Dobbs v. Jackson

32,650 Views | 638 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by Cobretti
nein51
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BUgolfbear • 4:57p, 7/14/22
BUgolfbear said:
I have never understood how the Hippocratic oath of "Do no harm" is in sync with abortion providers. Seems to be a contradiction of ideas and a violation of the oath.

It's not at all a disconnect if you don't see a fetus as a person.

The logic is pretty simple; if you birthed at 13 weeks (for example) there would be no child so removing it at 13 weeks is also not removing a child.
Reply Quote
Jack Bauer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:57p, 7/14/22
Mr. Clean is not very bright.

Reply Quote
2
1 edit
Cobretti
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:51p, 7/14/22
Reply Quote
1 edit
303Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Jack Bauer • 11:56p, 7/14/22
Jack Bauer said:
Mr. Clean is not very bright.

JFC, there is no chance. No one in the medical field has ever indicated there is a chance and no laws require carrying an ectopic pregnancy.

To be clear, ectopic pregnancy is NOT a viable pregnancy. It WILL rupture before the child/fetus is developed enough to survive, a rupture is an extreme emergency that will kill any woman not in a hospital when it does (and many that are). No OB/GYN will tell a woman otherwise or counsel anything but termination of pregnancy asap (and it is a surgery to do so, sometimes the tube cannot be saved though techniques and technology get better every year).

And NO law prohibits termination in this situation, it is a red herring and further evidence of the out of touch ignorance that runs this nation.

Source: My wife is an OB/GYN, she takes her board exam in a week and starts working as an attending in one of the best hospitals for women in the country in a little over a month. I am over the moon proud of her.
Reply Quote
9
Forest Bueller_bf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nein51 • 9:51a, 7/15/22
nein51 said:
BUgolfbear said:
I have never understood how the Hippocratic oath of "Do no harm" is in sync with abortion providers. Seems to be a contradiction of ideas and a violation of the oath.

It's not at all a disconnect if you don't see a fetus as a person.

The logic is pretty simple; if you birthed at 13 weeks (for example) there would be no child so removing it at 13 weeks is also not removing a child.


The people that do this procedure know that it is in fact a child.

Just one not able to protect himself outside the womb. But, they are a child.
Reply Quote
1
Harrison Bergeron
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 303Bear • 10:16a, 7/15/22
303Bear said:
Jack Bauer said:
Mr. Clean is not very bright.

JFC, there is no chance. No one in the medical field has ever indicated there is a chance and no laws require carrying an ectopic pregnancy.

To be clear, ectopic pregnancy is NOT a viable pregnancy. It WILL rupture before the child/fetus is developed enough to survive, a rupture is an extreme emergency that will kill any woman not in a hospital when it does (and many that are). No OB/GYN will tell a woman otherwise or counsel anything but termination of pregnancy asap (and it is a surgery to do so, sometimes the tube cannot be saved though techniques and technology get better every year).

And NO law prohibits termination in this situation, it is a red herring and further evidence of the out of touch ignorance that runs this nation.

Source: My wife is an OB/GYN, she takes her board exam in a week and starts working as an attending in one of the best hospitals for women in the country in a little over a month. I am over the moon proud of her.
Correct. A clear sign one side has lost the argument when it basically is making up fake news to promote its agenda.
Reply Quote
4
Redbrickbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:37p, 7/15/22

Reply Quote
J.B.Katz
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:20a, 7/16/22
Reply Quote
Wrecks Quan Dough
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to J.B.Katz • 10:24a, 7/16/22
J.B.Katz said:


And the counterposition is We Will Kill Your Babies and Sell Their Parts. Pretty gruesome on the other side.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
william
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 303Bear • 10:25a, 7/16/22
303Bear said:
Jack Bauer said:
Mr. Clean is not very bright.

JFC, there is no chance. No one in the medical field has ever indicated there is a chance and no laws require carrying an ectopic pregnancy.
......
Source: My wife is an OB/GYN, she takes her board exam in a week and starts working as an attending in one of the best hospitals for women in the country in a little over a month. I am over the moon proud of her.
double bonus points if she's an arby's gal.

- KKM

{ sipping coffee }

{ eating organic toast }
Go Bears!
Reply Quote
1
Canada2017
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to J.B.Katz • 10:38a, 7/16/22
J.B.Katz said:
Ask these foster children if they would have rather been killed before they emerged through the birth canal .
Reply Quote
2
4th and Inches
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to J.B.Katz • 10:54a, 7/16/22
J.B.Katz said:
tell me you know nothing about the foster care system without telling me you know nothing about the foster care system..

As a foster parent who has been trained and worked with FPS and CPS, you better research the goals of the state foster care system before making ridiculus comments you know nothing about..
“Mix a little foolishness with your serious plans. It is lovely to be silly at the right moment.”

–Horace


“Insomnia sharpens your math skills because you spend all night calculating how much sleep you’ll get if you’re able to ‘fall asleep right now.’ “
Reply Quote
8
Porteroso
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Wrecks Quan Dough • 2:22p, 7/16/22
He Hate Me said:
Porteroso said:
He Hate Me said:
Porteroso said:
Forest Bueller_bf said:
Jack Bauer said:
Cobretti said:

I'm literally shaking to my core after seeing these pics of so-called, quote-unquote, "pregnancy centers."

Thank you, Pocahontas, for standing up against so much evil.



Fake Native is simply a fool who has found a way to grift herself into wealth. She sounds like she is demon possesed here.

It also shoots to hell the straight from satan leftist notion that Evangelicals/conservatives don't care about the child after they are born. These centers outnumber Abortion Centers 3 to 1 without government funding. They provide years of support, free support for these mothers. And where do you think their money comes from. Conservative Evangelical individuals and Churches of all kinds.

And Moloch here wants to do away with all of them.


The fact that so many couples rushed to tweet pictures of themselves holding signs "don't abort we will adopt your baby!" when the foster care system is so overloaded really undermines your position.

There are tens of thousands of kids anyone could adopt in the US, millions world wide, but have these couples gone through foster training? Have they googled it? No, because if they had, and if they were truly willing and able to adopt, they'd have adopted already. They'd be up to the gills in saving humanity.

Instead they are posing for a tweet. They are the actual problem with society. I know pro life couples who foster and adopt, and they aren't tweeting about it. It seems to keep them busy enough without adding in an Instagram lifestyle.
Yeah, those pro-lifers willing to adopt and help expectant mothers just really make my blood boil. I am angry that they tweet about helping people in crisis.

Leftist virtue signaling about helping birthing people get to unPlanned Parenthood rocks.

Right-wing-nut virtue signaling about adopting babies and giving expectant mothers formula and baby clothes blows.

Somehow you just saw the word tweet and glossed over the rest. Not surprising.

These people tweeting are fakes. They're not adopting anyone. It's all posing. Maybe that was concise enough that you can be bothered to read it.
You don't know that the tweeters are fakes. That is your own assumption/bias. Is that concise enough for you?

Yes, I do know they are fakes.
Reply Quote
Porteroso
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Canada2017 • 2:24p, 7/16/22
Canada2017 said:
J.B.Katz said:
Ask these foster children if they would have rather been killed before they emerged through the birth canal .

I believe that wasn't the point. The point was if conservatives are going to claim to support these unwanted children because abortions are illegal, conservatives need to support the born as much as the unborn. And are failing at that.
Reply Quote
Wrecks Quan Dough
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Porteroso • 2:27p, 7/16/22
Porteroso said:
Canada2017 said:
J.B.Katz said:
Ask these foster children if they would have rather been killed before they emerged through the birth canal .

I believe that wasn't the point. The point was if conservatives are going to claim to support these unwanted children because abortions are illegal, conservatives need to support the born as much as the unborn. And are failing at that.


You are ignorant of what pro lifers do for women. And children. But go ahewith your opinion.
Reply Quote
4th and Inches
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Porteroso • 2:29p, 7/16/22
Porteroso said:
Canada2017 said:
J.B.Katz said:
Ask these foster children if they would have rather been killed before they emerged through the birth canal .

I believe that wasn't the point. The point was if conservatives are going to claim to support these unwanted children because abortions are illegal, conservatives need to support the born as much as the unborn. And are failing at that.
the system isnt designed for adoption of these "unwanted" children. Review the primary objective of foster care system and then we can talk.
“Mix a little foolishness with your serious plans. It is lovely to be silly at the right moment.”

–Horace


“Insomnia sharpens your math skills because you spend all night calculating how much sleep you’ll get if you’re able to ‘fall asleep right now.’ “
Reply Quote
Canada2017
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Porteroso • 2:50p, 7/16/22
Porteroso said:
Canada2017 said:
J.B.Katz said:
Ask these foster children if they would have rather been killed before they emerged through the birth canal .

I believe that wasn't the point. The point was if conservatives are going to claim to support these unwanted children because abortions are illegal, conservatives need to support the born as much as the unborn. And are failing at that.
And that is completely inaccurate .

However many posters have repeatedly attempted to educate you on the subject.....but you willfully ignore them .
Reply Quote
3
nein51
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Porteroso • 3:06p, 7/16/22
It's not as easy as "what do you have that I can adopt today". That's not at all how the system works. Just because children are in the system doesn't mean they can even be adopted.
Reply Quote
1
JXL
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:11p, 7/16/22
Why haven't the caring and compassionate liberals, who are "all about the children," already adopted these kids in foster care?
Reply Quote
4
4th and Inches
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to JXL • 3:57p, 7/16/22
JXL said:
Why haven't the caring and compassionate liberals, who are "all about the children," already adopted these kids in foster care?
the majority of them are not adoptable- they are in temporary care while their parents work the program thru CPS/judge ordered. Number 1 goal of foster care system is to return kids to bio parents, then to relatives or whomever is caring for siblings.
“Mix a little foolishness with your serious plans. It is lovely to be silly at the right moment.”

–Horace


“Insomnia sharpens your math skills because you spend all night calculating how much sleep you’ll get if you’re able to ‘fall asleep right now.’ “
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
Redbrickbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to JXL • 4:45p, 7/16/22
JXL said:
Why haven't the caring and compassionate liberals, who are "all about the children," already adopted these kids in foster care?


Because as always liberals are massive hypocrites.

They used children like this as a rhetorical weapon to attack their conservative enemies.

They have no intentions of helping them.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
Doc Holliday
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to J.B.Katz • 6:59p, 7/16/22
J.B.Katz said:
99% of all of those children come from Democrats.

You're pointing the finger at the wrong people.
Reply Quote
2
Porteroso
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Canada2017 • 7:29p, 7/16/22
Canada2017 said:
Porteroso said:
Canada2017 said:
J.B.Katz said:
Ask these foster children if they would have rather been killed before they emerged through the birth canal .

I believe that wasn't the point. The point was if conservatives are going to claim to support these unwanted children because abortions are illegal, conservatives need to support the born as much as the unborn. And are failing at that.
And that is completely inaccurate .

However many posters have repeatedly attempted to educate you on the subject.....but you willfully ignore them .

Nobody has provided any education at all. Tell me what state's department of children's services I should call tomorrow to ask if evangelicals are doing such a good job of adopting that there's a need for more orphans.
Reply Quote
Porteroso
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 4th and Inches • 7:31p, 7/16/22
4th and Inches said:
JXL said:
Why haven't the caring and compassionate liberals, who are "all about the children," already adopted these kids in foster care?
the majority of them are not adoptable- they are in temporary care while their parents work the program thru CPS/judge ordered. Number 1 goal of foster care system is to return kids to bio parents, then to relatives or whomever is caring for siblings.

There is a need for both foster parents, and couples who want to adopt, in pretty much every state. Many kids that cannot be reunited with family bounce around the foster system because nobody will adopt them.
Reply Quote
4th and Inches
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Porteroso • 8:18p, 7/16/22
Porteroso said:
4th and Inches said:
JXL said:
Why haven't the caring and compassionate liberals, who are "all about the children," already adopted these kids in foster care?
the majority of them are not adoptable- they are in temporary care while their parents work the program thru CPS/judge ordered. Number 1 goal of foster care system is to return kids to bio parents, then to relatives or whomever is caring for siblings.

There is a need for both foster parents, and couples who want to adopt, in pretty much every state. Many kids that cannot be reunited with family bounce around the foster system because nobody will adopt them.
really? Maybe I should be a foster parent..

Very aware of the situation.
“Mix a little foolishness with your serious plans. It is lovely to be silly at the right moment.”

–Horace


“Insomnia sharpens your math skills because you spend all night calculating how much sleep you’ll get if you’re able to ‘fall asleep right now.’ “
Reply Quote
2
Canada2017
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 4th and Inches • 11:21p, 7/16/22
4th and Inches said:
Porteroso said:
4th and Inches said:
JXL said:
Why haven't the caring and compassionate liberals, who are "all about the children," already adopted these kids in foster care?
the majority of them are not adoptable- they are in temporary care while their parents work the program thru CPS/judge ordered. Number 1 goal of foster care system is to return kids to bio parents, then to relatives or whomever is caring for siblings.

There is a need for both foster parents, and couples who want to adopt, in pretty much every state. Many kids that cannot be reunited with family bounce around the foster system because nobody will adopt them.
really? Maybe I should be a foster parent..

Very aware of the situation.
The kid knows far more about the realities of foster parenting than someone who actually provides foster care .

Who could possibly doubt it ?
Reply Quote
1
C. Jordan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 6:26p, 7/18/22
Sam Lowry said:
"The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. The Court overrules those decisions and returns that authority to the people and their elected representatives."
Terrible decision.

Your basic rights shouldn't be subject to the state in which you live.

Women should have the right to determine what goes on in their bodies whether they live in NY or TX.

Interestingly, the Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each state from regulating or prohibiting interracial marriage.

Wonder why Justice Thomas didn't mention that?

If Roe and Casey don't stand, then neither does Loving.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Wrecks Quan Dough
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to C. Jordan • 6:30p, 7/18/22
C. Jordan said:
Sam Lowry said:
"The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. The Court overrules those decisions and returns that authority to the people and their elected representatives."
Terrible decision.

Your basic rights shouldn't be subject to the state in which you live.

Women should have the right to determine what goes on in their bodies whether they live in NY or TX.

Interestingly, the Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each state from regulating or prohibiting interracial marriage.

Wonder why Justice Thomas didn't mention that?
Who knew killing the unborn and selling their remains was a basic right? I wonder why this is not discussed in the Federalist Papers.
Reply Quote
1
nein51
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to C. Jordan • 6:34p, 7/18/22
C. Jordan said:
Sam Lowry said:
"The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. The Court overrules those decisions and returns that authority to the people and their elected representatives."
Terrible decision.

Your basic rights shouldn't be subject to the state in which you live.

Women should have the right to determine what goes on in their bodies whether they live in NY or TX.

Interestingly, the Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each state from regulating or prohibiting interracial marriage.

Wonder why Justice Thomas didn't mention that?

If Roe and Casey don't stand, then neither does Loving.

Correct decision. There are ways to codify ones right to abortion. Bench legislation isn't it. Make congress do their job.

More power should be returned to states…not less.
Reply Quote
7
4th and Inches
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to C. Jordan • 7:03p, 7/18/22
C. Jordan said:
Sam Lowry said:
"The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. The Court overrules those decisions and returns that authority to the people and their elected representatives."
Terrible decision.

Your basic rights shouldn't be subject to the state in which you live.

Women should have the right to determine what goes on in their bodies whether they live in NY or TX.

Interestingly, the Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each state from regulating or prohibiting interracial marriage.

Wonder why Justice Thomas didn't mention that?

If Roe and Casey don't stand, then neither does Loving.


Sounds like an arguement a leftie would bring up.. Democrats have a long history of racism.

If you want a national level mandate, do it correctly. Codify it and make a constitutional amendement if it requires it. Stop using the judicial branch to create laws the legislative should have..
“Mix a little foolishness with your serious plans. It is lovely to be silly at the right moment.”

–Horace


“Insomnia sharpens your math skills because you spend all night calculating how much sleep you’ll get if you’re able to ‘fall asleep right now.’ “
Reply Quote
3
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to C. Jordan • 7:22p, 7/18/22
C. Jordan said:
Sam Lowry said:
"The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. The Court overrules those decisions and returns that authority to the people and their elected representatives."
Terrible decision.

Your basic rights shouldn't be subject to the state in which you live.

Women should have the right to determine what goes on in their bodies whether they live in NY or TX.

Interestingly, the Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each state from regulating or prohibiting interracial marriage.

Wonder why Justice Thomas didn't mention that?

If Roe and Casey don't stand, then neither does Loving.
Fundamental rights shouldn't be subject to the state in which you live, but the case for abortion as a fundamental right has always been dubious.

Loving and Roe were based on different rights, the rights to marriage and privacy respectively. The right to marriage is easier to support historically. Privacy is a so-called penumbral right whose connection to history is much more tenuous. Justice Thomas didn't mention Loving because he doesn't believe it should be overturned.
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
whiterock
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 8:53a, 7/19/22
Sam Lowry said:
C. Jordan said:
Sam Lowry said:
"The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. The Court overrules those decisions and returns that authority to the people and their elected representatives."
Terrible decision.

Your basic rights shouldn't be subject to the state in which you live.

Women should have the right to determine what goes on in their bodies whether they live in NY or TX.

Interestingly, the Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each state from regulating or prohibiting interracial marriage.

Wonder why Justice Thomas didn't mention that?

If Roe and Casey don't stand, then neither does Loving.
Fundamental rights shouldn't be subject to the state in which you live, but the case for abortion as a fundamental right has always been dubious.

Loving and Roe were based on different rights, the rights to marriage and privacy respectively. The right to marriage is easier to support historically. Privacy is a so-called penumbral right whose connection to history is much more tenuous. Justice Thomas didn't mention Loving because he doesn't believe it should be overturned.

every time a court makes something a right, that something is removed from democratic process.
Reply Quote
3
D. C. Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to C. Jordan • 9:13a, 7/19/22
C. Jordan said:
Sam Lowry said:
"The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. The Court overrules those decisions and returns that authority to the people and their elected representatives."
Terrible decision.

Your basic rights shouldn't be subject to the state in which you live.

Women should have the right to determine what goes on in their bodies whether they live in NY or TX.

Interestingly, the Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each state from regulating or prohibiting interracial marriage.

Wonder why Justice Thomas didn't mention that?

If Roe and Casey don't stand, then neither does Loving.


Killing another person is not a basic right.
Reply Quote
8
Cobretti
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:52p, 7/19/22

Reply Quote
Jack Bauer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cobretti • 2:54p, 7/19/22
Cobretti said:

Reply Quote
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.