Doctors would not leave a dead baby in the mother.

 

Nice you can recognize sarcasm.

 

Hard to tell with dem’s, you fuckers are canceling all the comedians.

 

Only the unfunny conservatives...

 

@njboytoy, so what did I get wrong?

 

THERE'S A LITTLE LEFT OUT OF THE ABOVE STORY.
A 21-year-old Native American woman from Oklahoma was convicted of manslaughter after having a miscarriage
The BBC obtained the infants coroner report which documented traces of methamphetamine in her unborn son's liver and brain. The examiner did not determine a cause of death for the foetus, noting genetic anomaly, placenta abruption or maternal methamphetamine use could have been contributing factors.
Apparently, the woman had a long running history of drug abuse. When she did not stop doing drugs during the early part of her pregnancy and she had the miscarriage and the baby had traces of meth in his liver and brain, she was charged with and convicted of 2nd degree manslaughter. I'm not sure I see a problem with this.

Liberals are desperate to find causes around which to motivate their base, up to and including lying by omission.

 

Under Roe v Wade, the father has No say !

 

And without Roe, neither the father nor the mother has any say.

 

Definitely not all they do, and planned Parenthood is also for men. I have been getting tested at planned Parenthood for decades. Not all of them even offer abortions.

 

If the law of the land prevents abortion because we are so concerned about the 'unborn human', then it should be protected in all ways. It should be illegal for a pregnant woman to smoke cigarettes, drink any alcohol, eat poorly, maybe even have sex (lol). Perhaps oregnant women should be forced into protective custody for the benefit of the unborn.

 

You can still get an abortion if you need one, you may have to travel to another state to get one.

The ruling only kicked the decision back to each individual state.

Lots of women are happy for this ruling.

 

But the majority of Americans want abortion to remain legal. The only way for these states to get the laws passed it's to force it in a bill. They are afraid to put it up for a general vote because they know that a majority of Americans want it.

Tyranny of the minority.

 

I agree that the majority is ok with early abortion, but when democrats started pushing the third trimester abortion you were no longer the majority.

they pushed it to far and that’s when the table started turning. They weren’t happy with 1st or 2nd trimester, we wanna kill a completely formed baby that can live if taken from its mother. To far buddy!

 

Really? You believe that a woman will allow a pregnancy to progress to the third trimester so then on a whim, she get's it aborted? How much does it cost for her to care for that fetus until the 26th week, when she can gladly and ceremoniously abort that non-viable lump of human cells?

Really? You believe that women allow a pregnancy to progress that far before doing something about it?

Third trimester abortions are due to medical reasons, not because the mother was just having a bad day.

 

Useless Fear mongering!

 

Says a man, of course. You have no idea.

 

I am being serious. Ann Coulter has stated that women would have their vote taken from them. I can't find it at the moment, but there was also a woman politician from Oklahoma (I believe) that wanted to take away women's right to vote.

 

BULLSHIT!!!!!!

 

Ok. Don't believe me. No skin off my dick...

 

You don't have a dick !

 

Looks to me like he does. Why don't you think so?

 

The US Supreme Court is not forcing a woman " to gestate a fetus she doesn’t want".... However, there is no obligation on behave of the US government to facilitate the termination of said "fetus" on demand...

 

The US Supreme Court has failed in their prima facie responsibility to protect the liberty of all Americans.

 

No one ever said the US Supreme Court was perfect or life is fair....

 

Well ain’t that the fuckin’ truth.

 

Does that include the unborn fetus? or the parent who wants to keep the child? The woman is not the only factor in the creation of a child !

 

And because they changed their minds about a 50-year old decision, several states had already introduced bans on abortion, even before the decision was announced. One state has gone so far as to say that if women are traveling out of state to anywhere that offers abortion, they will have to take a pregnancy test to be allowed to travel.

 

Bullshit! The Ruling specifically stated that women could seek the procedure in another State, as they are covered by "The Right to Travel" !

 

There are states who are looking to prohibit that.

 

I doubt they can do that!

 

Mississippi tried ... we are waiting for the decision!

 

Believe what you will. I will for keeping abortion legal, not because you dolts claim that we are "baby killers", but solely for the purposes of taking care of mother's that take drastic measures did to complications.

But I guess you'd rather see her die.

 

RBG should've retired under Obama, Anon.

 

Even back in the 50's abortion was not illegal for w0men who were affluent enough to afford to travel. They could and did travel to foreign countries for their abortions. But poor or even just average women did not have that luxury.

So now states can make it a crime to have an abortion in their state and make it illegal for a woman to travel to another state for an abortion.

 

Wrong ! The Ruling states that women are protected under their right to travel!

 

Wrong ! The Ruling states that women are protected under their right to travel!

 

Yeah, let's hear it for required "medical care..." That's Leftist code for aborting a fetus.

Regardless if you support Roe v Wade or not, and whether it's based on the right to privacy or not, the R v W ruling WAS intellectually flawed from the moment it was issued. Leftist legal scholars have worried from the very beginning about it being challenged in SCOTUS and losing.

 

So the "right of privacy" is in the constitution??? I believe the 14th amendment guarantees due process, not some right to privacy. There is a deeper issue here. The Supreme Court's mission is to see how cases square up against the Constitution. Their power is limited as it should be. They are appointed for life, not elected. I don't want the black robes grabbing too much power. This issue should go to the states as enumerated in the 10th amendment.

 

Why are you so intentionally ignorant? I've been very consistent in my views on abortion, and by required care, I mean saving the life of the mother.

But hey, you go right on mischaracterizing what people say. It's your best debate tactic.

 

I would ask you to show these scholars, but I doubt you will.

 

Absolutely nothing to do with the topic... But that is the height of your intellectual prowess.