Roe V Wade has been repealed

[SyphenFreht]

Actually no. The government can't say that guns are illegal. because the supreme court has settled this semantic argument a long time ago. Arms = guns, this is a fact. If the house passed a law making guns illegal, it'd be struck down. Because it goes against the constitution.

As someone pointed out. Bodily autonomy is in the constitution under the 4th amendments. The bill of rights was reaffirmed under the 14th amendment. However. Bodily autonomy doesn't mean that you have the right to determine life or death of another body, that being the baby. Not even the court that decided roe v wade suggested this.

Men and Women are inherently different because of.. biology. The fact that women can give birth doesn't mean that they have the right to kill their child.

And, as we've seen as recently before with the recent bill regarding laws being passed through one level already, it seems that if you enact one little law or mandate here or there, eventually it will turn into quite the big issue later down the line. Funny how that also works in terms of stripping away a person's right to what goes on in there own body.

Both of those reasonings stem deeply from an overarching religious point of view. If in the eyes of the Constitution people should have their right to bear arms regardless of emotional attachment, y'know, because it's in the Constitution, then it seems odd that the double standard regarding the reasonings behind valuing the potential of life stem beyond the same emotionless base we've set for operating under.

Youre trying to make an argument that even no gun control advocates have ever seriously pursued. Partly because they're not dense and know it's a loser, but also because it would very likely backfire. "Arms" means guns ... and more!!! Cannons, swords, grenades maybe. But i know what youre thinking .... nuclear weapons? No, sorry. Because nuclear weapons are not ordinary equipment issued to soldiers in wartime. US v Miller, decided in 1939, says the 2nd amendment covers the "ordinary military equipment" of the typical infantry soldier. That phrase, "ordinary military equipment," implies that the arms available to "the people" under the 2nd amendment are of the same type and capability that the military issues to grunt soldiers. So not just AR-15's, but even select fire M4's and full-auto M-16's.

Should we litigate this issue further???

Actually, my thought process was more akin to the multiple, repentant opportunities taken to cover something with so many different labels that it causes you to stray from the logical aspect. I didn't intend to discuss 2A rights in an abortion thread.

Funny how manipulation works, doesn't it? How we continue to have all these convenient bastardizations of the sense of the term to get to where we are now. Of course I'm not going to argue about nuclear weapons, that's absurd. But so is the idea of thinking that it's the same way of thinking when it comes to abortions.

You people attach concepts and feelings and interpretations where you see fit, and it all stems from control. At the very base, an abortion is always guaranteed to be a survival technique, regardless of species, because of the high rate of complications, much less the procedure itself, that can cause death in the host. If the host chooses to abort for any reason, it's basic survival instinct. Taking away a person's right to even have basic control over it's own survival shouldn't have to be in the constitution, it's a basic right to life.

 

[HalfScoper]

Soon, they'll take that away too

Gonna be a lot harder though to track who got it in their butt than who got an abortion, idk what you want to say with that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Elodain]

Soon, they'll take that away too

Meh. It was illegal before and people still did it, weather they cared to admit it or not.

Even if they did ban I doubt that anybody that are already actively doing it are going to think twice about continuing to do it. Those that haven't are a different story, they might be more hesitant. But I can't imagine too many people just saying who have been doing it for years just saying "Welp it's illegal so it's time to stop the buttseks."

I mean it didn't work well with alcohol prohibition so since most people value sex more than alcohol you can imagine it will be even less effective.

 

[ZeroT21]

Gonna be a lot harder though to track who got it in their butt than who got an abortion, idk what you want to say with that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You win this argument for the time being

 

[BitMasterPlus]

A lot of members of this site just had their bodily autonomy taken away. I guarantee you that no fetuses are members of this site, so the only effect on site members has been negative.

You say that as if the government is going house to house with turkey basters, forcibly impregnating women and forcing them to have babies 9 months later with a gun to their heads. Spoiler alert: That's not what's happening. If you don't want a baby, then a. practice safe sex, or b. go drive to a blue state where abortion is still available.

 

[BitMasterPlus]

Jesus, the amount of salt here. If it were real, being a Salt miner would make me a billionaire.

 

[Foxi4]

Says the guy who views slavery as "needed, but they totally only did it for a while while they cursed their own misfortunes and it got fixed eventually so its fine" earlier. Your values are twisted up a bit there, good sir, and I do not believe

Oh man, I wish Roe was still the precedent so that you could abort this failed argument instead of walking into the same river twice. The Constitution was the pride and joy of the Americans and the envy of Europe at the time, it set the trajectory for the introduction of democracy, rule of law and equality across the globe and led to the proliferation of human rights. It was, in historical context, extremely progressive, granting inalienable rights to a formerly persecuted population, even *if* it failed to fully live up to its premise until some time later. This concept shouldn’t be alien to you, considering you (if I recall correctly), worship the Communist Manifesto, a piece of writing that you believe in which didn’t fully live up to its stated goals either. The only difference is that the Constitution was *eventually* fulfilled with the abolition of slavery whereas the Communist Manifesto only succeeded in spreading misery. You are the last person here who can afford moral grandstanding - my sweetheart document created the land of the free, yours created the U.S.S.R., China and North Korea. As far as spreading liberty is concerned, the Constitution was a far more effective tool than anything your idols have ever put on paper or into practice. Now, if you have something to say about abortion, stick to that rather than slavery, considering the fact slavery is still alive and well in China - there’s a whole lot of Muslims who would’ve much preferred to be in America over a Chinese work camp. Before you say “that’s not real communism though”, you can stop right there because we’ve had this conversation before and it’s intensely dull. It’s the *only* communism that exists, nobody’s interested in brain farts that are not applicable to reality.

 

[wartutor]

1. Fetuses TURN INTO PEOPLE, sure, but they aren't there yet.

2. It is, but this always makes it sound a bit misleading. It isn't like women get abortions because of some kind of pride or political motive, it is an EXTREMELY taxing decision with very potent consequences either way. Just like to keep this point clear whenever possible, since some people act like abortions are lazy lady birth control for some reason...

3. All things considered, I don't blame democrats for gas companies exploiting demand without repercussions. That has been going on since as long as any of us have been alive, and is more a fault on capitalism than anything. That being said, you aren't completely wrong about their dropping the ball on this particular issue, they are not stalwart allies in this endeavor... but they also didn't play any hand in making this occurrence a reality. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as a result.

4. The supreme court is made up of people who selectively interprit law and set down precident as per their own biases... or in this case, overturn it despite leading people to believe they wouldn't. Specifically on this point. When asked repeatedly. While being broadcast to the population of the country they're supposed to represent. Making an amendment usually requires wars and/or riots and mass protest, like with women's voting rights and the end of slavery, so Dems get a pinch of leeway there (and only a pinch).

Don't gaslight me, comrade, this is an attack from the right. Even if the Dems didn't defend the people's rights as well as they should have, they also didn't throw out the betrayal to begin with.

I agrea with you and you still dont get it and accuse me of gas lighting. Tell me one thing a democrat has tried to do about this legal wise cause all i have seen is them screaming into cameras and deviding people trying to scrap up votes. Get into the office and start doing your fuckin job and get the ball rolling because no matter what anyone thinks this decision really shouldnt of been left to the court to decide. Start filing shit that you should of started a month or two ago when u was still screaming in the camera and trying to devide people for votes. Truthfully both sides are guilty of it and thats why nothing ever actually gets done in our government.

 

[Viri]

Jesus, the amount of salt here. If it were real, being a Salt miner would make me a billionaire.

Nah, too much salt. The price of salt wouldn't be worth it. It's like having your planet made of diamonds.

 

[Acid_Snake]

Wow... um... you know, women are people too, and most women are leftists to boot! And fun fact, women WANT the right to an abortion because NO SHIT ABORTIONS SUCK BUT THE ALTERNATIVES CAN BE WORSE! Bringing a life into the world is a huge deal, and particularly in a country that is sliding further and further into financial oblivion for the majority. I might have wanted another child if it wasn't for the fact that it might be too big a financial strain, and I work in IT for the government! You don't often get much more middle-class financial stability in the USA!

Please try asking somebody about their experience before mouthing off like you KNOW something is hypocritical. Also learn how to write. Also if you want somebody to believe women are more than just incubators, listen to them and then politely stand to the side while they tell you they want access to abortions even knowing and maybe even having experienced the pain and mental anguish of one and still not regretting it. Kthx.


The constitution provides a right for a well regulated militia to bare arms... in reference to before the United States had a standing military. Congratulations, you are wrong again. Please do better.

When have I said that women are not people? Is English not your native language? I literally criticized this idea in my post.
You leftists are brain dead and unable to read.
In any case, let me remind you (in case you didn't know or you ignore it), the overwellming mayority of pro-lifers are women.
And it makes sense, it's women who should decide if they wanna be pro-abortion or pro-life, the rest of us can only sit back and shut the fuck up (or make an opinion but not force it).

 

[Acid_Snake]

Havent seen anyone talking about religion. You dont need to be religious to be pro life

Show me a single pro-life post that uses sound and reasoning instead of quoting some religious morals?
You can't, mainly because you can't be pro-life without being a totalitarian feudalist.
There is no way in hell that a sane and resonable person would ever forbid women from having an abortion with all the safety and health guarantees that is required for this complex procedure to minimize risks.
Only a religious zealot would not see how this goes against individual freedom.
I do not want the government to decide over women's body, neither left nor right.

 

[Purple_Shyguy]

Show me a single pro-life post that uses sound and reasoning instead of quoting some religious morals?
You can't, mainly because you can't be pro-life without being a totalitarian feudalist.
There is no way in hell that a sane and resonable person would ever forbid women from having an abortion with all the safety and health guarantees that is required for this complex procedure to minimize risks.
Only a religious zealot would not see how this goes against individual freedom.
I do not want the government to decide over women's body, neither left nor right.

Im not religious at all. I think abortion is only acceptable in cases of rape, incest and if the womans health is in serious threat. Which as you probably know makes up <1% of all abortions.

For the other 99% I feel like killing a human being because its inconvenient for you is wrong. You shouldnt be allowed to decapitate an unborn child because you dont want to take responsibility for your actions. And if you do want to then go to some other country that allows it.

Explain how im a religious zealot.

 

[Jokey_Carrot]

Honestly, my takeaway from this is that if you're a woman/minority in America you really ought to arm yourself.

 

[hippy dave]

Don't think I'm gonna dive back into this shitshow today, but as a parting gift, here's one for the religionists

 

[Purple_Shyguy]

Don't think I'm gonna dive back into this shitshow today, but as a parting gift, here's one for the religionists
View attachment 315398

Maybe YOU should read those scriptures because none of that is what they mean at all. Just yet another example of a person who isnt religious twisting religious texts completely out of context to push their own narrative.

Genesis refers to first breath for the FIRST MAN created. Not every single life.
Numbers does not in any way give instructions on how to perform an abortion its simply a symbolic ceremony regarding a woman sinning from committing adultery.

Exodus literally says a man should be punished if he causes the death of an unborn child. Its actually shocking how you could even take this one so wildly out of context. But then again people who have a rabid animalistic blood lust to kill the unborn will see what they want to see in anything.

 

[hippy dave]

Maybe YOU should read those scriptures because none of that is what they mean at all. Just yet another example of a person who isnt religious twisting religious texts completely out of context to push their own narrative.

Genesis refers to first breath for the FIRST MAN created. Not every single life.
Numbers does not in any way give instructions on how to perform an abortion its simply a symbolic ceremony regarding a woman sinning by from committing adultery.

Exodus literally says a man should be punished if he causes the death of an unborn child. Its actually shocking how you could even take this one so wildly out of context. But then again people who have a rabid animalistic blood lust to kill the unborn will see what they want to see in anything.

I'm glad that my rabid animalistic blood lust is finally getting some recognition, so at least something positive has come out of this thread.

 

[Purple_Shyguy]

I'm glad that my rabid animalistic blood lust is finally getting some recognition, so at least something positive has come out of this thread.

I wasnt referring to you, I was referring to the woman that can take a sentence about a woman losing her child and someone she conceptualizes it in her head that it means that fetuses arent human.

 

[hippy dave]

I wasnt referring to you, I was referring to the woman that can take a sentence about a woman losing her child and someone she conceptualizes it in her head that it means that fetuses arent human.

Aw. Ok then nothing good has come out of this thread.

 

[Purple_Shyguy]

Aw. Ok then nothing good has come out of this thread.

I mean, you're welcome to post something good then instead of shitty twitter screenshots of crazy women posting fake interpretations of bible verses as 'gotchas'.

 

[hippy dave]

I mean, you're welcome to post something good then instead of shitty twitter screenshots of crazy women posting fake interpretations of bible verses as 'gotchas'.

"Fake interpretations"
I know from English lessons interpreting Shakespeare (pulp theatre written to entertain drunk people) as containing multiple profound statements in every sentence that there's always endless ways to interpret any given text, choosing the one that suits you doesn't make it the correct one, unless you've got a personal line to god you haven't mentioned? And we don't need to go into the fact that the bible contradicts itself over and over again on endless subjects because it was written, and rewritten, and translated, and retranslated, over and over by countless fallible humans.