitro fertilization. Their comments have often appeared amid photos of the babies that IVF made possible. Nelson, 30, resorted to the procedure after years of struggling with endometriosis. Her Instagram feed includes photos of her son’s embryo and then of 3-year-old Brent as a baby. (His onesie proclaimed “For this child we have prayed.”) She was able to conceive naturally with her second child, but she and her husband still have four embryos frozen that she plans to use someday. “I never thought [IVF] was so polarizing. There’s mamas who I just truly believe are meant to be mamas that can’t do it without IVF,” said Nelson, a school counselor. She thinks the procedure “can be used for God’s glory” — and that “it’s best for the government to keep its hands out of it.” In Pensacola, Fla., Emily Ley felt “a responsibility” to speak up — not only because she and her husband have friends across the border in Alabama whose IVF treatment was disrupted but because they’re worried about the implications for others. “It’s only a matter of time before it starts to happen in other states. It just terrifies me,” she said. The mother of three, who owns her own business, typically posts online about home organization to her 235,000 Instagram followers. She considers herself fiscally conservative yet socially liberal and most times stays away from political subjects. Not right now.
Tommy Callahan Posted March 1 Posted March 1 Aw. Wa po found an outlier then ran with it as the voice of hundreds of thousands of women. good example of how far Wa-Po has fallen. or was it an opinion piece?
SCBills Posted March 1 Posted March 1 Libs gonna rant about an outlier state like Alabama nonstop. It’s no more extreme that the abortion laws in deep blue states where there’s barely any protection for babies at any point during the pregnancy. The reality is, sounds like Trump may push for a 15 week abortion ban.. which is right around where polling flips from Dem favorability to Republican favorability. When it comes down to this issue.. where Trump v Biden stand is where it will go, not Cali anytime abortion vs Alabama IVF nonsense. 1
Tommy Callahan Posted March 1 Posted March 1 How does he make it federal if the courts ruled that it's a state issue? Seems like it would be struck down under the same reasoning. I do agree they will focus hard on Southern states. Do women not vote in the south? Alabama?
SCBills Posted March 1 Posted March 1 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said: How does he make it federal if the courts ruled that it's a state issue? Seems like it would be struck down under the same reasoning. I do agree they will focus hard on Southern states. Do women not vote in the south? Alabama? I have no idea. Both Trump and Biden are apparently going to aim to federalize or maybe make a national law as a starting point. The entire premise of overthrow Roe v Wade was to send it to the states. “Do women vote in the South?” This is where media/Dem manipulation plays in… Look at polling on this issue broken down between male and female. Men & Women are typically within a few points of each other on the issue itself, and - more importantly - when it should be legal/illegal. So women do vote in the South ha.. but alot of women down here are conservative and/or married, which typically lends itself to voting more along pro-life lines. Given the Democrats entire base now seems to be unmarried women, this issue can generate higher turnout in other parts of the country .. but the South is not abortion-obsessed. More people are religious and while they may be pro-choice, they can stomach crossing over to vote for a Brian Kemp or Ron DeSantis, Henry McMaster etc., because they prioritize other issues higher. In summary, yes women in the South vote. But the Dems heavy edge on unmarried women narrows down here where more are conservative and/or religious plus a higher amount of politically active married women. Edited March 1 by SCBills 1
Pokebball Posted March 1 Posted March 1 On 2/22/2024 at 6:30 AM, Doc said: No, it's not John. Illegal immigration is tied for 1st and that's why the Dems suddenly started admitting there's a crisis at the border and are trying to pin it on Repubs. So obvious as well. Dems must think we're all stupid 2
Doc Posted March 1 Posted March 1 2 hours ago, Pokebball said: So obvious as well. Dems must think we're all as stupid as they are. FIFY 1
The Frankish Reich Posted March 26 Posted March 26 Listening to the abortion pill/Mifepristone arguments before the Supreme Court (streaming now on the SCt website). So far, I can say that Garland's Solicitor General, Elizabeth Prelogar, is doing a superb job. She has an answer - supported by law and the record in the case - for all of the questions coming from the conservative justices. It is a very politically charged issue, but I can't really see a basis for the Supreme Court to allow a ban. 1 1
The Frankish Reich Posted March 26 Posted March 26 Sen Josh Hawley's wife is arguing for the Mifepristone ban - I wasn't aware of that until now. She's doing ok with a really difficult argument, but overall pretty unpersuasive.
Tiberius Posted March 27 Posted March 27 Democrats won a seat in Alabama yesterday in a deep red district running on reproductive rights HA HA https://www.cbsnews.com/news/marilyn-lands-alabama-special-election-abortion/ Washington — Democrat Marilyn Lands won a special election for an Alabama state House seat late Tuesday, flipping a Republican-held seat in the deep-red state in the aftermath of a court ruling in the state that threw access to fertility treatments into question. Lands, a mental health counselor, made reproductive rights central to her campaign. She's spoken openly about her own abortion when her pregnancy was nonviable. And she ran advertisements on reproductive health care, like contraception and in vitro fertilization, being threatened in the state, after an Alabama Supreme Court ruling that equated frozen embryos to children and led major IVF providers in the state to pause fertility treatments.
ChiGoose Posted March 27 Author Posted March 27 On 3/26/2024 at 10:11 AM, The Frankish Reich said: Sen Josh Hawley's wife is arguing for the Mifepristone ban - I wasn't aware of that until now. She's doing ok with a really difficult argument, but overall pretty unpersuasive. I wasn't able to follow it too closely, but from what I can tell, the argument for standing is extremely weak. Do you think they even reach the merits in the final decision or will it be dismissed for lack of proper standing?
Recommended Posts