Maybe he's not the conservative everyone thought he was
John Roberts Joins Liberal Justices in Ruling on Louisiana Abortion Law
Late Thursday night, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked a bill in Louisiana that would have enforced more abortion restrictions. In the 5-4 ruling, Chief Justice John Roberts joined with his liberal colleagues on the court.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobr...KMbEjRo4LY
Good for him. He has some integrity.
(02-08-2019, 03:08 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Good for him. He has some integrity.
Seems from the article he has a problem with two faces.
(02-08-2019, 03:08 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Good for him. He has some integrity.
Meh.
Pull Out You Dumb Bastards.
I'm pro-life by principle...
but in practice? 100% Pro-Choice. 1) Not a female, I don't get a say (2) The babies being aborted were more than likely going to be pieces of crap anyway.
(02-08-2019, 03:18 PM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019, 03:08 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Good for him. He has some integrity.
Meh.
Pull Out You Dumb Bastards.
I'm pro-life by principle...
but in practice? 100% Pro-Choice. 1) Not a female, I don't get a say (2) The babies being aborted were more than likely going to be pieces of crap anyway.
If I gotta pay then I want a say.
(02-08-2019, 03:18 PM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019, 03:08 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Good for him. He has some integrity.
Meh.
Pull Out You Dumb Bastards.
I'm pro-life by principle...
but in practice? 100% Pro-Choice. 1) Not a female, I don't get a say (2) The babies being aborted were more than likely going to be pieces of crap anyway.
It's rude to call other people pieces of crap, but monstrous to presume that people who have yet to do anything right or wrong will turn out that way.
I'm not a fan of abortion, in fact I'm strongly pro-life.
I straight up think the states have the authority to say, "you can not do this medical procedure unless your life is in danger."
But I don't appreciate states like Louisiana and Texas being so disingenuous, putting their foot in the door with "your doctor must have admitting privileges".
There is no reasonable connection between the safety for the mother and the admitting privileges.
They should just say, "Abortion is wrong. You don't get to trade a baby's life for your convenience. You can only do it if your own life is in danger."
(02-08-2019, 03:44 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019, 03:18 PM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]Meh.
Pull Out You Dumb Bastards.
I'm pro-life by principle...
but in practice? 100% Pro-Choice. 1) Not a female, I don't get a say (2) The babies being aborted were more than likely going to be pieces of crap anyway.
It's rude to call other people pieces of crap, but monstrous to presume that people who have yet to do anything right or wrong will turn out that way.
I'm not a fan of abortion, in fact I'm strongly pro-life.
I straight up think the states have the authority to say, "you can not do this medical procedure unless your life is in danger."
But I don't appreciate states like Louisiana and Texas being so disingenuous, putting their foot in the door with "your doctor must have admitting privileges".
There is no reasonable connection between the safety for the mother and the admitting privileges.
They should just say, "Abortion is wrong. You don't get to trade a baby's life for your convenience. You can only do it if your own life is in danger."
I'm basing that on the fact the mother doesn't want the baby anyway. How good of a life is that baby going to get from a mother that wanted to kill it?
(02-08-2019, 03:56 PM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]I'm basing that on the fact the mother doesn't want the baby anyway. How good of a life is that baby going to get from a mother that wanted to kill it?
Personally speaking, I really think a mother should get 50% (or some %) of the payment that adopting parents pay the agency for a child. Perhaps that would incentivise people to carry the child throughout the term of her pregnancy.
(02-08-2019, 03:56 PM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019, 03:44 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]It's rude to call other people pieces of crap, but monstrous to presume that people who have yet to do anything right or wrong will turn out that way.
I'm not a fan of abortion, in fact I'm strongly pro-life.
I straight up think the states have the authority to say, "you can not do this medical procedure unless your life is in danger."
But I don't appreciate states like Louisiana and Texas being so disingenuous, putting their foot in the door with "your doctor must have admitting privileges".
There is no reasonable connection between the safety for the mother and the admitting privileges.
They should just say, "Abortion is wrong. You don't get to trade a baby's life for your convenience. You can only do it if your own life is in danger."
I'm basing that on the fact the mother doesn't want the baby anyway. How good of a life is that baby going to get from a mother that wanted to kill it?
Without abortion, you would see......
1. More child murders and abuse situations at the hands of parents who didn't want them.
2. More kids in foster care (many in horrible or abusive situations.)
3. More crime due to the fact that children grew up feeling unwanted and it messed with their heads, leading to drug addiction, alcoholism or mental illness.
4. More people in the United States, leading to overcrowding and more demand for "things" which would drive up cost.
5. More deaths due to illegal and unsafe "back alley abortions."
I don't agree with abortion as a means of birth control, but I see it as a necessary evil. People are irresponsible. That's just a fact. No amount of legislation is ever gonna make people voluntarily use birth control every time. Instead of wasting money on pitches to tell people to be abstinent, we need to deal with reality. There will always be tons of unwanted pregnancies and forcing people to carry unwanted babies to term, when they don't want them, only creates more problems. Many of those babies will lead "hellish" lives if they are brought to term. There are some really horrible people in this world. I view abortion as the lesser of two evils.
(02-08-2019, 04:16 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019, 03:56 PM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]I'm basing that on the fact the mother doesn't want the baby anyway. How good of a life is that baby going to get from a mother that wanted to kill it?
Personally speaking, I really think a mother should get 50% (or some %) of the payment that adopting parents pay the agency for a child. Perhaps that would incentivise people to carry the child throughout the term of her pregnancy.
That's how you end up with kids being bred just to collect on the adoption fee.
(02-08-2019, 08:09 PM)DragonFury Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019, 04:16 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]Personally speaking, I really think a mother should get 50% (or some %) of the payment that adopting parents pay the agency for a child. Perhaps that would incentivise people to carry the child throughout the term of her pregnancy.
That's how you end up with kids being bred just to collect on the adoption fee.
The Dutch boy is right. Hell, people abuse the foster care program. They take ‘em in for the check and don’t even give a crap about the kids. But it would keep from murdering babies.... best just to ban abortion. Let’s those that want them have them.
What about the father’s rights? Do they not have any? Not that I want to disclose this, but, I made a girl pregnant oncein the past. It was her choice. I didn’t want to abort the baby. I fought tooth and nail. She was scared of her parents or mine, or both. So was I. But I didn’t care. We were younger. Early 20’s. I had no say. She did it. It’s against everything I believe in. It was early but still wrong. We were engaged. Not after that. I could have two kids now. I wonder every now and then what he or she would be like. I also think about his/her age. What grade they’d be in. What we could do together. It’s not just “her” choice. Plus it’s killing a living being.
Personally 109% pro life politically best option make it a state issue. Feds should have no authority over medical procedures. After the 1st trimester is should be outlawed completely. Let states decide what they will and won't accept in the 1st trimester. I've offered to adopt two babies that their selfish parents aborted. Breaks my heart to this day, after they choose that evil we excummnicated them from our lives. If you don't love your own child enough to at least let it live then you sure as hell don't give two thoughts about my family.
(02-08-2019, 08:25 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019, 08:01 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Without abortion, you would see......
1. More child murders and abuse situations at the hands of parents who didn't want them.
2. More kids in foster care (many in horrible or abusive situations.)
3. More crime due to the fact that children grew up feeling unwanted and it messed with their heads, leading to drug addiction, alcoholism or mental illness.
4. More people in the United States, leading to overcrowding and more demand for "things" which would drive up cost.
5. More deaths due to illegal and unsafe "back alley abortions."
I don't agree with abortion as a means of birth control, but I see it as a necessary evil. People are irresponsible. That's just a fact. No amount of legislation is ever gonna make people voluntarily use birth control every time. Instead of wasting money on pitches to tell people to be abstinent, we need to deal with reality. There will always be tons of unwanted pregnancies and forcing people to carry unwanted babies to term, when they don't want them, only creates more problems. Many of those babies will lead "hellish" lives if they are brought to term. There are some really horrible people in this world. I view abortion as the lesser of two evils.
You could use the same logic to justify the police shooting a suspect, because some suspects will turn out to be a burden to society.
We could save us all the trouble and just forcibly abort all minority pregnancies. Watch that crime rate drop!!!
Oh wait, that's a plank of the Democrat platform.
Carry on!
Does anyone know which way Ruth's law clerks voted? Asking for 350 million people...
Whenever I meet someone who is vehemently anti-abortion, I just ask them how many children they have adopted. If they aren't willing to adopt an unwanted child, they should have no say in abortion, because banning abortion would create so many more children in the foster care system.
(02-09-2019, 02:40 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Whenever I meet someone who is vehemently anti-abortion, I just ask them how many children they have adopted. If they aren't willing to adopt an unwanted child, they should have no say in abortion, because banning abortion would create so many more children in the foster care system.
Right now I think the death toll from abortion is roughly between 50 and 60 million people. That's orders of magnitude more than the holocaust, this is one of the greatest tragedies in human history. The idea that you can casually say "oh well, let's just kill tens of millions of people because most foster kids don't have cable." is symptomatic of a larger devaluation of the basic sanctity of life that has infected this country that is going to have ramifications that most people still don't understand.
As for the idea that "If you don't want a child you shouldn't have a say." That's like saying if I didn't want to orally service the rapist then who am I to judge his sexual choices.
"You're not woman, you don't get a say!" What about the 30 some odd women who were sucked out of the womb. What would they say? Also, if a woman kills a toddler she's basically (and rightfully so) seen as the lowest rung of society. The development level of the child is a mitigating factor. So if a rape a pre-pubescent child it should be okay?
"What about right to privacy?" The law currently holds that if a person demonstrates themselves to be a credible threat to themselves or others that physicians are mandated to alert the authorities and have the power to commit someone against their will for psychiatric evaluation. The idea that a woman who expresses the desire to kill her own child in the womb creates some new death sacrament that is to be celebrated with extra-constitutional grace is more than just flawed, its evil.
"Roe v. Wade" The lead plantiff in the case HAD THE CHILD! Did she go insane from nine months of carrying a child to term? Did it ruin her life? No! In fact the facts of the case demonstrate that pregnancy is NOT an undue burden especially when weighed against the finality of death.
Margaret Sanger: America's Hitler. There's not other way to put it really. When you look at the history of eugenics and the incestuous relationship between americans of the practice and Nazi's at the time it's not a similarity, it's a direct causal relationship. She believed in putting poor people in concentration camps. Pro Choice? She didn't believe in the concept. She wrote an entire book about the fact that the government should pass laws about who would be allowed to pro-create and who wouldn't. She believed the best gift that could be given to Minorities and other "weeds of humanity" was birth control. When you examine her background you see a woman that resented her own large family (10 brothers and sisters) for the lack of attention she received and the eventual trauma of loosing her mother. It is very likely that as a result she was a functioning psychopath or at a minimum demonstrated an inordinate level of anti-social behavior in her relationships and ideas about life and the world. The idea that this woman and her racist death cult ideology have basically dominated our culture for the last 45 years is a stain on our countries history approaching that of slavery.
(02-09-2019, 03:53 AM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019, 02:40 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Whenever I meet someone who is vehemently anti-abortion, I just ask them how many children they have adopted. If they aren't willing to adopt an unwanted child, they should have no say in abortion, because banning abortion would create so many more children in the foster care system.
Right now I think the death toll from abortion is roughly between 50 and 60 million people. That's orders of magnitude more than the holocaust, this is one of the greatest tragedies in human history. The idea that you can casually say "oh well, let's just kill tens of millions of people because most foster kids don't have cable." is symptomatic of a larger devaluation of the basic sanctity of life that has infected this country that is going to have ramifications that most people still don't understand.
As for the idea that "If you don't want a child you shouldn't have a say." That's like saying if I didn't want to orally service the rapist then who am I to judge his sexual choices.
"You're not woman, you don't get a say!" What about the 30 some odd women who were sucked out of the womb. What would they say? Also, if a woman kills a toddler she's basically (and rightfully so) seen as the lowest rung of society. The development level of the child is a mitigating factor. So if a rape a pre-pubescent child it should be okay?
"What about right to privacy?" The law currently holds that if a person demonstrates themselves to be a credible threat to themselves or others that physicians are mandated to alert the authorities and have the power to commit someone against their will for psychiatric evaluation. The idea that a woman who expresses the desire to kill her own child in the womb creates some new death sacrament that is to be celebrated with extra-constitutional grace is more than just flawed, its evil.
"Roe v. Wade" The lead plantiff in the case HAD THE CHILD! Did she go insane from nine months of carrying a child to term? Did it ruin her life? No! In fact the facts of the case demonstrate that pregnancy is NOT an undue burden especially when weighed against the finality of death.
Margaret Sanger: America's Hitler. There's not other way to put it really. When you look at the history of eugenics and the incestuous relationship between americans of the practice and Nazi's at the time it's not a similarity, it's a direct causal relationship. She believed in putting poor people in concentration camps. Pro Choice? She didn't believe in the concept. She wrote an entire book about the fact that the government should pass laws about who would be allowed to pro-create and who wouldn't. She believed the best gift that could be given to Minorities and other "weeds of humanity" was birth control. When you examine her background you see a woman that resented her own large family (10 brothers and sisters) for the lack of attention she received and the eventual trauma of loosing her mother. It is very likely that as a result she was a functioning psychopath or at a minimum demonstrated an inordinate level of anti-social behavior in her relationships and ideas about life and the world. The idea that this woman and her racist death cult ideology have basically dominated our culture for the last 45 years is a stain on our countries history approaching that of slavery.
You can say whatever you want, but your argument is just a bunch of nonsense to me. I don't believe a life is truly a life, until you take a breath outside of the womb.
You said it yourself. Between 50-60 million people would have been born without abortions. That's 50-60 million unwanted kids. Where are they gonna go? Are you willing to adopt some of them? I guarantee most of them would have gone into the foster system, which is already overcrowded. You say abortion is taking a life, I say it's preventing a life from happening. A hard life in which that child would've been born to careless, irresponsible parents who didn't want it in the first place and would've probably either mistreated it or given it away to be raised by the state. I'll say it again. People are wreckless and irresponsible. There will always be unwanted pregnancies. Without abortions, what are you gonna do with all of these unwanted children? You seem vehemently opposed to abortion and want it banned. What do you propose we do with all of the unwanted kids who would now be brought to term? You can't just oppose something without providing some type of viable solution.