DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus SC Rulings

So if having a kid is inconvenient we should definitely force those women to have that child. Teach her a lesson right? I mean nothing like being raised by a parent that didn’t want you. That didn’t have space, time, energy, or money for you. That’ll make for a great outcome.
Awesome.

Yeah...but the woman CHOSE to have unprotected sex...you talk like some white supremacist impregnated her through osmosis. SHE MADE THE DECISION THAT STARTED THE WHOLE THING.

You just described when an issue becomes one for the states to rule on...like abortion is now. RvW was created by the SC out of thin air with no judicial reasoning other than what the justices "wanted". That's simply not their job or responsibility.

This quote from Magoo yesterday sums up the disaster that the socialists want - legislation from the bench:

"With this decision, the conservative majority of the Supreme Court shows how extreme it is, how far removed they are from the majority of this country," Biden said during a speech at the White House.

A 40+ year politician that pretends to not know how our system of government actually works. That is flat out irresponsible of the POTUS to think such a thing...let alone say it to the world. That comment is offensive to anyone with a lick of intelligence and/or education.

And this is what the right wing and self described centrist refuse to acknowledge: Thomas went out of his way to bring up two other specific cases that he wants brought up to court to be overturned.

And then the guys are gonna go “well, gay marriage isn’t in the constitution”

“Contraceptives aren’t in the constitution”

Well what happens when a same case comes up to the court that personally affects him? That interracial marriage. Notice how he didn’t name that case? Because that would have a personal affect on him, even though it falls under the same interpretation as the two cases he mentioned.

And then what? Is someone gonna post “I’m not racist but where in the constitution does it allow people of different ethnicities get married?

“I’m not homophobic, but where in the constitution does it say gay marriage is allowed?”

I love how people want to blend originalist interpretations of the constitution and when they don’t, just to suit their narrative.

Honestly. I feel bad for women. Women thought these conservative losers were bad at stalking them now and shooting up places cause they can’t get dates, boy oh boy it’s bout to get a whole lot worse when women do actually decide to close their legs.

Birth rates gonna drop, incels gonna grow in population, violence against women will climb, and I’m going to be laughing harder at these right wing males. It’s about to be a bunch of sausage parties in moms basement still whining about feminism. Better hope the Japanese make advances on them sex robots STAT.

WSU…
So a mistake was made. You want to compound that by bringing a child into the world to a parent that already has proven to be a poor decision maker, and that doesn’t want/can’t afford the kid?
Sounds like you’re punishing the child for a choice it didn’t make. I’d hate to be raised in such a household. One’s chance of having a positive outcome as an adult drops dramatically. Likely they’ll go on to make the same mistakes and perpetuate the problem. (see studies of teenage parents leading to another generation of teenage parents, etc).

What outcomes do you see for all these unwanted kids being forced into the world? Living quiet lives in the suburbs with an active set of parents, with a minivan and a Beemer in the driveway? Lol… delusional.
Where do you see these children in 12-16 years? Top students? Making great life choices by modeling their already proven unresponsible parents?
What world do you all live in that you see bringing unwanted kids, typically from lower income households, into the world as a positive? Oh, but the cell clumps… the precious unwanted cell clumps have a right to be born into a hellscape of a life.

Dear God the denial of reality is on full display in this thread.

Lima explained the original court ruling to you in an above post and how it tied into the constitution. Beyond that I can't help you.

I’ll just highlight those areas so everyone is clear what this is about…

Of course that's what he and others want. We have millions of single women raising children when the men abandoned them. We have drug addicts that become pregnant. We have women who are raped and victims of incest that become pregnant. We have teen age girls who aren't even old enough to buy beer become pregnant. But never mind all of that. None of that makes any difference. I mean after all, they made a mistake, right? Oh yeah, accept for those who are victims of rape and incest. I wonder why they think making the mistake of getting pregnant deserves a life sentence?

j/c

World leaders react to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade

The international community is speaking out after Friday's landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade, marking a major change in abortion rights in the United States.

In the dissenting opinion, the court's three liberal justices, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, wrote the U.S. "will become international outliers after today."

Below is a look at the reactions of some of the world's highest leaders.

United Nations

UN Secretary General spokesperson Stephane Dujarric on Friday reiterated the organization's position on abortion: "That sexual and reproductive health and rights are the foundation of a life of choice, empowerment and equality for the world's women and girls."

"It's also important to note that restricting access to abortion does not prevent people from seeking abortion; it only makes it more deadly," Dujarric added. "UNFPA (United Nations Population Fund) tells us that some 45 per cent of all abortions around the world are unsafe, making it a leading cause of maternal [death]."

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet called the ruling a "major setback."

"Access to safe, legal and effective abortion is firmly rooted in international human rights law and is at the core of women and girls' autonomy and ability to make their own choices about their bodies and lives, free of discrimination, violence and coercion," Bachelet said. "This decision strips such autonomy from millions of women in the U.S., in particular those with low incomes and those belonging to racial and ethnic minorities, to the detriment of their fundamental rights."

United Kingdom

"Look, I'll be absolutely clear with everybody. This is not our court," U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson said Friday, according to the Associated Press. "It's another jurisdiction. But clearly, it has massive impacts on people's thinking around the world. It's a very important decision."

"I've got to tell you, I think it's a big step backwards," he added. "I've always believed in a woman's right to choose and I stick to that view and that's why the UK has the laws that it does and actually, if you look, we recently took steps to make sure that those laws were enforced throughout the whole of the U.K."

Scotland

"One of the darkest days for women's rights in my lifetime," First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon said Friday. "Obviously the immediate consequences will be suffered by women in the US - but this will embolden anti-abortion & anti-women forces in other countries too. Solidarity doesn't feel enough right now - but it is necessary."

Canada

"The news coming out of the United States is horrific. My heart goes out to the millions of American women who are now set to lose their legal right to an abortion," Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said. "I can't imagine the fear and anger you are feeling right now."

"No government, politician, or man should tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her body," he continued. "I want women in Canada to know that we will always stand up for your right to choose."

Spain

"We cannot take any rights for granted," Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said, in a tweet translated to English. "Social achievements are always at risk of going backwards and their defense has to be our day to day. Women must be able to decide freely about their lives."

Norway

"The right to abortion can either be banned or tightened in several US states after the US Supreme Court has now overturned the historic ruling from 1972 that surely American women have this right," Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre said, in a tweet translated to English. "This is a serious step backwards for women's rights!"

France

"Abortion is a fundamental right for all women," French President Emmanuel Macron said, in a tweet translated to English. "It must be protected. I express my solidarity with the women whose freedoms are today challenged by the Supreme Court of the United States of America."

"Appalling: the US Supreme Court's revocation of the right to abortion represents a major setback for fundamental rights," French Foreign Affairs Minister Catherine Colonna wrote Friday. "The [French] will continue to mobilize in their defense."

Belgium

"Very concerned about implications of [the Supreme Court] decision on #RoeVWade and the signal it sends to the world," Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo said. "Banning abortion never leads to fewer abortions, only to more unsafe abortions. Belgium will continue to work with other countries to advance #SRHR everywhere."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-roe-v-wade-abortion-rights-international-response/

As with many things, there are some Americans who think the rest of the globe is wrong and somehow we're the only nation who gets it right. Murica!

So now with RvW overturned it goes back to the states-it was my understanding that the Ohio law was on hold until fall, but I am mistaken


COLUMBUS, Ohio — A ban on most abortions at the first detectable fetal heartbeat became the law in Ohio on Friday following the U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

Enforcement of Ohio’s 2019 “heartbeat” ban had been on hold for nearly three years under a federal court injunction. The state attorney general, Republican Dave Yost, asked for that to be dissolved because of the high court’s ruling, and a federal judge agreed hours later.

Gov. DeWine signed an executive order late Friday night for the Ohio Department of Health to adopt rules under the Heartbeat law "specifying the appropriate methods of performing an examination for the purpose of determining the presence of a fetal heartbeat of an unborn individual based on standard medical practice."

Critics had argued that the measure essentially prohibits abortions because the first detectable fetal heartbeat can occur as early as six weeks into pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.

Although the injunction was dissolved, the case has not been dismissed.

A status conference will be scheduled to determine future proceedings in the case

https://www.10tv.com/article/news/l...530-ae0e7a91-9f20-47ec-94c6-cd4c6ede829a

It doesn't have to be in the constitution. Are seatbelts in the constitution? No. But we have a law saying you have to buckle up because as a society we determined it was the right thing to do to save lives. You see, the government IS there to solve the problems of the day. If not, would ALL still be running around like poop-throwing monkeys fighting over scraps. Thankfully only half the country has regressed to that. Meanwhile, those of us who don't live in a stone-age value system based on superstition and moral thought processes that haven't advanced since the 1600s witchhunts can see just how damaging these knuckle-dragging laws can be. And downplaying this as being a good thing is a farce at best. Women woke up yesterday with a right to choose what happens with their bodies and they went to bed without that right! They were made less than equal and free by a group of strangers over religious zealotry. And this "BUT THE STATES" BS can go where the sun doesn't shine too. Just more poop-throwing monkeys talk about people being different because of the geography we live in and some imaginary lines in the dirt. An unwanted child in Texas will suffer just as much as one in Maine. We are either one country OR we aren't. I would happily divide this country in two just to escape the mayhem of medieval idiocy like this, as long as nobody got STUCK in the wrong camp and got to choose where they wanted to live.

The Constitution doesn't give anyone the right to own or control other people, because we used the founding framework as designed to end slavery and enact laws guaranteeing equality, freedom, and a woman's right to choose what happens with her body already. There is just a small group who wants to take us back to a time when those things did not exist. And it's this same small group that doesn't want women to have a choice, forcing this upon the other 70-80 percent that do. In what kind of value system is that remotely the fair and just thing to do? Oh yeah, the value system of the old-ass white Christian male-dominated societies in our horrific past! The same ones who brought us wars, witchhunts, hate, and mistrust since the beginning of recorded history; or at least the portion of history where White Christian Males rose to power and influence. A time when white Christian men thought of themselves above others who are different in even the slightest of ways; so much so that they justified owning people and treating women like property. And these same people now want to drag modern society back to that crap ass past, because some dumbass hate mongers told them that they are entitled to that kind of power like it's an Fn prize. All of you can have that crap, I want no part of it. Abortions aren't "killing babies" or "baby murder", and anyone with a 10th-grade education should know that and be able to wrap around it. But no, the braindead are dragging us back to the stone-age because "GOD" gave them their mission from inside a book written over 2000 years ago in THE STONE-AGE. A book that was written by the poop-throwing monkeys of the day, who were trying to wrap their undeveloped or underdeveloped minds around the PROBLEMS OF THEIR DAY. And not the problems of our day.

The founders who couldn't possibly conceive of the world we live in today didn't create a be-all-end-all doctrine to rule the lives of people in perpetuity! They created a mutable framework so we could come together and agree on how to change and adapt an evergreen document to handle the ISSUES OF THE DAY as we progress. Nowhere in that document does it say the constitution can never change, nowhere. Nowhere does it say any supposed "GOD" or just White Christian Males have total authority over the rest of us. And IF it did say that, it was designed to be changed when the majority of the country wanted that change. It also does not back the idea that 30% of the country gets to push their value system on 70% of the country. No, that is just small-minded entitlement thinking by people afraid they are being REPLACED by others because their ingrained thought processes won't allow them to adapt and grow past their stone-age mystical superstitious way of life.

But let's look at facts, since the beginning of time, abortions have been with us and mostly accepted behavior in one form or another. Herbal medicine was used to induce miscarriages throughout time. And the life of a fetus has never been so zealously protected in any religion or by any people, as it was yesterday when women's rights were stripped away. But some BS sense of morality somehow empowers the few to thrust a dystopian set of laws on the many? Anyone who subscribes to this asinine ideology with a straight face is too morally and mentally inept to lead anything in a modern world, let alone the most powerful country on earth. And by allowing this to stand in any form, the rest of us who want to live in a modern country striving to actually adapt and create a fair and open society, accepting of all, even the poop-throwing monkeys; well, it makes us complicit in all the harm it causes going forward and we cannot allow this to stand. You guys are right that it hasn't been decided yet, but not because the "States" get to weigh in. Nope, it hasn't been settled yet because the 70% disagree and will not allow it to stand. Thanks for letting us have this SAME battle again, and don't think for a second that we won't win this time too. So go celebrate your little victory that you had to cheat, steal, lie, and attempt a coup to corrupt our system enough to accomplish because we're about to deal with that BS too.

And they cried over being forced to wear a mask during a deadly pandemic, pfft.

Who gives a damn, that is their right. It is only a problem for religious zealots! It's her right to screw whoever she wants, as often as she wants, however she wants. And if any of that results in an unwanted pregnancy, it's her right because it's her body to choose what she wants then too. How hard can that be to wrap around? You don't have a say because it's not your life. Or is freedom only for the few? Just because you believe otherwise, doesn't give you the right to impose those beliefs on those of us who think differently. But y'all just can't wrap around that.

Magoo? Could you break out your childish translator and decipher this code for those of us who don't speak baby talk? Oh, the big bad socialist... You people have the nerve to say anything we (the left) do is bad while you trash the entire concept of freedom and democracy. Pfft.

Yep...it's about women's rights. She had the right to chose whether to have unprotected sex. She exercised that right. That is so damn simple that it isn't funny. All the other things you stated previously STILL have merit (re: unwanted children, lack of parenting, etc.)...but had she not had unprotected sex she would not have gotten pregnant. Period. THAT is where the issue started and is undeniable. It's not the end of the debate/issue...BUT every other point, counterpoint, debate, whatever...starts at the beginning. You act as if pregnancy was forced upon her...when it was not. (Except for rape, incest, harm to the mother.)

Look...you want to get all emotional about an issue as if we don't have a Constitution and as if the man & woman have no culpability in the pregnancy. But we do...and they did.

You want to argue whether abortion is a right provided-for in our Constitution. I want to argue that the federal government had - and has - no business in making that act a right. And MY point is what the SC ruled on. One's thoughts on abortion don't make even the slightest bit of difference when ruling on Constitutionality - well...to certain Justices anyway.

Apparently Magoo needs a child-level code decipher-er to understand the responsibility of the SC and the fact that the SC should not even remotely consider what the people "want".

I never once opined regarding who the woman and man can/should have sex with. I don't care. I'm not imposing my beliefs on sex or abortion on anyone. The issue is one for the states to rule on. The federal government should stay out of it.

You liberals are fighting over a January 6th false flag and now your leaders are leading the new Nazi Brownshirts????

You are giving out addresses of the SCOTUS to riot and destroy??? Sounds familiar!

Last Night in America: Democrat Brownshirts
By M Dowling -June 25, 2022

Riots and disruptive protests took place in major cities throughout the nation last night after numerous Democrats urged radical abortionists to take to the streets.

Rioters attempted to breach the Arizona capitol building in Phoenix while the Arizona Senate was in session.

The Arizona Department of Public Safety issued the following statement: “Troopers deployed gas outside the Senate building after protesters attempted to break the glass. The crowd then moved to the Wesley Bolin Plaza where some monuments were vandalized. Gas was deployed again to disburse the crowd.”

You can see a clip of that insurrection below.

Barack Obama added his kindling to the flames. He falsely claimed the ruling is an attack on freedoms. That isn’t true. It was the opposite of an attack on freedoms. The Court’s decision put abortion back in the hands of the people.

“Today, the Supreme Court not only reversed nearly 50 years of precedent,” Barack Tweeted, “it relegated the most intensely personal decision someone can make to the whims of politicians and ideologues—attacking the essential freedoms of millions of Americans.”

Bernie Sanders, a big supporter of forced vaccination has a different view on killing the unborn.

“Overturning Roe v. Wade and denying women the right to control their own bodies,” Bernie tweeted, “is an outrage and in defiance of what the American people want. Democrats must now end the filibuster in the Senate, codify Roe v. Wade, and once again make abortion legal and safe.”

The Democrat Brownshirts were called to arms and they have begun with their night of rage. They terrorize and make city streets unsafe. Crickets from Attorney General Merrick Garland and Joe Biden. That’s because these people are their Brownshirts.

The corrupt US media has no problem with any of this. When they do cover it, you won’t hear the acrimonious invective you hear from them over J6.

At least two Supreme Court justices have been moved to safety, perhaps all of them. The radicals passed around their addresses.



Ana Navarro goes full Hitlerian and indicates that her handicapped relatives should have been aborted.







The communists are using the Roe decision to terrorize people.







They can do anything they want.





Anything at all.



They’re everywhere. These people are part of subversive communist Brownshirts and our DOJ and FBI have little to no interest in that fact.





The fires have begun.





Assaulting police is what Brownshirts do.



Communist Democrats fuel the flames to get votes.



As Victor Davis Hanson said, we are under mob rule, a post-constitutional phase.

https://rumble.com/v19kkmx-victor-davis-hanson-explains-this-is-a-revolution.html

https://www.independentsentinel.com/last-night-in-america-democrat-brownshirts/

1. The Supreme Court got it right with guns. (In constitution)

2. The Supreme Court got it right with abortion. (Not in the constitution) Goes back to the states to decide on an individual basis.

Those are the facts. Do I agree with number 1? Absolutely, as should every single American. Number 2? Not really.

Personally, I don't care what another person does with their body. I support abortion and actually think there should be an amendment added to the constitution, and more centers need to be set up throughout the states to make access for every individual that feels they may need help.

I don't understand what is accomplished by overturning Roe V Wade. It takes away freedom.

You certainly never mentioned the mans role or choice though. Like only women were involved in getting pregnant. Some of us have noticed how that seems to be a common theme.

You mean like when I posted this:

"Look...you want to get all emotional about an issue as if we don't have a Constitution and as if the man & woman have no culpability in the pregnancy. But we do...and they did."

I don't see where anyone has absolved the man's side of a pregnancy. There is a common theme of reading only what one wants and/or missing what one doesn't want to see.

I don't care if someone has an abortion. It's none of my business. I don't want the federal government involved in the issue and I don't want my tax dollars used to pay for it.

No, I meant this post right here. This entire post lays 100% of the blame on the woman alone.

So, you only considered one piece of evidence and completely threw out another piece of evidence because it didn't fit your biased narrative. That's par for the course for you. Trying to win an argument at all costs. Not playing fair. Not discussing. You are a freaking joke. Bring in the We Team for support.

Verses what, the "I whine team"? Maybe you should report that or call more people an "impotent old man" for better impact and effect. The one who calls quotes coming from his own posts lies doesn't have any room to cast stones. Keep going Shemp.

Context matters. That post was in response to Portland - who himself was focused only on the woman...and was posting as if she was an innocent bystander in a drive-by shooting.

And in the case if rape?
What about stealthing?
Why does the women end up bearing all the responsibility? Why do we not hold the men culpable?

If I misunderstood your comments, my mistake. I just took the post at face value.

Great comeback. Your garbage is so freaking old. You have no interest in discussion. No interest in fairness. You aren't even man enough to fight fairly. Picking and choosing which information to use. Gotta win that argument and pretend to be a man, when in fact, you have the emotional maturity of 13 year old boy.

I thought you were all about class? I thought you were the one who called people out for making such posts? The fact you get called on your BS doesn't mean it's not fair. It means you have no room to talk about others acting like a 13 year old. So OCD is old an impotent and I act like a 13 year old boy according to you? Boy aren't you on a roll today. You have become what you claim to hate and are too blind to see it.

Drink another one....

Right. Says the guy who completely ignored one comment by WSU while focusing only on another comment just to win an argument and show WSU up. Now, go tell another lie.

Which has been addressed. Try to keep up for a change. Speaking of liars.....

I have not dipped my toes into the pool of whether abortion should be legal or not. I do not support it, but it's really none of my business. I have dove head first into the pool of the federal government keeping it's nose out of the abortion business/issue and that the federal government should not use federal tax dollars to fund it.

That said, I believe abortion should be an option for pregnancies caused by rape, incest and danger for the woman. HOWEVER, if one is impregnated after a rape or incest the decision HAS to have a time limit. I don't have an opinion on the time 'limit', but it's not after months have passed since conception.

On the man note: If I were 'in charge' men who don't take responsibility for a pregnancy that they participated-in would not like me at all...no...they'd hate me. I find it abhorrent the number of fatherless children in this country. We are not animals - especially not the children. You father a child you can't support you will be tracked and $$$ taken from you...if you father a second child that you can't support, you are getting the big V to make damn sure you don't father a 3rd child...or you can go to jail. No exceptions. Women would also face harsh action for continuing to make babies they cannot support. If one isn't responsible enough to care for life one created, then you are giving up the right/ability to re-produce.

I'm fiscally very conservative...but as I age...I become more and more Libertarian on social issues and life. Our Constitution is the guide. There is too much government and not enough accountability.

I have never made my views on abortion public on here. I have said I hate the extremists on both sides. People blowing up abortion clinics are extremists. It's mind boggling how they think it might be okay to kill a person to protect the rights ....I better stop there. I also hate those who are being violent because of the law.

As a man, I don't think it is my place to judge women if they have an abortion or not. I can say that I always believed that the man should take care of a child who is born from his seed and if he doesn't, he should be punished.

Personal story: My daughter practiced safe sex or no sex at all [probably not--LOL] until she was married. She and her husband immediately tried to have a child. She's miscarried twice. Those who think that casually having an abortion might want to consider that many women struggle to have a child. Well, she is pregnant now. There were some bad signs. She was told that the baby had fluid on her neck and would have heart issues. One specialist said the baby would be still-born. My daughter and her husband considered abortion if that was the case. I would have supported her no matter her decision. Thankfully, the fluid is gone and the baby is the right size for her age. The heart rate was good.

I don't know.........I think people should probably be more sensitive when discussing a topic such as this one. Some of these opinions are over the top and frankly, they sometimes infuriate me or deeply sadden me.

I am not against abortion like some extremists are. However, I do wish that people would do more to prevent pregnancy if they have no desire to have a child. While there are exceptions to any rule, birth control and abstinence, are generally quite effective. I don't think it's a good idea to put one's own pleasure ahead of everything else.

Impotent? lmao, ok Mr. Limpy.

You mean the thinest minority of people while flying in the face of the overwhelming majority? lmao, you can't make this garbage up.

We have (3) separate and distinct branches of government...you should look it up.

Sure you didn't. None of this is any of your damn business or the government. Only if it involves a minor or non-consensual sex. The two things Old White Christian GOPer leadership love to do is taboo, so they go after every woman in the country because their base incels and religious zealots cry about it. Pfft. I have granddaughters that will be affected by your parties BS for most of their adult lives now. Vers. did you read that? Then shut up. And as for you Willie, you and everyone like you should be ashamed of what you are doing to this country. Disgusting.

You're a troll and your schtick is worn out Q. And just like that, every time the left protest, here comes the NGO reports. That turd wouldn't know ANTIFA if they were sleeping with his mama. Yet you guys post his crap like it's gospel. RIDICULOUS.

No crap and one of those is now under the control of extremists representing less than 30% of the population. YOU ARE A MINORITY. The majority does not share your views. Your opinions don't matter to the majority on this topis. We don't care if you think GOD is on your side. What don't you get about that?