Why I Voted For Trump...

[Cow Poke]

Fetuses are not deemed persons during the first trimester according to Roe v Wade, which is when the vast majority of abortions are performed. This is also the position of the majority of the US population (including Evangelicals 50 years ago) who support R v W.

We've been here before, Tassman --- anybody with half a brain knows that it's a human baby inside the woman's body. Cowardly hiding behind terminology does not change that.

Also, the woman has rights too, which you are blithely ignoring.

I'm not "blithely" ignoring anything, you goofus. If anybody is ignoring anything, it's you and your culture of death allies ignoring that the living being has ZERO rights, according to the abortion industry.

OTOH capital punishment DOES wantonly kill actual, sentient persons and there can be no justification for this in a civilized society.

I'm not a vocal advocate of capital punishment, but what you're "blithely" ignoring is that fact that the condemned person has actually been condemned after due process - something not afforded the baby.

[Terraceth]

Fetuses are not deemed persons during the first trimester according to Roe v Wade, which is when the vast majority of abortions are performed. This is also the position of the majority of the US population (including Evangelicals 50 years ago) who support R v W.

I think a lot of that comes from the fact people are ignorant about exactly what Roe v. Wade decided. (I also expect many are ignorant of the legal matters, because as I have noted before, Roe v. Wade was so poorly reasoned that even people who were pro-choice decried its decision as the Supreme Court just making up a constitutional right and correctly comparing it to the much-derided Lochner era).

Of course, if so many people are supposedly in favor of abortion rights, then there's no need for Roe v. Wade. Just overturn it and then enact those things into law, problem solved. Almost no one cares about an overturn of Buck v. Bell because the sterilization laws that were upheld in that decision have all been repealed.

Also, the woman has rights too, which you are blithely ignoring.

The "constitutional right" of the woman to get an abortion was just as made up as the "right to contract" that caused the Supreme Court to claim that minimum wage laws were unconstitutional (see earlier link). To be consistent, anyone who believes Roe v. Wade was correctly decided must agree that all minimum wage laws, maximum work hour laws, child labor laws, and all the rest of such laws are unconstitutional, because both of these claims are both equally supported by the constitution.

[NorrinRadd]

So, in your view, its OK to kill human beings once they're outside the womb?

Only if they turn into liberals or atheists.

(I chose to prefer Prov. 26:5 over 26:4.)

[Tassman]

I'm not a vocal advocate of capital punishment, but what you're "blithely" ignoring is that fact that the condemned person has actually been condemned after due process - something not afforded the baby.

[Tassman]

Of course, if so many people are supposedly in favor of abortion rights, then there's no need for Roe v. Wade. Just overturn it and then enact those things into law, problem solved.

[Cow Poke]

Again,

Stating the same crap over and over does not make it truer, Tassy.

fetuses are not deemed 'persons' ...

"Personhood" is a philosophical term. Trust the science, Tass.

When an egg and a sperm unite, a new unique being is created with its very own DNA. What type of being is it? Obviously, it's a HUMAN BEING.

[Cow Poke]

You keep citing Roe V Wade like it's sacred. (No doubt, to you, it is)

Roe V Wade was a terribly flawed decision.

Honest pro-choicers admit Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision



Got that, Tass? HONEST Pro-choicers...

[Tassman]

You keep citing Roe V Wade like it's sacred. (No doubt, to you, it is)

Roe V Wade was a terribly flawed decision.

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcar...old-roe-v-wade

[Tassman]

When an egg and a sperm unite, a new unique being is created with its very own DNA. What type of being is it?

The issue is when this https://momentmag.com/wp-content/upl...life-begin.pdf

Obviously, it's a HUMAN BEING.

[Terraceth]

Plessy v. Ferguson was also law of the land, which the anti-segregationists wanted to overturn.

Also, I would argue that Plessy v. Ferguson, despite its deficiencies, had much backing in precedent and the text of the Constitution than Roe v. Wade did.

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcar...old-roe-v-wade

And how many of those people would be even able to say what the Supreme Court's supposed rationale for the decision was? Or don't really care about how good the rationale was and just want it because it supports their preferred social policy? A survey of people where most of them whose knowledge begins and ends with "Roe v. Wade made abortion legal" (without any knowledge of the specifics or the reasoning) doesn't mean anything at all as to the decision not being flawed.

[Tassman]

A survey of people where most of them whose knowledge begins and ends with "Roe v. Wade made abortion legal" (without any knowledge of the specifics or the reasoning) doesn't mean anything at all as to the decision not being flawed.

It is only for those whose religious ideology opposes abortion.

[Cow Poke]

It became the law of the land because abortionists pushed activist judges to create "rights" that were not in the Constitution.

[Cow Poke]

The issue is when this attains all the rights and protections of a person.

In your opinion. But you have quite a track record of being wrong. Stop being such a science denier!

[Cow Poke]

It is only for those whose religious ideology opposes abortion.

[JimL]

Yet she still believed it to be an acceptable judicial decision.