Roberts is lost to the dark side. Expect nothing from him except for betrayal of conservatism and the Constitution. I'd like to demand that he show us that part of the Constitution that specifically enumerates the right to an abortion. But he will never answer that question directly... if he answered at all it would be the most convoluted leap of logic and word salad in search of a cogent thought.
William Buckeley once said that some ideas are so ridiculous that only an intellectual could believe them. Case in point, Justice Roberts.
This is where it is easy to tell that someone is out of his depth. "His dimwit son"? GW Bush was an F-102 pilot. There is no way to be a dimwit and survive flying that plane. He wasn't a dimwit, but he was wrong in many things. You don't get to look down on his intelligence simply because he was wrong.
W was born into evil and raised in it. He is very, very stupid. I would say borderline retarded.He made a joke at a commencement speech that it is not the A students running the world but the D students(like himself,which would have gotten anyone else an F------)). He was also a cheerleader lol. As to flying jets, I am sure anyone of average + intelligence could be taught). As to how to and fly strategic missions, on-the-fly decision makimg, etc, that is different. Also, I doubt W flew a jet in his worthless life. Seeing a PR pic is not proof. Poppy knew he had and idiot and had an image created for him. His words and deeds show who he is, a rertard puppet of evil family.
No. I happen to be an aerodynamicist who understands how tricky it was to fly the F-102, and have talked with an F-102 pilot about that. Since you don't have a clue, you are comfortable in your ignorance and scorn. You would crash on your first flight, so be thankful that you aren't in that seat.
No, I'm not acting at all like he is Isaac Newton, and you know that, too. Interesting that you have to build yourself up by tearing other people down.
Ding, Ding,Ding Ding Ding! House can impeach with a simple majority, just as they can do with a president. But it requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate to remove a SCOTUS Justice.
It’s also possible that his family was threatened. The control did not necessarily come from something he did wrong (but it is equally possible that it is from something he did). But it is pretty clear that he is controlled. How horrible to be him.
I was reading your post (and I did read all of it) with an open mind until you said "according to their individual morals and values." I still have an open mind, but I am confused by your logic. If the matter of abortion always comes down to individual morals and values, then some people would be justified (under that relativistic paradigm) to go with the new 4th trimester bullshit, let alone 2nd and 3rd trimesters.
To me, the problem is a lack of humility among human beings. Belief in God, or not, if we are not humble enough in the presence of creations earliest moment, then all else is a slippery slope, and we are no better than a male carnivore that eats its own young.
I'm on the road and I can't elaborate as much as I want but your posts are really good.
Most anti abortion folks are pretty hypocritical because they'll happily support couples doing IVF...where anywhere from one to a two dozen embryos get killed just to have one "miracle" pregnancy instead of just adopting
I dont agree that embryos are being killed in ivf for all couples. It is still natural selection taking place. Most of the embryos die on their own in the support material before day 3 as they would in the womb due to abnormalities of the cells or they don't keep splitting. A few more will stop growing on there own before day 5 for the same reasons.
At day 5 a choice: good embryos can be put back in the womb, frozen to be used later or discarded (that would be a mom who doesn't care) I doubt anti abortion are discarding when my next example is a viable option. These things can be discussed with the fertility doctor. Most women going through that are doing it for want of children and aren't going to be willy nilly destroying precious potential babies.
I had my embryos that didn't look so viable (already deteriorating) be used and put into my womb where God and nature could take its course if it wanted.
I am 42. 6 rounds of ivf and I only ever had 1 embryo live each time to day 5. 2 miscarriages and 4 didn't even implant - that is up to god.
Anyway just an opinion from someone in those trenches who is prolife. My 7th round worked well finally and I froze 5. The first didn't implant, 2nd was my first born child this year. I will keep trying with all three of the frozen ones. I would never destroy them even if I'm trying till I'm 50.
Now if you are talking about women who discard frozen saved embryos you are right and I don't know how many do that let alone women who are anti abortion like me - I wouldn't do it. Maybe they can't foot the yearly bill of 1000 dollars for freezing storage so then maybe you are right. Others will use all their frozen embryos - hoping God wills it into a baby.
Ivf life - nobody going into an ivf clinic or working for one wants to see those lives destroyed. I don't doubt that there are some evil ones out there as in anything but it hasn't been my experience. That cli ic was with me for 10 years even though I lowered their success rates. They clearly scared about me throughout my pregnancy. They were more supportive of the life In me then women and infants in Providence that hounded me to get pregnancy vaxxed.
Also - who kills their embryos they spent 15000 to 50000 for even if prochoice.
Lastly many vote prochoice who haven't really looked into the science behind life (ivf clinics understand this science better than most)
Many of these women think they are prochoice but wouldn't actually use it themselves - again women doing ivf want that baby.
Not sure I agree with you that those are the only two opinions allowed to be debated. Even the most rabid Democrats I know wouldn't argue that you can kill a baby after it's born. It's always a number of weeks after conception. Maybe those people do exist, but I certainly haven't met any of them.
I like most of your posts rooftop (I mostly lurk and comment as I did on chans and voat) and appreciate your long post on where the debate is at and why it's wrongly framed.
My belief is if it is moving and splitting and growing...it is living. It is making its brain and heart to better support its life but i happen to believe each cell is a brain and it can feel itself to do its most basic functions. The lowliest one celled organism bacteria would be considered a sign of life by science on another planet so why not the two celled split organism at conception? And I call those cells my baby when actively trying to procreate even at 1 week pregnant. So my thing is that it doesn't need a heart or nerve ending to want to exist if it is already growing it clearly does want to exist. It is the basic form of us yes but it is still a unique human life. Maybe science will be able to see far enough some day to know that a divided 2 celled human being can feel at its most basic level. Then would abortion be wrong for those who say not past a heartbeat or until it can feel etc..but before is ok?
Yeah maybe there should be exceptions if it's forced on you by a real rape but those are less than 1% of what the debate is even talking about. Most people are doing it for convenience and as birth control because they've been told it is just a clump of cells and it's their body to choose to murder it. At 8 weeks that baby has every organ and limb and is super small but formed but that is legal to abort as well in 1st trimester.
Many women have never seen an aborted baby spasming in death throws in the 1st trimester because they willfully will not look at the ultrasounds showing it clearly. Deep down they know it's life but want to stay asleep to the evil of it for conveniences sake. Murder isn't a choice and while it is in their body it is its own form tenously only attached through a placenta which is an organ it grew. Murder is never right.
It is also not needed to abort a child to save the moms life. I'm sure there's one rare exception but most of the time delivering the baby saves the life of both. C section is done.
If you look at ultrasounds of abortions or wanted babies you cannot unlook and if it doesn't effect that person they might be a psychopath.
Not saying you are one, as i dont know how much research or looking you have done but for some reason I felt I needed to comment on this. Maybe it will spark a thought for someone. I tried for 20 years and 7 rounds of grueling ivf. I've read thousands of papers and seen hundreds of ultrasounds. I know the heart ache of a lost child at 4 weeks and 6 weeks and 8 weeks and the joy from my firstborn this year at 42. When you want that life you can feel it's presence. It effects every part of your body and communicates with your body and you feel its loss for days and weeks and years. For a women to willingly put herself into that kind of trauma and to be the cause of it...it breaks my heart for them even if they do not understand what they did was wrong. But many who did an abortion deeply regretted it right after and turned them prolife. It's innate shame they did something wrong even if they don't know why. The body knew.
Babies are a gift. Struggling with infertility you realize just how tenuous and amazing it all is. Most babies die naturally before a women even gets a period. More than most women know. If any one thing goes wrong in the cycle process that life isn't happening. They teach us procreation is easy but in reality healthy couples in their fertile years between 18 and 28 only have a 25% chance of conception. It lowers every year after that until its less than 5% chance to even conceive in your 40s. That isn't even the % chance that baby implants which is lower. And the % chance that baby lives to a heartbeat. Every baby has passed insurmountable odds to be a gift. It shouldn't be discarded like trash.
I've never met any like that either. A lot of Democrats I've had discussions with tend to agree that if the baby can survive outside the womb even with lots of medical intervention, that abortions shouldn't happen after that unless the pregnancy is directly threatening the mother's life. This period of viability of a baby outside the womb is usually about 24 weeks for any sort of good survivability. That's around the end of the second trimester. The large majority of abortions happen within the first trimester.
The problem arises far before the woman is pregnant, though nobody wants to talk about it.
Allowing abortion in any form takes the responsibility off of the person. I would not say that women think "no big deal worst comes to worst I'll have an abortion". I don't think the majority of women are as flip as that.
But I DO believe that if abortion were fully illegal, they may give sex that one quick second thought. And that could save millions of lives of both unborn babies and the women who are scarred forever.
We need a communal effort to take in these women, help them through, and the only decision should be adoption or she decides to keep the child.
I don't think the ability to have an abortion or not even matters to a rapist to be honest.
But we're getting far into the weeds here anyway. Illegals and enemy forces... Yeah I get it but those are also issues that need to be taken care of independently. I don't think you can wait until everything is perfect to start change.
Even if you just allow for women who are impregnated due to rape to have abortions... I mean that just opens up all kinds of bullshit.
I absolutely agree. You can also find lefties who once you admit that abortion is their individual choice, they will be open to discussing the horrors of buying fetuses. That's the red pill that most of them don't know about, and it opens them to the rational side of the conservative argument.
I've also met left winged girls (varying in age) who regret getting an abortion, and they tell me how they cry at night over the choice they made years later. Some of these girls are in their 60s, and it still effects them.
I don't think a lot of people understand how it eats at these girls for the rest of their lives.
It dawned on me that some might be defending their past regrets when these abortion issues come up. These politicians are sick.
It's crazy how one can say they are 100% against abortions and also say they are for individual liberties at the same time. Our contradictions are just as bad as the lefties when we fall for it. Keep in mind this contradiction is being utilized by the Cabal to divide each other.
For those who don't believe me, reread Tendie's post:
and lots of times when we're not feeling >pressure coming from 100%anti-abortion >MAGAtarians... we will discuss our views with >eachother, and there's quite a healthy slice of >MAGA that isn't 100% on it.
It's already happening under our nose. So what are we going to do about it? Shutting it out of the conversation obviously isn't healthy, nor is it working.
I've found that abortion is one of the polarizing issues that stop some women from voting conservative altogether.
A little empathy goes a very long way in delivering this red pill, and if we can be more open to other people's scenarios, I think we can get our message across. It's time to wake up out of the mainstream conservative trance and look what's going on in our own backyard.
So if a woman chooses to not murder her baby you have a right to not be a dad.
Did you do your part and wear a condom or make sure she had birth control? Spermicides for example, it doesn't always have to be the pill.
Or better yet don't fuck around if you don't want to risk having a baby.
Men can also be responsible and use condoms, or oh idk not have sex outside of a longterm relationship?
<How about forced neutering?> Maybe they could force vasectomies.
I was a single mom only had one and raised her on my own, I was on the pill but I had just started it, didn't realize it took a month to be effective. I tried to make him wear condoms... famous last words I'll pull out, or just this once baby, or but it doesn't feel as good. I could go on.
I've never been married and I've had three long term relationships, but the story is always the same. Thankfully I only was pregnant once, but I used birth control.
They could use the money they're using to fund planned parenthood on reproductive education for women and affordable birth control methods with assistance paying for it for women in need.
Making affordable birth control widely available and easy to access is the quickest, most effective way to reduce the number of abortions that occur. There's been studies on this. Helping women have family planning solutions and the ability to manage their own birth control regardless of ability to pay will continually keep unplanned pregnancies from happening in the first place, and therefore cutting down hugely on the number of abortions. But there are many Christians around here and elsewhere on the right that get so puritanical about anything to do with sex that they think people just shouldn't ever have sex, as if that'sa realistic solution. News Flash, people are going to have sex regardless, it's been happening forever, and will continue to happen. So getting birth control and education about the birth control and how to properly use it for both men and women is essential in keeping children from being aborted.
The problem is as you stated but it's two fold. Men shouldn't be throwing away their procreation materials on trash women for the fun of sex by being trashy themselves. Women who want to fool around should use prevention as you said but so should the man and I'm sorry if it doesn't feel good to wear a condom or makes a man go green to get a vasectomy but if they are gonna be gross with gross women they are gonna get repercussions. The responsibility should be on both parties not to start a life and kill it.
I agree on more stringent rules for handouts to discourage this type of thing and we need more carrots for people starting real families.
We need to make societal shame for willy nilly premarital sex great again,
monogamy and marriage great again too. Staying married great again.
First we may need to defund them: It's going to be hard without a real PP evil reveal - and a huge one. to convince both Democrats (the non-hardened ones) and wishy washy Republicans to defund PP. Senator Rand Paul has been fighting this battle in the Senate as long as he has been in office, and has blamed the Republican left (so-called 'moderates') for the continued Taxpayer 'grants for education purposes' for PP.
The Court has not yet decided on the constitutionality of the Texas law. The matter before them for today as whether the law can be stopped by forcing Texas officials to stop enforcing it. The Court ruled that there is no constitutional grounds to stop state officials from enforcing their laws.
The question of whether the Texas law is unconstitutional is still pending. We now know with certainty that Roberts will vote that it is unconstitutional. So the conservative majority on the Court is truly 5-4, with no margin for error.
The Mississippi case is a more direct Roe v Wade challenge. This one is also important, but is less restrictive than MS, and therefore doesn't represent the same "overturning Roe v Wade" significance.
You're not ignorant at all. No one can answer your question because the Constitution has no such right. Roe was poorly briefed, poorly argued and poorly decided. It is a terrible decision from a legal standpoint, let alone the immorality of it.
The Constitution does not confer rights to humans. It confers power to the government to act within it's confines.
So, before I continue with my answer to your question, look carefully at this picture. It may convey a very important lesson. One, more important than you may think.
Good! With that under the belt, let's go back to the CONSTITUTION that is supposed to curtail and contain the federal government.
Amendment X surprisingly reads: ALL [FUCKING] RIGHTS RESERVED.
And that is exactly what Roe v Wade contends.
If you want to know more, simply go to searchvoat.co. And use the search option with the check box Voat.co engaged, and greatawakening as the board.
You can choose to look for comments or posts.
I can already hear the self-rightious crowd roar. Sorry guys and girls. *You should read your contracts better. *It says exactly what it says. If you do not like it, you are just as tyrannical as the left you are railing against.
Here is a quote from Oscar Wilde, though commenting concerning a different part of freedom:
I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an ass of yourself.
There is no right to murder another person. A fetus is "another person," because it is genetically distinct from the mother. It is indeed another individual person. If you think you have a right to murder it, then it is impossible to say you do not have a right to infanticide, since the issue at stake is the convenience to the mother. (And we are now seeing stories about cases where the baby is delivered, and the doctor and the mother are supposed to "have a conversation" about what to do next: keep it or conduct infanticide.)
Rape is immaterial to this question. The fetus did not commit the rape. It is an innocent third party. You don't murder innocent persons for the sake of convenience. This is Nazi genocidal thinking.
O yes, there is. It happens everyday. There are two ways in which you can legally end a walking talking human's life:
~1. Self defense.
~2. Jury of 12.
~3. By declaration of war
~4. Clear and Present danger.
~5. Pre-emptive.
~6. When you can get away with it.
Your argument reflect utilitarian arguments. And I do not disagree with you. I have been confronted with the issue from two angles. From a medical perspective and from a convenience perspective. My personal views were and still are irrelevant to the final outcome, as it is not my choice to make but the woman's in question.
Since time immemorial the choice has always been the woman's. Do some research, actual research. And you will see the factual correctness of that statement.
Roe v Wade is a monstrosity. But not for "GRANTING" or legislating something you do not agree with. On the one hand it does recognize the right to choose, as such a choice is not the government's to make, but the woman's by whatever freedom article you want to go. Scotus embedded it within the first semester, as that is also the natural period of uncertainty, and the historical usance.
The monstrosity appears when the Scotus made a pregnant woman into an object of STATE INTEREST, a ward of the STATE. That is putting the relationship between the People and the Government on it's head, as if the product of the creation of the People has more power than the People having created it.
But, do not take my word for it. read the damn ruling yourself for a change.
The next item connected to this drama is how to discard of the aborted. Is it a product? Is it waste? Personally, I find it disgusting what I saw being revealed by Project Veritas. And yes, people find themselves in such situations due to a lack of self-awareness and virtue, and do stupid things, because they are stupid, and kept stupid. The worst part is, many of them remain stupid, because that is what they like to be. It is their virtue to be stupid.
Here is a quote from Oscar Wilde, though commenting concerning a different part of freedom:
I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an ass of yourself.
You are just being sarcastic. None of the items you enumerate are either murder or an excuse for murder. You completely duck the medical and legal fact that the fetus is a separate individual. (There is no point to quibbling over "utilitarian" arguments, when the argument for abortion is only utilitarian. My point is that there can be no utilitarian arguments.)
Since time immemorial, infanticide has been practiced. That rather eliminates "time immemorial" from the status of an authority figure.
If Roe vs. Wade is set aside, we return to the status quo ante, which was for the issue to be determined by the individual states through legislation. Just as the issue of homicide is determined.
You say it is not your choice to make. I would agree, in the sense that It is no one's choice to make, as murder is not an allowable "option." But in a larger sense, the opinions of society at large cannot be dismissed as irrelevant---any more than they would be if you or I or anyone were to walk past an alley and see someone in the act of murdering someone else. Murder is not a "private affair" of the murderer, such that no one else should interfere. Murder is a very individual crime against humanity, and all humanity has an interest in preventing it. Women who want to murder (for convenience or any other motive) are not admirable or honorable people.
Dems and uniparty are using this to give you a false victory and take a house and senate majority lead going forward.
Abortion is the single biggest distraction and the uniparty is fooling everyone.
Have fun when the 13% is 30% and the 1 million caravan migrants become 4 million. That's just in the first 10 years, and it's not even the biggest problem with abortion bans
the ruling didnt really read to me as a 'win' or a 'loss' but just allowing the case to proceed... the ruling also barred Texas from enforcing the law until the case is complete. To me this means no fines can be given currently, but perhaps if any providers are caught performing abortions that violate the law they can be fined after the case.
Roberts is lost to the dark side. Expect nothing from him except for betrayal of conservatism and the Constitution. I'd like to demand that he show us that part of the Constitution that specifically enumerates the right to an abortion. But he will never answer that question directly... if he answered at all it would be the most convoluted leap of logic and word salad in search of a cogent thought.
William Buckeley once said that some ideas are so ridiculous that only an intellectual could believe them. Case in point, Justice Roberts.
Fetuses do not vote unfortunately, that's all it ever comes down to.
This is where it is easy to tell that someone is out of his depth. "His dimwit son"? GW Bush was an F-102 pilot. There is no way to be a dimwit and survive flying that plane. He wasn't a dimwit, but he was wrong in many things. You don't get to look down on his intelligence simply because he was wrong.
W was born into evil and raised in it. He is very, very stupid. I would say borderline retarded.He made a joke at a commencement speech that it is not the A students running the world but the D students(like himself,which would have gotten anyone else an F------)). He was also a cheerleader lol. As to flying jets, I am sure anyone of average + intelligence could be taught). As to how to and fly strategic missions, on-the-fly decision makimg, etc, that is different. Also, I doubt W flew a jet in his worthless life. Seeing a PR pic is not proof. Poppy knew he had and idiot and had an image created for him. His words and deeds show who he is, a rertard puppet of evil family.
I'm not gonna argue your point but, I will say this.
Wikipedia is a horrible place to draw your sources from.
You just quoted wikipedia...
No. I happen to be an aerodynamicist who understands how tricky it was to fly the F-102, and have talked with an F-102 pilot about that. Since you don't have a clue, you are comfortable in your ignorance and scorn. You would crash on your first flight, so be thankful that you aren't in that seat.
No, I'm not acting at all like he is Isaac Newton, and you know that, too. Interesting that you have to build yourself up by tearing other people down.
Bush cultivated an image of himself as a dimwit in order to garner votes from rural America.
He was far from a dimwit; his grades were actually very good.
It's a DC elite thing. Get invited to the parties, get the media on your side, accolades, maybe a trip to a spiffy island...
They go south if they aren't men of strong constitution, pun intended
Maybe he has something in his past that keeps him in line. I know some have linked him to Epstein.
Start with his children.
Yessir. His adopted children made possible by the Epstein Pizzagate Foundation.
There is a John Roberts on Epstein's flight log, but the name is so common it isn't 100%, but I am leaning toward yes he is on the blackmail list.
Many believe this is him at Epstein Island with BC.
”The Reason Chief Justice Roberts is being blackmailed”
https://greerjournal.com/the-reason-chief-justice-roberts-is-being-blackmailed/
He is a member of the black eye club.
No surprise there. Traitor
Ding, Ding,Ding Ding Ding! House can impeach with a simple majority, just as they can do with a president. But it requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate to remove a SCOTUS Justice.
https://legalbeagle.com/6596992-rules-removing-supreme-court-justice.html
It’s also possible that his family was threatened. The control did not necessarily come from something he did wrong (but it is equally possible that it is from something he did). But it is pretty clear that he is controlled. How horrible to be him.
He's been implicated in Scalia's death Roberts is not squeaky clean at all.
Rumor has been that his adopted children were acquired illegally and that's his blackmail material
Which family? Doesn’t he have illegitimate kids?
I was reading your post (and I did read all of it) with an open mind until you said "according to their individual morals and values." I still have an open mind, but I am confused by your logic. If the matter of abortion always comes down to individual morals and values, then some people would be justified (under that relativistic paradigm) to go with the new 4th trimester bullshit, let alone 2nd and 3rd trimesters.
To me, the problem is a lack of humility among human beings. Belief in God, or not, if we are not humble enough in the presence of creations earliest moment, then all else is a slippery slope, and we are no better than a male carnivore that eats its own young.
This is a very good post. Thank you.
I'm on the road and I can't elaborate as much as I want but your posts are really good.
Most anti abortion folks are pretty hypocritical because they'll happily support couples doing IVF...where anywhere from one to a two dozen embryos get killed just to have one "miracle" pregnancy instead of just adopting
I dont agree that embryos are being killed in ivf for all couples. It is still natural selection taking place. Most of the embryos die on their own in the support material before day 3 as they would in the womb due to abnormalities of the cells or they don't keep splitting. A few more will stop growing on there own before day 5 for the same reasons.
At day 5 a choice: good embryos can be put back in the womb, frozen to be used later or discarded (that would be a mom who doesn't care) I doubt anti abortion are discarding when my next example is a viable option. These things can be discussed with the fertility doctor. Most women going through that are doing it for want of children and aren't going to be willy nilly destroying precious potential babies.
I had my embryos that didn't look so viable (already deteriorating) be used and put into my womb where God and nature could take its course if it wanted.
I am 42. 6 rounds of ivf and I only ever had 1 embryo live each time to day 5. 2 miscarriages and 4 didn't even implant - that is up to god.
Anyway just an opinion from someone in those trenches who is prolife. My 7th round worked well finally and I froze 5. The first didn't implant, 2nd was my first born child this year. I will keep trying with all three of the frozen ones. I would never destroy them even if I'm trying till I'm 50.
Now if you are talking about women who discard frozen saved embryos you are right and I don't know how many do that let alone women who are anti abortion like me - I wouldn't do it. Maybe they can't foot the yearly bill of 1000 dollars for freezing storage so then maybe you are right. Others will use all their frozen embryos - hoping God wills it into a baby.
Ivf life - nobody going into an ivf clinic or working for one wants to see those lives destroyed. I don't doubt that there are some evil ones out there as in anything but it hasn't been my experience. That cli ic was with me for 10 years even though I lowered their success rates. They clearly scared about me throughout my pregnancy. They were more supportive of the life In me then women and infants in Providence that hounded me to get pregnancy vaxxed.
Also - who kills their embryos they spent 15000 to 50000 for even if prochoice.
Lastly many vote prochoice who haven't really looked into the science behind life (ivf clinics understand this science better than most)
Many of these women think they are prochoice but wouldn't actually use it themselves - again women doing ivf want that baby.
Not sure I agree with you that those are the only two opinions allowed to be debated. Even the most rabid Democrats I know wouldn't argue that you can kill a baby after it's born. It's always a number of weeks after conception. Maybe those people do exist, but I certainly haven't met any of them.
I like most of your posts rooftop (I mostly lurk and comment as I did on chans and voat) and appreciate your long post on where the debate is at and why it's wrongly framed.
My belief is if it is moving and splitting and growing...it is living. It is making its brain and heart to better support its life but i happen to believe each cell is a brain and it can feel itself to do its most basic functions. The lowliest one celled organism bacteria would be considered a sign of life by science on another planet so why not the two celled split organism at conception? And I call those cells my baby when actively trying to procreate even at 1 week pregnant. So my thing is that it doesn't need a heart or nerve ending to want to exist if it is already growing it clearly does want to exist. It is the basic form of us yes but it is still a unique human life. Maybe science will be able to see far enough some day to know that a divided 2 celled human being can feel at its most basic level. Then would abortion be wrong for those who say not past a heartbeat or until it can feel etc..but before is ok?
Yeah maybe there should be exceptions if it's forced on you by a real rape but those are less than 1% of what the debate is even talking about. Most people are doing it for convenience and as birth control because they've been told it is just a clump of cells and it's their body to choose to murder it. At 8 weeks that baby has every organ and limb and is super small but formed but that is legal to abort as well in 1st trimester.
Many women have never seen an aborted baby spasming in death throws in the 1st trimester because they willfully will not look at the ultrasounds showing it clearly. Deep down they know it's life but want to stay asleep to the evil of it for conveniences sake. Murder isn't a choice and while it is in their body it is its own form tenously only attached through a placenta which is an organ it grew. Murder is never right.
It is also not needed to abort a child to save the moms life. I'm sure there's one rare exception but most of the time delivering the baby saves the life of both. C section is done.
If you look at ultrasounds of abortions or wanted babies you cannot unlook and if it doesn't effect that person they might be a psychopath.
Not saying you are one, as i dont know how much research or looking you have done but for some reason I felt I needed to comment on this. Maybe it will spark a thought for someone. I tried for 20 years and 7 rounds of grueling ivf. I've read thousands of papers and seen hundreds of ultrasounds. I know the heart ache of a lost child at 4 weeks and 6 weeks and 8 weeks and the joy from my firstborn this year at 42. When you want that life you can feel it's presence. It effects every part of your body and communicates with your body and you feel its loss for days and weeks and years. For a women to willingly put herself into that kind of trauma and to be the cause of it...it breaks my heart for them even if they do not understand what they did was wrong. But many who did an abortion deeply regretted it right after and turned them prolife. It's innate shame they did something wrong even if they don't know why. The body knew.
Babies are a gift. Struggling with infertility you realize just how tenuous and amazing it all is. Most babies die naturally before a women even gets a period. More than most women know. If any one thing goes wrong in the cycle process that life isn't happening. They teach us procreation is easy but in reality healthy couples in their fertile years between 18 and 28 only have a 25% chance of conception. It lowers every year after that until its less than 5% chance to even conceive in your 40s. That isn't even the % chance that baby implants which is lower. And the % chance that baby lives to a heartbeat. Every baby has passed insurmountable odds to be a gift. It shouldn't be discarded like trash.
Love your posts though!
I've never met any like that either. A lot of Democrats I've had discussions with tend to agree that if the baby can survive outside the womb even with lots of medical intervention, that abortions shouldn't happen after that unless the pregnancy is directly threatening the mother's life. This period of viability of a baby outside the womb is usually about 24 weeks for any sort of good survivability. That's around the end of the second trimester. The large majority of abortions happen within the first trimester.
Well said anon.
The problem arises far before the woman is pregnant, though nobody wants to talk about it.
Allowing abortion in any form takes the responsibility off of the person. I would not say that women think "no big deal worst comes to worst I'll have an abortion". I don't think the majority of women are as flip as that.
But I DO believe that if abortion were fully illegal, they may give sex that one quick second thought. And that could save millions of lives of both unborn babies and the women who are scarred forever.
We need a communal effort to take in these women, help them through, and the only decision should be adoption or she decides to keep the child.
I don't think the ability to have an abortion or not even matters to a rapist to be honest.
But we're getting far into the weeds here anyway. Illegals and enemy forces... Yeah I get it but those are also issues that need to be taken care of independently. I don't think you can wait until everything is perfect to start change.
Even if you just allow for women who are impregnated due to rape to have abortions... I mean that just opens up all kinds of bullshit.
I absolutely agree. You can also find lefties who once you admit that abortion is their individual choice, they will be open to discussing the horrors of buying fetuses. That's the red pill that most of them don't know about, and it opens them to the rational side of the conservative argument.
I've also met left winged girls (varying in age) who regret getting an abortion, and they tell me how they cry at night over the choice they made years later. Some of these girls are in their 60s, and it still effects them.
I don't think a lot of people understand how it eats at these girls for the rest of their lives.
It dawned on me that some might be defending their past regrets when these abortion issues come up. These politicians are sick.
It's crazy how one can say they are 100% against abortions and also say they are for individual liberties at the same time. Our contradictions are just as bad as the lefties when we fall for it. Keep in mind this contradiction is being utilized by the Cabal to divide each other.
For those who don't believe me, reread Tendie's post:
It's already happening under our nose. So what are we going to do about it? Shutting it out of the conversation obviously isn't healthy, nor is it working.
I've found that abortion is one of the polarizing issues that stop some women from voting conservative altogether.
A little empathy goes a very long way in delivering this red pill, and if we can be more open to other people's scenarios, I think we can get our message across. It's time to wake up out of the mainstream conservative trance and look what's going on in our own backyard.
Another outstanding post. Thank you.
In my other comment, I said:
I wasn't lying, and the responses to your first comment are a perfect example of how this works.
So if a woman chooses to not murder her baby you have a right to not be a dad. Did you do your part and wear a condom or make sure she had birth control? Spermicides for example, it doesn't always have to be the pill.
Or better yet don't fuck around if you don't want to risk having a baby.
I'm very pro life by the way.
You are so right and a great way to put it.
Men can also be responsible and use condoms, or oh idk not have sex outside of a longterm relationship?
<How about forced neutering?> Maybe they could force vasectomies.
I was a single mom only had one and raised her on my own, I was on the pill but I had just started it, didn't realize it took a month to be effective. I tried to make him wear condoms... famous last words I'll pull out, or just this once baby, or but it doesn't feel as good. I could go on.
I've never been married and I've had three long term relationships, but the story is always the same. Thankfully I only was pregnant once, but I used birth control. They could use the money they're using to fund planned parenthood on reproductive education for women and affordable birth control methods with assistance paying for it for women in need.
Making affordable birth control widely available and easy to access is the quickest, most effective way to reduce the number of abortions that occur. There's been studies on this. Helping women have family planning solutions and the ability to manage their own birth control regardless of ability to pay will continually keep unplanned pregnancies from happening in the first place, and therefore cutting down hugely on the number of abortions. But there are many Christians around here and elsewhere on the right that get so puritanical about anything to do with sex that they think people just shouldn't ever have sex, as if that'sa realistic solution. News Flash, people are going to have sex regardless, it's been happening forever, and will continue to happen. So getting birth control and education about the birth control and how to properly use it for both men and women is essential in keeping children from being aborted.
The problem is as you stated but it's two fold. Men shouldn't be throwing away their procreation materials on trash women for the fun of sex by being trashy themselves. Women who want to fool around should use prevention as you said but so should the man and I'm sorry if it doesn't feel good to wear a condom or makes a man go green to get a vasectomy but if they are gonna be gross with gross women they are gonna get repercussions. The responsibility should be on both parties not to start a life and kill it.
I agree on more stringent rules for handouts to discourage this type of thing and we need more carrots for people starting real families.
We need to make societal shame for willy nilly premarital sex great again,
monogamy and marriage great again too. Staying married great again.
Lol anyway you are right
First we may need to defund them: It's going to be hard without a real PP evil reveal - and a huge one. to convince both Democrats (the non-hardened ones) and wishy washy Republicans to defund PP. Senator Rand Paul has been fighting this battle in the Senate as long as he has been in office, and has blamed the Republican left (so-called 'moderates') for the continued Taxpayer 'grants for education purposes' for PP.
https://www.paul.senate.gov/news/republicans-block-sen-rand-paul%E2%80%99s-amendment-defund-planned-parenthood
https://en-volve.com/2018/08/24/senate-votes-against-defunding-planned-parenthood-here-are-the-two-republicans-that-sided-with-the-abortion-mill/
I don’t understand - this isn’t the big SCOTUS case we were all anticipating right?
The Court has not yet decided on the constitutionality of the Texas law. The matter before them for today as whether the law can be stopped by forcing Texas officials to stop enforcing it. The Court ruled that there is no constitutional grounds to stop state officials from enforcing their laws.
The question of whether the Texas law is unconstitutional is still pending. We now know with certainty that Roberts will vote that it is unconstitutional. So the conservative majority on the Court is truly 5-4, with no margin for error.
Thank you for that explanation that makes way more sense now
Barrett will fuck this up. I hope not, but unless she’s playing rope-a-dope, I think she’s compromised.
she's been a cunt from day 1. she's likely not compromised.
she has children, which makes her easy to compromise.
nah, screw her.
The Mississippi case is a more direct Roe v Wade challenge. This one is also important, but is less restrictive than MS, and therefore doesn't represent the same "overturning Roe v Wade" significance.
So, my body my choice "wins" out in the end.
Pedes, you know what to say to the mandatory vax mandates!
"My body, my choice!"
This is important.
Seems awful convenient for SCOTUS to overturn “my body my choice” just in time for vaccine mandates.
They must have made the calculation that they can kill more of us with vaccines than they can with abortions.
Roberts is a demoncrat.
Those labels are meaningless. The only labels that matter now are Patriots and traitors for elected officials.
Roberts, whether by his own will or not, is acting in the interest of traitors
Maybe im just ignorant, but can someone explain how they extrapolated a “right” to an abortion, based on the language of the constitution?
You're not ignorant at all. No one can answer your question because the Constitution has no such right. Roe was poorly briefed, poorly argued and poorly decided. It is a terrible decision from a legal standpoint, let alone the immorality of it.
The Constitution does not confer rights to humans. It confers power to the government to act within it's confines.
So, before I continue with my answer to your question, look carefully at this picture. It may convey a very important lesson. One, more important than you may think.
https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/asterix/images/a/a0/046.jpg
Good! With that under the belt, let's go back to the CONSTITUTION that is supposed to curtail and contain the federal government.
Amendment X surprisingly reads: ALL [FUCKING] RIGHTS RESERVED.
And that is exactly what Roe v Wade contends.
If you want to know more, simply go to searchvoat.co. And use the search option with the check box Voat.co engaged, and greatawakening as the board.
You can choose to look for comments or posts.
I can already hear the self-rightious crowd roar. Sorry guys and girls. *You should read your contracts better. *It says exactly what it says. If you do not like it, you are just as tyrannical as the left you are railing against.
Here is a quote from Oscar Wilde, though commenting concerning a different part of freedom:
Cheers.
There is no right to murder another person. A fetus is "another person," because it is genetically distinct from the mother. It is indeed another individual person. If you think you have a right to murder it, then it is impossible to say you do not have a right to infanticide, since the issue at stake is the convenience to the mother. (And we are now seeing stories about cases where the baby is delivered, and the doctor and the mother are supposed to "have a conversation" about what to do next: keep it or conduct infanticide.)
Rape is immaterial to this question. The fetus did not commit the rape. It is an innocent third party. You don't murder innocent persons for the sake of convenience. This is Nazi genocidal thinking.
O yes, there is. It happens everyday. There are two ways in which you can legally end a walking talking human's life: ~1. Self defense. ~2. Jury of 12. ~3. By declaration of war ~4. Clear and Present danger. ~5. Pre-emptive. ~6. When you can get away with it.
Your argument reflect utilitarian arguments. And I do not disagree with you. I have been confronted with the issue from two angles. From a medical perspective and from a convenience perspective. My personal views were and still are irrelevant to the final outcome, as it is not my choice to make but the woman's in question.
Since time immemorial the choice has always been the woman's. Do some research, actual research. And you will see the factual correctness of that statement.
Roe v Wade is a monstrosity. But not for "GRANTING" or legislating something you do not agree with. On the one hand it does recognize the right to choose, as such a choice is not the government's to make, but the woman's by whatever freedom article you want to go. Scotus embedded it within the first semester, as that is also the natural period of uncertainty, and the historical usance.
The monstrosity appears when the Scotus made a pregnant woman into an object of STATE INTEREST, a ward of the STATE. That is putting the relationship between the People and the Government on it's head, as if the product of the creation of the People has more power than the People having created it.
But, do not take my word for it. read the damn ruling yourself for a change.
The next item connected to this drama is how to discard of the aborted. Is it a product? Is it waste? Personally, I find it disgusting what I saw being revealed by Project Veritas. And yes, people find themselves in such situations due to a lack of self-awareness and virtue, and do stupid things, because they are stupid, and kept stupid. The worst part is, many of them remain stupid, because that is what they like to be. It is their virtue to be stupid.
Here is a quote from Oscar Wilde, though commenting concerning a different part of freedom:
Cheers.
You are just being sarcastic. None of the items you enumerate are either murder or an excuse for murder. You completely duck the medical and legal fact that the fetus is a separate individual. (There is no point to quibbling over "utilitarian" arguments, when the argument for abortion is only utilitarian. My point is that there can be no utilitarian arguments.)
Since time immemorial, infanticide has been practiced. That rather eliminates "time immemorial" from the status of an authority figure.
If Roe vs. Wade is set aside, we return to the status quo ante, which was for the issue to be determined by the individual states through legislation. Just as the issue of homicide is determined.
You say it is not your choice to make. I would agree, in the sense that It is no one's choice to make, as murder is not an allowable "option." But in a larger sense, the opinions of society at large cannot be dismissed as irrelevant---any more than they would be if you or I or anyone were to walk past an alley and see someone in the act of murdering someone else. Murder is not a "private affair" of the murderer, such that no one else should interfere. Murder is a very individual crime against humanity, and all humanity has an interest in preventing it. Women who want to murder (for convenience or any other motive) are not admirable or honorable people.
Excuse me? Sarcasm? Are you touched in the head?
No. Argument that you couldn't answer to. Thanks for trying to divert with insults.
Pray the rosary for the Supreme Court it has more power than an atomic bomb 💣 The problem is we need more people to pray it.
time to clear out ~50% of the supreme court... at a minimum.
Social piety.
Dems and uniparty are using this to give you a false victory and take a house and senate majority lead going forward.
Abortion is the single biggest distraction and the uniparty is fooling everyone.
Have fun when the 13% is 30% and the 1 million caravan migrants become 4 million. That's just in the first 10 years, and it's not even the biggest problem with abortion bans
when is it "go" time? asking for 60 million babies murdered.
Roberts' support was never in question.
How would you ever expect the abortion that lived to rule
WIN!
the ruling didnt really read to me as a 'win' or a 'loss' but just allowing the case to proceed... the ruling also barred Texas from enforcing the law until the case is complete. To me this means no fines can be given currently, but perhaps if any providers are caught performing abortions that violate the law they can be fined after the case.