Ever read the Tenth Amendment? That’s the crux of the argument that Roe was a mistake. It should never have even been a federal issue.
roe v wade, don't take the bait
- Thread starter rmdelta1
- Start date
Ha ha! Flailey made another gender joke! Flailey looooooooves posts about cock. I bet you'd like to inspect the little kiddie dicks and certify which kid is which gender. That's your calling, pediatric gender assignment!
Dang, the board's dickbreath is once again focused on penis. Who would have guessed that?
Are you one of the dumbasses that think doctors assign sex? It looks like you are.
What is a "woman," syskaqueef?
A hint... a woman is something you've never encountered outside of your mom...
Yes.
Ever read the Fourteenth and/or the Ninth Amendments? That is where a woman's right to choose abortion is found. Which is why the Tenth Amendment doesn't apply.
Can you share the parts of the Fourteenth and/or Ninth that talk about abortion? K, thanks, cOuNsElOr.
As an lol moment...
FLASHBACK: Biden backed amendment to overturn Roe v. Wade as a senator
FLASHBACK: Biden backed amendment to overturn Roe v. Wade as a senator
President Biden on Tuesday weighed in on the leaked Supreme Court opinion draft that would strike down Roe v. Wade, saying he believes that “a woman’s right to choose is fundamental.”
Now do the guy that died from the covid shot.
I know those amendments. In fact, they were part of my review for the STAAR test this week. Care to quote the parts that say anything about abortion rights.
Abortion, the word, is not used n the Constitution, just as the words right to privacy, interracial marriage, homosexual marriage, birth control, etc. are not used in the Constitution. However, the constitutional and legal principles that are the basis for these issues/rights are.
"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" - Fourteenth Amendment, Due Process Clause, provides a fundamental right to privacy that protects a woman's liberty to choose whether to have an abortion.
I'm going to guess that you are focused in the liberty word. Those things are not property. Which means ironically you skipped the life part and went right on past that to liberty. Not sure you want to use this amendment. It has arguements for both sides in it.
While you are looking for another place how about you tie those things to liberty? I would like to see how you pretzel your way through that.
Still defaulting to the 10th.
Has the Supreme Court ever ruled that a fetus at all stages of pregnancy is entitled to the protection of the Due Process Clause because of the word life? Even Alito didn't make such an argument in his draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade. If this was going to be the reasoning from the Supreme Court, Alito's draft opinion would ban all abortions throughout the country. It doesn't do that though.
I don't have to look for another place. I've provided you where the right is found and what has been the settled legal precedent.
As for your question, sorry, but I don't understand what you are asking here. Please clarify your question a bit more and I would be glad to answer it.
No reason to default to the Tenth because we have the Fourteenth.
^^^^^^^ Loves his some Baby Killing. Haven't seen him this worked up since Desantis stopped the Grooming of kids.
Another theory that some are suggesting...
This draft opinion is dated Feb. 10. Which means a lot has taken place behind close doors since then. There has been reporting that Roberts was/is trying to forge a middle compromise position. In order to do this though, he would need one or more of the other conservative justices to break with Alito. What if this was close to happening, and the leak came from someone trying to stop any conservative deflections to a proposed Roberts' position?
By leaking the draft, the leaker could be hoping that the four justices aligned with Alito will now consider it very costly to break with Alito. If they now break with Alito, many people will believe (especially conservatives) that they changed their vote in response to the public reaction to the draft opinion. This leak could, then, be meant to keep any of those four justices from breaking with Alito.
Tie right to privacy, interracial marriage, homosexual marriage, birth control, etc. to liberty. Also what is your definition of the word liberty in the context of the 14th.
Ask yourself if you would like to have been aborted. I've never met a person who would have preferred to have been aborted but I have met some that should have been.
I am the byproduct of a injured WWII soldier and a nurse. In those days abortion was thankfully illegal, my mother was born and given up for adoption. She was fortunate to have been adopted by two loving people that I fondly call my grandparents. We know little to nothing about my mother's biological parents but we are thankful for being created. To think my mother, myself and my children would not be on this earth if abortion had been legal in those days provides me with a unique perspective on the abortion issue that not many have.
Supreme Court leak confirms Ruth Bader Ginsburg's prescient warning about Roe v. Wade
www.foxnews.com
Supreme Court leak confirms Ruth Bader Ginsburg's prescient warning about Roe v. Wade
The unprecedented leak of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's draft opinion in a key case striking down Roe v. Wade (1973) has sparked a heated debate, perhaps drawing new attention to the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's opinion on the key abortion precedent.
Alito's opinion effectively reverses what Ginsburg described as fashioning a new "regime" on abortion – a move that would be unnecessary had the court instead proceeded to work with state legislatures and Congress to hammer out compromises on abortion.
Exactly. The problem we have is the extremes on both side are very vocal and receive all the attention, while the majority of people in the middle do not have their opinions heard. Time to tell the extremes to STFU and lets work on a compromise that the majority can live with.
Exactly. The problem we have is the extremes on both side are very vocal and receive all the attention, while the majority of people in the middle do not have their opinions heard. Time to tell the extremes to STFU and lets work on a compromise that the majority can live with.
Maybe it’s time for a case to go before the SCOTUS that protects the rights of an unborn child. In my opinion, once it has a heartbeat it is a living child. Just because it can’t live on its own doesn’t mean it should be open to having its life snuffed out. There are lots of people living today that can’t survive without help. Is it okay to kill them, too?
That would definitely have an interesting affect on Mexican tourism to the US
There is some precedent to this as there have been people who murder someone who is pregnant that have been charged with two murders.
Why is griswold relevant? Contraception, by its very etymology (preventing conception) does not involve the destruction of human life.
Nah. You can quote it, copy/paste, or whatever you'd like. Or don't. Shrug.
I didn't think you answered it, I took it as a dodge. No offense but, in no place during your answer to my post did you actually answer any question.
What in the world does this have to do with anything? Absolutely nothing.
A deeply personal story for you and your family. I don't believe anyone (including the government) should have forced your grandmother to have an abortion.
Millions of others though are also living their lives with their own personal stories and contexts. Including women. They shouldn't be forced by you or the government to align with your family's personal choices, history, or personal opinions on this issue. Your situation is not their situations. No government should force them to have an abortion or forbid them from having an abortion. This is a deeply personal issue (as you noted), therefore, it should be left up to women to make.
Last edited:
Once again, a large majority of Americans believe Roe v. Wade should not be overturned. This draft opinion by Alito represents an extreme position not held by a large majority of Americans, including those in the middle.
So why don't you tell Alito and his fellow extremists to "STFU" and allow the acceptable compromise that a majority already wants to live with to remain in place?
They essentially already have such a case. Alito and the other four reactionary justices could easily rule the way you want them to
But Alito's draft opinion doesn't do that.
Last edited:
Have you read the draft opinion?
Griswold matters because of the legal framework that Alito presents in his argument to overturn Roe v. Wade.
It is literally a few posts above this one. If you are too lazy to scroll up and read it, that is on you.
You don't really care about the answer anyways.
I did answer it.
I cited Alito's draft opinion and the precedent of the Supreme Court. Such an argument has never been endorsed by a Supreme Court ruling, not even in Alito's draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.
Bingo. I'm very sure that it's nothing but your usual prattle.
