ADVERTISEMENT

Roe v Wade

That seems rather arbitrary to me. A baby can't survive without intervention. Leave a 6 month old baby in the middle of your living room floor and come back in a month and you will find a dead baby. I would suspect intervention is required to keep a human alive for several years.
To be clear, I used the word intervention because it was the word used by a poster in a previous post in regards to the egg won’t implant without intervention.
 
I actually posted some of it yesterday but you're claiming it's opinion but suddenly around 22 weeks, things became factual.

Are you really not following along with this?
Im saying that a baby surviving at 22 weeks is fact and documented. It either happened or it didn’t. The development during gestation is also documented facts. That has been proven to be what happens. The only thing I said about the development being opinion is when did the life start because there is no black and white moment that conclusively says when life begins. Many believe it starts at conception. Many people don’t. Not even all scientists agree when it starts. Therefore, that is opinion.
 
You can look up the stages of development on line that will break down what happens when during gestation. Again that isn’t opinion. It is documented fact.
Zygote - 2 weeks
Embryo - 2-8 weeks
Fetus - 8+ weeks

So should these distinctions have importance...would seem fair enough to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WayneDougan
Zygote - 2 weeks
Embryo - 2-8 weeks
Fetus - 8+ weeks

So should these distinctions have importance...would seem fair enough to me.
I think they should definitely be distinctions. I’ve said repeatedly that I wouldn’t choose abortion for my family but I support the right for a woman to choose for herself. I also don’t think late term abortions should be available except in very specific circumstances. I think a 15/16 week timeframe for an abortion is reasonable. I don’t think 8 weeks is fair because many women barely know or don’t know they are pregnant at 8 weeks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: entropy13
I think they should definitely be distinctions. I’ve said repeatedly that I wouldn’t choose abortion for my family but I support the right for a woman to choose for herself. I also don’t think late term abortions should be available except in very specific circumstances. I think a 15/16 week timeframe for an abortion is reasonable. I don’t think 8 weeks is fair because many women barely know or don’t know they are pregnant at 8 weeks.
Pretty reasonable stance. Kind of wild a judge blocked a legislature seemingly, reasonable 15 week ban - and blew up this issue into a huge deal.
 
I think they should definitely be distinctions. I’ve said repeatedly that I wouldn’t choose abortion for my family but I support the right for a woman to choose for herself. I also don’t think late term abortions should be available except in very specific circumstances. I think a 15/16 week timeframe for an abortion is reasonable. I don’t think 8 weeks is fair because many women barely know or don’t know they are pregnant at 8 weeks.
Think this is pretty close to the opinion of a majority of Americans
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ron Mehico
Pretty reasonable stance. Kind of wild a judge blocked a legislature seemingly, reasonable 15 week ban - and blew up this issue into a huge deal.
The district court would have been appealed, regardless. The Court of Appeals would have reversed a district court that found the Mississippi law constitutional, which would have been hard for ANY district court without wading into Casey and performing legal gymnastics that a trial court does not have the authority to do. Most conservative trial judges would have found for the plaintiff, as well. This was going to the Supreme Court, so long as the Supreme Court accepted review.
 
We take you now to the front porch of Kentucky Bob, circa 1848:

Bob: I believe Africans are fully human, just like me, with the same gifts, rights, and freedoms as me. Personally, I would never own a slave. Just don’t think it is right for me or my family. But, I know Tennessee Joe and others don’t agree with me and I respect their right to disagree and, therefore, do not think their choice to be slave owners should be taken from them and made illegal. Respect my decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wkycatfan
We take you now to the front porch of Kentucky Bob, circa 1848:

Bob: I believe Africans are fully human, just like me, with the same gifts, rights, and freedoms as me. Personally, I would never own a slave. Just don’t think it is right for me or my family. But, I know Tennessee Joe and others don’t agree with me and I respect their right to disagree and, therefore, do not think their choice to be slave owners should be taken from them and made illegal. Respect my decision.
Just when I think you can't post something more stupid than you have previously, you always do.
 
Just when I think you can't post something more stupid than you have previously, you always do.
I understand why you don’t like the point made. You have struggled to support your positions in this thread. Failed, in fact. You cannot move the ball fast enough to keep up with all the weaknesses in your expressed views. So, you have nothing left but to do what you do best, name call and attempt to shame. Good luck with that. 😆
 
I understand why you don’t like the point made. You have struggled to support your positions in this thread. Failed, in fact. You cannot move the ball fast enough to keep up with all the weaknesses in your expressed views. So, you have nothing left but to do what you do best, name call and attempt to shame. Good luck with that. 😆
I didn't call you names. I said your post was stupid and it was. I didn't say you were stupid. There is a huge difference. In your post, you tried to compare the fetus to a slave. The problem is the pregnant woman is more like the slave than the fetus. She is being forced to do something that she doesn't want to do. In essence, this SCOTUS ruling has "enslaved" her to this baby. I haven't failed in anything i posted. You on the other hand have failed at just being a good person. Do us a favor. Go back to your cave and take your caveman view with you. If it was up to you, it would be ok for women to be drug down the street by their hair like cavemen used to do. That is right up your alley.
 
I understand why you don’t like the point made. You have struggled to support your positions in this thread. Failed, in fact. You cannot move the ball fast enough to keep up with all the weaknesses in your expressed views. So, you have nothing left but to do what you do best, name call and attempt to shame. Good luck with that. 😆
I constantly lose IQ points by reading your ridiculousness. Back to ignore you go.
 
I didn't call you names. I said your post was stupid and it was. I didn't say you were stupid. There is a huge difference. In your post, you tried to compare the fetus to a slave. The problem is the pregnant woman is more like the slave than the fetus. She is being forced to do something that she doesn't want to do. In essence, this SCOTUS ruling has "enslaved" her to this baby. I haven't failed in anything i posted. You on the other hand have failed at just being a good person. Do us a favor. Go back to your cave and take your caveman view with you. If it was up to you, it would be ok for women to be drug down the street by their hair like cavemen used to do. That is right up your alley.
The comparison is not between a fetus and a slave, or a slave and a woman. It is a comment about weakness.
 
Poorly written article. Perry grants a TRO based on the Ky Constitution and the article makes no effort to explain the legal analysis employed by the judge. The judge was required to find irreparable harm AND likelihood of success by the plaintiff. The article should have explained the latter.
 
Poorly written article. Perry grants a TRO based on the Ky Constitution and the article makes no effort to explain the legal analysis employed by the judge. The judge was required to find irreparable harm AND likelihood of success by the plaintiff. The article should have explained the latter.
The fact is abortions can now legally be performed in KY again. It’s a good day for women’s rights in KY even if it’s only temporary.
 
Typical leftie who does not care if there is a legal foundation or not, just so long as he gets his way and babies are killed.
If a judge temporarily halted it, seems that there is legal foundation for it at least for now. It also has nothing to do with babies being killed. In fact, I prefer that women not choose abortions. Them having the ability to make the choice for themselves is a great day in KY though regardless of the decision they make.

Lets just make vasectomies mandatory as well as outlawing abortions. If a guy can't get a girl pregnant, then we don't have to worry about abortions. If the goal is truly to save baby lives, you should be all in on it. Vasectomies can be reversed when the guy has a partner that he wants to have a baby with.
 
If a judge temporarily halted it, seems that there is legal foundation for it at least for now. It also has nothing to do with babies being killed. In fact, I prefer that women not choose abortions. Them having the ability to make the choice for themselves is a great day in KY though regardless of the decision they make.

Lets just make vasectomies mandatory as well as outlawing abortions. If a guy can't get a girl pregnant, then we don't have to worry about abortions. If the goal is truly to save baby lives, you should be all in on it. Vasectomies can be reversed when the guy has a partner that he wants to have a baby with.
Weak
 
“The restraining order will remain in place until at least next Wednesday when the state's two abortion providers are expected to present cases for why there should be a more permanent suspension of the law.”

It sounds like the judge permitted the stay while the plaintiffs gather legal arguments supporting the stay. With the history of abortion laws in Kentucky prior to the entry of Roe, it is highly unlikely that the Kentucky constitution is implicated by Kentucky’s trigger law. Rather, this appears to be just a liberal judge being a liberal judge.
 
Do you believe that anyone who is "pro choice" is a liberal? That seems to be your view, and the view of everyone on the political board. If that is the case, something like 70% of the country are liberals, or "libtards" as many here like to say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lil2coupe
Do you believe that anyone who is "pro choice" is a liberal? That seems to be your view, and the view of everyone on the political board. If that is the case, something like 70% of the country are liberals, or "libtards" as many here like to say.
Nope. I know pro-life liberals. Of course, I never said that all pro-abortion people were liberals. That thought came out of you.
 
The only impression you’ve given me is that you probably have gotten your socks and sandals caught under the brake pedal of your Prius.
And I thought Caveman was the least witty person here. You should really put some work in on these attempted insults. Maybe you wouldn’t look so foolish Scooter.
 
Wha
Before this gets moved over to the political thread I’d like to point out 99% of you will NOT be involved or will have a close friend/family member involved in an abortion in anyway whatsoever anytime in the near futur
W
Before this gets moved over to the political thread I’d like to point out 99% of you will NOT be involved or will have a close friend/family member involved in an abortion in anyway whatsoever anytime in the near future.
What’s your point? Most won’t know or be involved with anyone that gets carjacked and murdered but they still think the person that commits these crimes should be prosecuted to the greatest extent possible. That was a really dumb argument.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT