If California can restrict gun rights, then Texas can restrict abortion rights
Sounds ChineseThe bill proposed by the Dems, was defeated because it allowed for abortion on demand, up to the time of birth, and would allow gender selection abortions! These people who claim to be "progressive," are nothing but pure EVIL!
Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
The bill proposed by the Dems, was defeated because it allowed for abortion on demand, up to the time of birth, and would allow gender selection abortions! These people who claim to be "progressive," are nothing but pure EVIL!
Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
YupProgressive is how a communist self identifies. Communists aren’t people. Amiright @Hoji?
I would argue that abortion is unconstitutional on the grounds that it deprives a living being to the right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".I understand your sentiment, and I also love shoving CA's face in the mud where it belongs, but this is false. The 2A is an enumerated right, whereas there is no such thing as an abortion "right". Abortion will be a legal privilege, like driving (assuming the SCOTUS decision actually happens).
The government can make a dog's breakfast out of your privileges, but our civil rights are supposed to receive elevated protections against government restrictions (which is part of the reason why the left wants to pretend there is an abortion right)
I would argue that abortion is unconstitutional on the grounds that it deprives a living being to the right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".
IMO, abortions are hardly what I would think qualified as due process in order to end a life. And it's not like the fetus can argue it's case in court for due process.From a purely legal standpoint, "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" has nothing to do with our Constitution -- it's from the Declaration of Independence.
The Constitution is actually quite clear that the government can kill you. The 5A says, “No person shall…be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;" which of course means that with the due process of law, people can be deprived of life, liberty and property.
So killing is totally OK, as long as there was due process, which isn't defined in the Constitution, and as we saw during the Obama administration, can be administered in some pretty cavalier/sloppy/questionable ways.
But your larger point, yes, I think most of us agree with you about abortion being used as birth control, our taxes paying for their choices and of course the lack of responsibility on the part of too many in our society.
IMO, abortions are hardly what I would think qualified as due process in order to end a life. And it's not like the fetus can argue it's case in court for due process.
Could be why people are willing to take a stand on this issue, to argue and take a stand for a lie that can't defend itself.
And IMO, abortion is murder, because there is no due process.
Yes, under the exceptions that aborting a fetus due to rape or incest could be applied as due process. Or a life threatening medical condition.OK, so you'd be OK with abortion if there were due process. Here's a view of what might soon happen:
Assume a couple of things:
First, assume that the leaked SCOTUS decision will stand, and remember that almost no one argues their own case in court, this is done through representatives.
With those assumptions, let's remember that many states, such as CA, have already passed legislation stating that if Roe is overturned, a law will go into effect permitting abortion in those states under whatever circumstances. Also remember that the 14A puts the same limits on the states that the 5A does on the federal govt -- no killing the peeps without due process.
So with all that in mind, would you then say abortion will be legal in (eg) CA, where the people's duly elected representatives have passed legislation legalizing it?
That woman needs to be aborted.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
She obviously was not living her "faith" (not referring just to her abortion stance either) so this should not be a problem for her.San Francisco Bishop Bans Pelosi From Communion
San Francisco Bishop Bans Pelosi From Communion
The archbishop of San Francisco told U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi that she is barred from receiving communion over her support for abortion rights, the archdiocese said in a letter released Friday.www.newsmax.com