Congress needs to make a law

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Yeah, I get all of that. But what about women that are raped and incest? Red states are saying no exceptions. Is that really right, or extremist? I don't like abortion, but I I think it is despicable to make someone who is the victim or a violent sexual act carry a baby they never had a chance to prevent through contraception for a full term. And then there are some republicans that are saying conception is wrong. I'm sorry, I can no longer support a party if it has gone that far to the extreme. I've criticized democrats for going to the extreme to pacify their progressive idiots, I can't look the other way when republicans do the same.

I'm a conservative on fiscal values, I really don't care that much on social issues. What do I care if people in the inner cities are able to get abortions? I don't want to pay for them, but then if their kids are born and they don't parent them correctly, I am still going to pay for them in some way. And innocent people end up paying for that mistake with their lives when they become thugs that kill them.

In a perfect world, every child brought into the world would be loved and wanted. That just isn't the case today. I just can't go along with this. Like I said, I don't like abortion, it has never happened in my family, but I'm tired of dealing with so many unwanted kids in society that we all end up paying for in one way or another.

That said, I do agree with the technicality of the decision. There is no basis in the constitution to guarantee abortion rights on a federal level. So the democrats have the presidency, the senate, and the house. If they really want to legislate this, they can. They will need to kill the filibuster to do so, but they do have the opportunity. Let's see if they have the balls to do it. I doubt it. But if they really want to do it, they can change the rules of the senate and put a law in place. Of course, that would leave them open to some of their things being overturned. It will be interesting to see the next chess move.

I wonder how many independents this decision has lost? The red wave was going to overwhelm Biden and the democrats. Now I am not so sure. I still think it will be there,, just not as big. The SCOTUS just gave democrats a reason to show up at the polls in November. And you can bet they are going to milk it big time.

A couple of things:

Since when are "the Republicans" trying to ban contraception? I haven't heard anything about that.

Also, if you take a stroll through any ghetto, you'll see that those women aren't getting abortions. In fact they are reproducing exponentially. It's rare to see a female over the age of 14 in the hood who doesn't have at least one bebe. Apparently they aren't even using contraception.

So the democrats have the presidency, the senate, and the house. If they really want to legislate this, they can.

They can try, but I'm pretty sure it would be challenged as unconstitutional within two seconds. Maybe less.

I think pretty much everything should be up to the states. More specifically, it should be voted on by We the People and not left up to our so-called representatives.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

Yeah, I get all of that. But what about women that are raped and incest?
Well ..... it's been borne out that rape and incest are minuscule in number as reasons, or justification, to get an abortion. However, it appears, a woman's acceptance of personal responsibility has been thrown out the window, being selfish and thinking of only themselves, and/or simply inconvenienced becoming pregnant. All because they are too lazy to take the necessary precautions so it doesn't happen. Getting an abortion as an elective procedure, from being inconvenienced, having the highest percentage.

So let's just call it out for what is really is, morality has devolved .... Women want to be whores, (just as men), under the guise of being respectful, and have as much unprotected intercourse as they can, without taking the responsibility for their actions. (However, many a smart man, knowing how devious and selfish women can be, will always, always, use protection to avoid any possible negative outcome or scenario. And, after which, take that used protection home, or to the furthest dumpster, to discard safely so the contents cannot be used against him later.)


FWCGgc0WQAEcA39
 

herb749

Well-Known Member
For your consideration ...


Well ..... it's been borne out that rape and incest are minuscule in number as reasons, or justification, to get an abortion. However, it appears, a woman's acceptance of personal responsibility has been thrown out the window, being selfish and thinking of only themselves, and/or simply inconvenienced becoming pregnant. All because they are too lazy to take the necessary precautions so it doesn't happen. Getting an abortion as an elective procedure, from being inconvenienced, having the highest percentage.

So let's just call it out for what is really is, morality has devolved .... Women want to be whores, (just as men), under the guise of being respectful, and have as much unprotected intercourse as they can, without taking the responsibility for their actions. (However, many a smart man, knowing how devious and selfish women can be, will always, always, use protection to avoid any possible negative outcome or scenario. And, after which, take that used protection home, or to the furthest dumpster, to discard safely so the contents cannot be used against him later.)


FWCGgc0WQAEcA39


You'd swear listening to people on the left that the 92% was rape.
 

22AcaciaAve

Well-Known Member
A couple of things:

Since when are "the Republicans" trying to ban contraception? I haven't heard anything about that.

Also, if you take a stroll through any ghetto, you'll see that those women aren't getting abortions. In fact they are reproducing exponentially. It's rare to see a female over the age of 14 in the hood who doesn't have at least one bebe. Apparently they aren't even using contraception.



They can try, but I'm pretty sure it would be challenged as unconstitutional within two seconds. Maybe less.

I think pretty much everything should be up to the states. More specifically, it should be voted on by We the People and not left up to our so-called representatives.

And by the weekend, state GOP lawmakers were openly questioning forms of birth control, including the Plan B pill, a widely used form of emergency contraception often provided to rape victims.

It may only be the so called "Morning after" pill that has been questioned, not sure since they didn't actually go into more details on other forms of birth control. I agree with you about it being voted on. Since abortion is not a right guaranteed by the constitution, let the people vote on it in a national referendum. Let the chips fall wherever they may.

And yes, I realize that a lot of the inner city kids would have the kids anyway. There are plenty of 30+ grandmothers in the inner cities.

If congress passed a law legalizing abortion and making it illegal to prevent it, I am not sure it could be successfully challenged. Since abortion is not a guaranteed right within the constitution, as the SCOTUS just said, then it is not something that can be considered unconstitutional unless such law was to violate another part of the constitution. Maybe infringing on states rights, but there are already plenty of federal laws that do just that. I don't think it will happen, but if it did, I believe it would be tough to overturn by the letter of the law. What this SCOTUS would do, is anybody's guess.
 

22AcaciaAve

Well-Known Member
You'd swear listening to people on the left that the 92% was rape.

I do recognize and agree that pregnancies by rape or incest are rare within overall pregnancies. But so if that is the case, then why not exclude it from any abortion ban? Since it is that rare I see no reason to make it part of an overall abortion ban.
 

22AcaciaAve

Well-Known Member
Why are you ragging on independents ? Don't you realize that they have figured out that both parties are full of crap. They figured this out early, do you actually believe that these people are too stupid to understand how our Republic works.

I'm not ragging at all on them! They are the ones that control presidential elections. They went for Trump in 2016 and gave him a very narrow electoral victory over Hill. And then, just as they had giveth, they tooketh away. Independents went against him in 2020. Lesson......You gotta do more than just preach to your base! I am registered republican, but have honestly been an independent for about 20 years now. I agree wholeheartedly with your both parties are full of crap assessment. I believe we will only make progress in this country after both parties are dead and buried.
 

glhs837

Power with Control
I do recognize and agree that pregnancies by rape or incest are rare within overall pregnancies. But so if that is the case, then why not exclude it from any abortion ban? Since it is that rare I see no reason to make it part of an overall abortion ban.

See, this is the common ground enough people should be able to work with.
 

Kyle

ULTRA-F###ING-MAGA!
PREMO Member
There should also be an exemption for butt-ugly people.

We got plenty of those now. This can be part of the beautiful America movement.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BOP

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
See, this is the common ground enough people should be able to work with.

Agreed and this is where I tell folks to take a simple trip to Wiki and look up Abortion Law in other countries. Most countries that allow abortion have restrictions for many cases and strangely enough, VERY FEW allow at will, no reason, elective abortion without SOME restriction if not outright ban it.

Most of the nations we all consider so progressive and modern and we wish to emulate do NOT permit abortion at any time for any reason, and most of them restrict elective abortion at anywhere from 12 weeks (Germany) to 14 weeks (France) .
 

limblips

Well-Known Member
I do recognize and agree that pregnancies by rape or incest are rare within overall pregnancies. But so if that is the case, then why not exclude it from any abortion ban? Since it is that rare I see no reason to make it part of an overall abortion ban.
The SCOTUS decision does not break down any exceptions nor should it. Either abortion is constitutional or it is not. That is what the court is supposed to do, determine constitutionlity of laws. If states want exceptions as of now they are free to do so.
 

glhs837

Power with Control
The SCOTUS decision does not break down any exceptions nor should it. Either abortion is constitutional or it is not. That is what the court is supposed to do, determine constitutionlity of laws. If states want exceptions as of now they are free to do so.

I that was the point, that those states enacting bans could go a long way towards compromise by allowing birth defect, rape and incest exceptions. At the "cost" of not allowing very many.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
The SCOTUS decision does not break down any exceptions nor should it. Either abortion is constitutional or it is not. That is what the court is supposed to do, determine constitutionlity of laws. If states want exceptions as of now they are free to do so.
PRECISELY. I'm having this conversation repeatedly with people at all levels of information regarding the decision.

The only thing they did was determine that there is NOT a constitutionally protected right to have an abortion. They do not ban it, nor do they outline what kinds of abortions should be allowed - WHICH IS WHAT ROE *DID*. SCOTUS is not supposed to MAKE laws.

Even RGB found that Roe was on constitutionally shaky ground. Roe is predicated on the concepts in the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause, which has been a rather weak argument to a "right to privacy". She actually supported abortion, but believed it should have been argued under the Equal Protection Clause (same amendment) - and had written to the effect of scrapping it and starting over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BOP

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

Since abortion is not a right guaranteed by the constitution, let the people vote on it in a national referendum. Let the chips fall wherever they may.
National referendum? Do you think the Federal government is something like California with their plethora of annual referendums? Nothing in the US Constitution references anything about referendums. There is however, a similar mechanism called the Constitutional Amendment process. But good luck with getting 3/4ths, (37) of the States to sign off, ratify, on something like that. Abortion is a States right issue. It's as simple as that.
 

22AcaciaAve

Well-Known Member
The SCOTUS decision does not break down any exceptions nor should it. Either abortion is constitutional or it is not. That is what the court is supposed to do, determine constitutionlity of laws. If states want exceptions as of now they are free to do so.
Agreed. And I even said that I agree with the SCOTUS decision as far as technical terms. The decision should be a states issue, or be legislated from either states or the Feds. Or maybe just let the states determine it, which is what republicans have wanted for years. But it didn't take long for republicans to start talking about controlling the presidency, the house, and the senate, and crafting a national ban. Which I would think should be struck down by the SCOTUS for the exact same reasons as Roe v. Wade was.
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
Agreed. And I even said that I agree with the SCOTUS decision as far as technical terms. The decision should be a states issue, or be legislated from either states or the Feds. Or maybe just let the states determine it, which is what republicans have wanted for years. But it didn't take long for republicans to start talking about controlling the presidency, the house, and the senate, and crafting a national ban. Which I would think should be struck down by the SCOTUS for the exact same reasons as Roe v. Wade was.
Once again I’m going to disagree, I don’t think it’s a state’s decision, I’d go with a medical decision. I’m sure there are some very good reasons why some women should need an abortion and a doctor is generally the right person to make that decision.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

Once again I’m going to disagree, I don’t think it’s a state’s decision, I’d go with a medical decision. I’m sure there are some very good reasons why some women should need an abortion and a doctor is generally the right person to make that decision.
You mean to say the person that has a financial interest in providing said abortion, is the right person to make that decision?
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
They’ve got a financial interest in setting a broken leg also. It’s a medical decision, not a political one, you either trust the guys who trained for it or not.
 

black dog

Free America
Why would any woman raped not take the "morning after pill" (and screening for STD) to prevent pregnancy from occurring is beyond me.
That brings lots of question's..

What does she do if she doesn't have the $50.00 the pill costs at the pharmacy?
What if she lives in a red state and now has no PP office to make an appointment?
What if shes under 17 has no money and cant buy the pill without a prescription?

Plan B One-Step and Next Choice are available over the counter at many pharmacies for women over 17. It may cost anywhere from $10 to $50. If you are under 17 and need a prescription, the health care visit may cost anywhere from $35 to $250, depending on where you live.
 

black dog

Free America
Everybody has a car. Drive to a state that approves of murdering your kids and get rid of it.
Abortions are not illegal everywhere. It's up to the individual states, and more then likely now that they are forced into it a lot of states will be changing their laws on it.

It's just another transition.
Everyone has a car? LOL.....
Most of America doesn't have a savings account,
And you think they all have cars....
 
Top