Clem72
Well-Known Member
Those types do exist, I worked with a guy who would drive up to DC at least once a month to protest abortion.
Roe v Wade
- Thread starter vraiblonde
- Start date
Those types do exist, I worked with a guy who would drive up to DC at least once a month to protest abortion.
They exist, they just don't make up the whole of the Party. Right to Life isn't a major selling point for the GOP. I mean, it is now because of the case before the Supremes, but that's just politicians jumping on the bandwagon. Like same-sex marriage - I think most people have gotten used to it and if some crazy President wanted to abolish it we as a country would be like, "You can't do that."
Or maybe not. It could be just my perception.
Why is it important to make that distinction? Does calling it a union or a marriage change anything about it? And does what it’s called effect you in any way?
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
You can do anything you like and accept what you like, I will do the same.;
It is not a marriage. Just like you cannot marry the male or female ends of a garden hose.
The sexes are different for a purpose. You call them anything you like I won't.
During Dobbs Oral Arguments, Justice Sotomayor Referenced Some of The Worst Pro-Abortion Arguments There Are
This abortion case provided a unique opportunity in that one could listen into oral arguments. A transcript was also available.
Early on in the line of questioning from justices, Sotomayor bent over backwards to try to dismiss claims that unborn children can feel pain in the womb. The Mississippi solicitor general, Scott Stewart, had offered up the science of studying fetal pain as one of the advancements made since 1992's Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Justice Sotomayor admonished Stewart, claiming that it's "a gross minority of doctors who believe fetal pain exists before 24, 25 weeks, it's a huge minority and one not well founded in science at all," later adding it was "a small fringe of doctors."
This abortion case provided a unique opportunity in that one could listen into oral arguments. A transcript was also available.
Early on in the line of questioning from justices, Sotomayor bent over backwards to try to dismiss claims that unborn children can feel pain in the womb. The Mississippi solicitor general, Scott Stewart, had offered up the science of studying fetal pain as one of the advancements made since 1992's Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Justice Sotomayor admonished Stewart, claiming that it's "a gross minority of doctors who believe fetal pain exists before 24, 25 weeks, it's a huge minority and one not well founded in science at all," later adding it was "a small fringe of doctors."
I think the chick trying to make the case that adoption is just as traumatic as abortion is the Hot Take of the issue (until some terrible lefty comes up with a more stupid one). She was coming at it from the standpoint of the pregnant person - how hard it is for a woman to give up her baby. She made no comment on how the, you know, baby might be affected.
And....ready?
She herself was adopted.
Obviously it didn't occur to her that had her birth mother opted for abortion instead of adoption, she wouldn't be here to spew her nonsense.
I'll post the piece if I can find it again.....
And....ready?
She herself was adopted.
Obviously it didn't occur to her that had her birth mother opted for abortion instead of adoption, she wouldn't be here to spew her nonsense.
I'll post the piece if I can find it again.....
One layer deep thought process.