1 in 4 women have abortions? Wow.

quad decade guy

Well-Known Member
Listened to some of the Supreme Court testimony on the MS. abortion law today. The pro abortion lawyer(plaintiff I think) said this statistic.

That's a bunch.

And when the 65,000,000 number gets put out there......wow.

When asked what amendment right or exact language gave the right to an abortion......the plaintiff said "liberty". Really ironic coming from a communist, socialist, liberal Democrat(female). Really ironic. When asked what about killing the baby.....? Deflection. And only the pregnant woman's inconvenience/life changing events must supersede all.
 

NAHimGOOD

Nothing to see here.... Move along.
supernatural-dean-winchester.gif
 

UnionStrong

Sorry, but I don’t care anymore.
Listened to some of the Supreme Court testimony on the MS. abortion law today. The pro abortion lawyer(plaintiff I think) said this statistic.

That's a bunch.

And when the 65,000,000 number gets put out there......wow.

When asked what amendment right or exact language gave the right to an abortion......the plaintiff said "liberty". Really ironic coming from a communist, socialist, liberal Democrat(female). Really ironic. When asked what about killing the baby.....? Deflection. And only the pregnant woman's inconvenience/life changing events must supersede all.
Tragic.
 

quad decade guy

Well-Known Member
It is said that Clarence Thomas doesn't ever say much in court. He was the one asking about Constitutional language and statute/amendments.....

The left's position is clear: Roe set precedent(50 years ago) and that's that. Asked if abortion was always considered "legal" and accepted practice....."Yes, all through history....abortion was common...". Abortion at any time, anywhere for any reason up to and including "inconvenience" must be without question. And ONLY by the mother. With "liberty" having the only hint of constitutionality. Equality made it in there too. Meaning, a woman is not as equal as a man if she can't choose....that childbirth was so potentially life altering that only the mother can decide course. This was reiterated over and over. And their basic strategy. No exception for rape/incest was touched on briefly.

There was discussion of Roe being decided correctly......in the first place. Viability some. The pro abortion folks saying viability could never be established exactly.....so no.

Again, baby's rights or the father or any of that was never discussed.

Discussion of the court should be neutral and leaving it to the "people" or "states". The point was also made of taking sides, meaning law was/could be determined through "politics".

Thoughts....
Official abortions from Roe: 1.5 million per year. Imagine Covid deaths approaching that.....while this goes on year after year after year.....with "people of color" being substantially impacted....being a bit ironic. Think about this number.....65,000,000 deaths from Covid....into perpetuity as an analogy.

I don't think 9 people are smart enough or qualified enough to decide this. With decisions made along party lines/liberalism. With liberals/left always choosing yes.

I don't think religion should have anything to do with this subject.
 

Whither

Scofflaw
When asked what amendment right or exact language gave the right to an abortion......the plaintiff said "liberty". Really ironic coming from a communist, socialist, liberal Democrat(female). Really ironic. When asked what about killing the baby.....? Deflection. And only the pregnant woman's inconvenience/life changing events must supersede all.
Liberty is a foremost concern of the only communists (not Democrats) I care about. (To be clear I don't care about Democrats, I don't care if you're vaxxed, I loathe government.)

You let women have the liberty to practice 'witchcraft' again, and cease and desist with the idiotic 'sex education' that recommends abstinence, you get men on board with 'birth control' methods that don't screw up womens' hormones, you won't have to worry so much about abortion.
 
Last edited:

DriveInDriveOut

Inordinately Right
He could have gone so much farther.

Could have just said it...."There is no constitutional right to an abortion."
The place for that is in the court's decision.

What he did was ask her where the right to abortion was in the Constitution. Repeatedly, and watched her squirm into the corner.

The wisdom of that is it uses her lack of a good argument to bring the other justices all the way over to his side, rather than just preaching his own opinion.
 

quad decade guy

Well-Known Member
The place for that is in the court's decision.

What he did was ask her where the right to abortion was in the Constitution. Repeatedly, and watched her squirm into the corner.

The wisdom of that is it uses her lack of a good argument to bring the other justices all the way over to his side, rather than just preaching his own opinion.
The problem is we are dealing with liberals. Everything is based on liberalism. Constitution be damned. Thomas will never sway the liberals.
 

quad decade guy

Well-Known Member
Liberty is a foremost concern of the only communists (not Democrats) I care about. (To be clear I don't care about Democrats, I don't care if you're vaxxed, I loathe government.)

You let women have the liberty to practice 'witchcraft' again, and cease and desist with the idiotic 'sex education' that recommends abstinence, you get men on board with 'birth control' methods that don't screw up womens' hormones, you won't have to worry so much about abortion.
I've got to be honest....

I'm not clear about your point.

Could you explain it in less nebulous terms?
I'm interested.
 
Top