Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Judism recognizes life at birth, not conception.

So why are Christian beliefs being given preferential treatment over my beliefs?

This ruling goes against religious freedom and is thus unconstitutional.

I think there need to be criminal referrals for perjury made to DoJ for Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett because THEY ALL LIED UNDER OATH. There should be immediate impeachment hearings started against them - Clinton was impeached for less. They need to be removed from SCOTUS and any decisions that they drove the majority on should be considered illegitimate as their nominations were illegitimate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Judism recognizes life at birth, not conception.

So why are Christian beliefs being given preferential treatment over my beliefs?

This ruling goes against religious freedom and is thus unconstitutional.

I think there need to be criminal referrals for perjury made to DoJ for Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett because THEY ALL LIED UNDER OATH. There should be immediate impeachment hearings started against them - Clinton was impeached for less. They need to be removed from SCOTUS and any decisions that they drove the majority on should be considered illegitimate as their nominations were illegitimate.

Anonymous wrote:Judism recognizes life at birth, not conception.

So why are Christian beliefs being given preferential treatment over my beliefs?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t have a vagina or a medical degree your vote shouldn’t count for womens health issues. Further, womens health issues shouldn’t be up for a vote at all. Period.

If you don’t have a penis you cannot judge the actions of a man. Word.

No, because I don’t have male anatomy I can’t judge someone who develops prostate cancer for how he chooses to manage it. It’s a situation that will never apply to me and I don’t know any of the scientific or personal/emotional context, so why would I think MY opinion mattered? If my husband, Heaven forbid, ever gets prostate cancer, the choice of how to treat it will be his choice because it’s his body and he gets to decide what happens to it.

You dare equate pregnancy’s to prostate cancer? Rot in hell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Banning abortion is tie result of decades of methodical planning by conservatives. The Supreme Court is solidly conservative and will remain so for a generation. Win or lose at the ballot, conservative court will force conservative policies on the nation, just as the formerly liberal court did in the second half of the 1900s. Democrats politicized the court and now conservatives are beating them at their own game. There is nothing democrats can do about it, except adjust to their new reality. These are the facts.

When did democrats politicize the court?

Dem states should ignore the court, just like red states have continuously done. If that specific gun regulation in NY is not permitted, try another version and let it work it’s way to the courts. Then write a slightly different one, and so on.

Substantive due process, roe v wade, interpreting the commerce clause to allow the massive growth of the administrative state, etc. These are all areas where the court gave up on any sort of actual legal analysis and just started issuing political sections with no legitimate justification. Conservatives have been developing originalism as a principled alternative. Liberal justices have no theory of interpretation, just a naked results oriented approach. And now they no longer have the votes.

Originalism is the greatest farce I’ve ever seen. There is nothing principled or even historically accurate about it. The framers would have never tolerated the state interfering with their most precious property (that is - their wives and kids) in the way Texas et al have done. If you have no right to keep the state out of the body of your wife, who cares about your house or your papers? Especially when it’s the PAPISTS they fled from in Europe that are doing it?! (England’s bloody religious battles would have been living memory for them). Nope nope nope.

Why was abortion illegal at the time then?

It wasn’t illegal. You have been subjected to disinformation. Laws against abortion in the United States did not get imposed until the mid-19th century.

Anonymous wrote:Good. Arrests have been made. Now, follow up with prosecution.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Banning abortion is tie result of decades of methodical planning by conservatives. The Supreme Court is solidly conservative and will remain so for a generation. Win or lose at the ballot, conservative court will force conservative policies on the nation, just as the formerly liberal court did in the second half of the 1900s. Democrats politicized the court and now conservatives are beating them at their own game. There is nothing democrats can do about it, except adjust to their new reality. These are the facts.

If the Dema were as dirty and unethical as the Reps, they can simply stack the court. Which I would be fully in support of at this point.

The Trump appointees should be impeached for demonstrably lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Time for Dems to develop a backbone and play as dirty as they do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Banning abortion is tie result of decades of methodical planning by conservatives. The Supreme Court is solidly conservative and will remain so for a generation. Win or lose at the ballot, conservative court will force conservative policies on the nation, just as the formerly liberal court did in the second half of the 1900s. Democrats politicized the court and now conservatives are beating them at their own game. There is nothing democrats can do about it, except adjust to their new reality. These are the facts.

If the Dema were as dirty and unethical as the Reps, they can simply stack the court. Which I would be fully in support of at this point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t have a vagina or a medical degree your vote shouldn’t count for womens health issues. Further, womens health issues shouldn’t be up for a vote at all. Period.

If you don’t have a penis you cannot judge the actions of a man. Word.

No, because I don’t have male anatomy I can’t judge someone who develops prostate cancer for how he chooses to manage it. It’s a situation that will never apply to me and I don’t know any of the scientific or personal/emotional context, so why would I think MY opinion mattered? If my husband, Heaven forbid, ever gets prostate cancer, the choice of how to treat it will be his choice because it’s his body and he gets to decide what happens to it.

You dare equate pregnancy’s to prostate cancer? Rot in hell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t have a vagina or a medical degree your vote shouldn’t count for womens health issues. Further, womens health issues shouldn’t be up for a vote at all. Period.

If you don’t have a penis you cannot judge the actions of a man. Word.

No, because I don’t have male anatomy I can’t judge someone who develops prostate cancer for how he chooses to manage it. It’s a situation that will never apply to me and I don’t know any of the scientific or personal/emotional context, so why would I think MY opinion mattered? If my husband, Heaven forbid, ever gets prostate cancer, the choice of how to treat it will be his choice because it’s his body and he gets to decide what happens to it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the left was against slut shaming? But somehow it becomes okay and viral worthy to out a then underage teenager’s sex life and abortion.

No one said she was a slut. She’s a filthy hypocrite. Much worse.

To be fair, Ivanka's abortion would still be legal in states with an incest exception.

Yes, Trump is gross about his daughter, but incest is never a joke. It is a horrifying form of abuse that ruins a person’s entire life.

— daughter of an incest survivor

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Banning abortion is tie result of decades of methodical planning by conservatives. The Supreme Court is solidly conservative and will remain so for a generation. Win or lose at the ballot, conservative court will force conservative policies on the nation, just as the formerly liberal court did in the second half of the 1900s. Democrats politicized the court and now conservatives are beating them at their own game. There is nothing democrats can do about it, except adjust to their new reality. These are the facts.

When did democrats politicize the court?

Dem states should ignore the court, just like red states have continuously done. If that specific gun regulation in NY is not permitted, try another version and let it work it’s way to the courts. Then write a slightly different one, and so on.

Substantive due process, roe v wade, interpreting the commerce clause to allow the massive growth of the administrative state, etc. These are all areas where the court gave up on any sort of actual legal analysis and just started issuing political sections with no legitimate justification. Conservatives have been developing originalism as a principled alternative. Liberal justices have no theory of interpretation, just a naked results oriented approach. And now they no longer have the votes.

Originalism is the greatest farce I’ve ever seen. There is nothing principled or even historically accurate about it. The framers would have never tolerated the state interfering with their most precious property (that is - their wives and kids) in the way Texas et al have done. If you have no right to keep the state out of the body of your wife, who cares about your house or your papers? Especially when it’s the PAPISTS they fled from in Europe that are doing it?! (England’s bloody religious battles would have been living memory for them). Nope nope nope.

Why was abortion illegal at the time then?

It wasn’t illegal. You have been subjected to disinformation. Laws against abortion in the United States did not get imposed until the mid-19th century.

Your head is going to explode when you learn when the Fourteenth Amendment was enacted

Hardly. The pp was asking why abortion was illegal when the constitution was drafted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Banning abortion is tie result of decades of methodical planning by conservatives. The Supreme Court is solidly conservative and will remain so for a generation. Win or lose at the ballot, conservative court will force conservative policies on the nation, just as the formerly liberal court did in the second half of the 1900s. Democrats politicized the court and now conservatives are beating them at their own game. There is nothing democrats can do about it, except adjust to their new reality. These are the facts.

When did democrats politicize the court?

Dem states should ignore the court, just like red states have continuously done. If that specific gun regulation in NY is not permitted, try another version and let it work it’s way to the courts. Then write a slightly different one, and so on.

Substantive due process, roe v wade, interpreting the commerce clause to allow the massive growth of the administrative state, etc. These are all areas where the court gave up on any sort of actual legal analysis and just started issuing political sections with no legitimate justification. Conservatives have been developing originalism as a principled alternative. Liberal justices have no theory of interpretation, just a naked results oriented approach. And now they no longer have the votes.

Originalism is the greatest farce I’ve ever seen. There is nothing principled or even historically accurate about it. The framers would have never tolerated the state interfering with their most precious property (that is - their wives and kids) in the way Texas et al have done. If you have no right to keep the state out of the body of your wife, who cares about your house or your papers? Especially when it’s the PAPISTS they fled from in Europe that are doing it?! (England’s bloody religious battles would have been living memory for them). Nope nope nope.

Why was abortion illegal at the time then?

It wasn’t illegal. You have been subjected to disinformation. Laws against abortion in the United States did not get imposed until the mid-19th century.

Your head is going to explode when you learn when the Fourteenth Amendment was enacted