Supreme Court Votes to overturn Roe v Wade Draft Shows.

Author: Reece101

Posts

Total: 324
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@ILikePie5
@Reece101
..." cope "...
 
Yeah, we need to cope with virtual rapists who repeatedly stick their repulsive noses into a womans bodily business without her consent. Sad truth of humans ability to lack a higher degree of  intelligence and compassion empathy at same time.  This all stems from ego based in religious fanaticism.

These type of sic-n-head people needed to be re-educated in morality, ethics, common sense, and practical solutions to 7.6 billion and growing over population issue via the inefficient and ecological destructive systems/mechanisms we have in place on  our spaceship, out in hostile space.

Sperm cell and egg cell are both alive { life }.

The fertilized egg is neither independent { existence outside of womb } nor breathing human being.

For practical purposes, let these sic-n-head humans practice not breathing and see how long before they realize the difference between an independent human that has taken at least one in-spirited breath,  and the results of not breathing outside of the womb, whether on their own or a breathing machine that moves expands and contracts their lungs for them.

The womb is a sacred divine place and this has been known for thousands of years. Yet those men and women, who would defy the rights associated with the sacred womb/room and the woman who owns it, are effectively  defective  in various mechanisms of the brain.




TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,096
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@oromagi
but my stance is a lot more complicated then the political exigencies of the moment
How so?

If you really believe this and you want the GOP to lose in 2022, wouldn't you support repealing Roe V Wade to help the dems.
I do, in fact.
With this statement, the woke mob like Theweakredge and Double_R cancelled you for hate speech towards women and minorities.  Welcome to sane America; cancelled by the woke mob.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@TheMorningsStar
i am not suggesting that you, yourself advocate for killing a mother of twelve children because one of them died from an accident

i'm simply pointing out that some very powerful people do advocate for killing a mother of twelve children because one of them died from an accident
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc


That was beautiful.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,980
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8

Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) touts Florida’s 15-week abortion ban with no exception for rape, incest, or human trafficking.


Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Tarik
I take it your pro-life but what about the life of the mother argument that most lifers make an exception for, you argued that arbitrary delineations is why the viability argument is flawed but so is the health of the mother argument because one can argue that with every pregnancy a woman’s health is at risk, do you mean to tell me that the government should interfere and decide a point where that risk is worth it?
Why would you take it that I'm "pro-life"? I'm not. Despite my utter disgust and abhorrence for the act of abortion, I endorse, as a matter of principle, the pro-choice argument.

If you don’t like that argument then what about the miscarriage argument? You mean to tell me that if a woman that planned on carrying her child to term and ends up miscarrying the law should do a murder investigation on? Does that sound like an ethical thing to do to a woman after she just lost her child? These are the questions that need answers if we’re ever going to go the route of making abortion illegal because looking at it through one lens alone isn’t practical/sustainable from a legislation perspective.
I know this is supposed to suggest a reductio ad absurdum, but it's really no more absurd than what is already legislated.
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@3RU7AL
--> @Lemming
I 'imagine many Pro Choice, don't view a fetus as a human life, or sacred.
and that's the MASSIVE RED HERRING that keeps this issue in the purely emotional arena
To be fair, we've had statements like these:

Polytheist-Witch Post #34:
There is no life there there is potential life there it is not a citizen, it is not born, it is not a human being yet.
3RU7AL Post #40:
most women believe it should be their choice whether or not to allow a tumor to grow inside them
which aren't accurate and serve the purposes of red herrings. If the focus is on the prospective pregnant female's right, then the zygote/embryo/fetus's status as a human being, tumor, or citizen would still remain subordinate to said right.

3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Athias
which aren't accurate and serve the purposes of red herrings. If the focus is on the prospective pregnant female's right, then the zygote/embryo/fetus's status as a human being, tumor, or citizen would still remain subordinate to said right.
great point

it's kinda like arguing over whether or not "god" "exists" without both parties first agreeing on a definition of both "god" and "exists"
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Reece101
A woman dresses scantily, goes out partying, and she gets raped. Isn’t it partially her fault if she gets pregnant?
No--not even remotely.

She most likely knew the risks.
And how is one to calculate these risks? Here, let me try an argument using your rationale: I go outside without a Kevlar vest despite the chances I may randomly be stricken by a stray bullet. So when I play basketball at my local park, should I be met with an unfortunate wound from a stray bullet--possibly fatal--it was in part my fault because I either neglected my Kevlar vest, or went outside in the first place. The culpability of the gun's wielder is by default mitigated in part due to my culpability as described before.

And statistically it’s inevitable.
Statistics aren't psychic readings.

Regardless of the means, she got pregnant knowing the chances.  
It is incumbent upon any interaction that the parties involved are willful participants, however consent manifests. Manner of dress and venue are irrelevant.
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
PW, thank you.  I had no idea you agreed with any of my positions about;
.
.....sperm { alive }, egg { alive }, fertilized egg { alive human aka fetus/baby },

--->------------1 month { fetus/baby }------------>---------2 months { fetus/baby },

--->------------3 months { fetus/baby }---------------------4 months {  fetus/baby },

---->-----------5 months { fetus/baby }----------->---------6 months { fetus/baby },

---->----------7 months { fetus/baby }----------->----------8- months { fetus/baby },

--->-----------9 months { birth of fetus/baby }------------> independent { outside of womb baby in-spirits first breath } ,

--->-----------in need of important breast milk { antibodies called immunoglobulins }, 

--->----------breathing { inspirited },  alive,  if not also crying,  human baby  in search of nipple to suckle its first milk.
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,838
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
The courts always work when they rule in your favor and are broken when they don't.  Just another branch of govt  politicly weaponized and rendered fucking useless. Fuck the US Govt and fuck the worthless Supreme Court. They should change the name to the Dept of but hurt feelings. Fuck the rule of law.
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Athias
No--not even remotely.
Let’s see about that.

And how is one to calculate these risks?
They don’t need to be quantified to know they exist. 

Here, let me try an argument using your rationale: I go outside without a Kevlar vest despite the chances I may randomly be stricken by a stray bullet. So when I play basketball at my local park, should I be met with an unfortunate wound from a stray bullet--possibly fatal--it was in part my fault because I either neglected my Kevlar vest, or went outside in the first place. The culpability of the gun's wielder is by default mitigated in part due to my culpability as described before. 
“…by default mitigated…“ is paradoxical. By default the situation has both parties culpable of what occurred in the end. 

Statistics aren't psychic readings.
They don’t have to be.

It is incumbent upon any interaction that the parties involved are willful participants, however consent manifests. Manner of dress and venue are irrelevant.
The woman wilfully participated in the risk taking.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Athias
The culpability of the gun's wielder is by default mitigated in part due to my culpability as described before.
perfecto
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Reece101
Studies show that women with passive personalities, who tend to dress in layers, long pants and sleeves and high necklines, are actually more likely to be raped.

Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,893
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
This has gone passed what I was building up to with TheMorningsStar and conservative arguments. 
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,096
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@FLRW
Well, until the Supreme Court rules that women don't have the right to vote since they were made from Adam's rib.
Slippery slope fallacy.
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,096
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@ILikePie5
I debated with someone for over 20 pages one time. Analyzed hours of video footage. Turns out I was right. Any objective individual could see I was right. But it didn’t change that gentleman’s mind one bit because of Orange Man Bad.
That's just a bias.  I'm sure he thought the same thing.
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Reece101
Let’s see about that.
Is that it? I presumed that this was going to segue into a larger point.

They don’t need to be quantified to know they exist. 
Explain and substantiate how manner of dress, and participating in the festivities of a party, create a risk of being raped. Furthermore, explain and substantiate how any individual is responsible for not just the risk, but also knowing how said risk is created.

“…by default mitigated…“ is paradoxical. By default the situation has both parties culpable of what occurred in the end. 
No, it's not paradoxical. Rather than the rape rendering the rapist solely culpable, your argument would have it that both the rapist and the "rape-ee" share culpability (particularly for the "rape-ee's" manner of dress, and attendance at a party,) which by default mitigates the culpability of the rapist.

They don’t have to be.
They aren't.

The woman wilfully participated in the risk taking.
Once again:

Explain and substantiate how manner of dress, and participating in the festivities of a party, create a risk of being raped. Furthermore, explain and substantiate how any individual is responsible for not just the risk, but also knowing how said risk is created.



Novice
Novice's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 24
0
2
5
Novice's avatar
Novice
0
2
5
It is not possible for me to hold anything but the pro life position for reasons of being against child sacrifce 
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@sadolite
The courts always work when they rule in your favor and are broken when they don't.
In favor of the pregnant woman's body autonomy, then yes, not broken, not insane with no lack of empathy/compassion.

When not in favor of a pregnant womans body autonomy,  then yes, broken and some degree of insanity with lack of empathy/compassion for the pregnant woman and in support of virtual rape. Sic-n-head humans.





sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,838
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@ebuc
"The Senate will vote to protect Roe V Wade." Sooo the Supreme Court serves no purpose as the Senate can just vote to override any ruling the Supreme Court makes based not on the law but feelings. I see no point in the taxpayer funding the judicial branch of govt any longer. The Senate is both the legislative and Judicial branch of govt. The Supreme court no longer has any legal standing it is just the opinions of 9 people that can be overridden at anytime by the Senate.  The legal opinion of any judge sitting on the supreme court carries no more weight than my legal opinion. The Supreme Court no longer  decides what laws are Constitutional, the Senate does. Again what purpose does the Supreme court serve if their rulings can be overridden by the Senate? I'll wait for your legal opinion,  it carries the same weight as a Supreme Court justice.

ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@sadolite
"The Senate will vote to protect Roe V Wade."

I doubt that, but hope your correct. 
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
The legal opinion of any judge sitting on the supreme court carries no more weight than my legal opinion.
yep
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@sadolite
@3RU7AL

Sadolite...The legal opinion of any judge sitting on the supreme court carries no more weight than my legal opinion.
Legal Justice
.. ebuc 1990's limmerick  ....

Legal justice implies fairness,
Within the judicial scene
It may lack ethics and morals
If you know what i mean.

A legal human existence
As in “the rights to life”
Leaves an illegal human
Susceptible to the knife.

What is fair for the gooser,
May not be fair for the gander
In a world of high court systems,
Whom they may choose to pander.

It may not be the quantity of thought,
So much as it might be the quality of living
In a world of many viewpoints
And no one is forgiving.

The truth of what most matters,
To all who feel with their hearts
Lies within their reasoning
And not a judicial K-Mart.

The freedom free thinkers
Is beyond the limits of a judge
Who may be bound by misguided directives
Thank God{es} were allowed to fudge.

Allowance for some slop
In all systems we rely
To keep the juices flowing
And looping,
As an eternally existent bow-tie.

The patterns of our lives
Have many a detailed crossing
Interference with each other
And ideas that we keep tossing.

Beginnings lead to endings
Legalities come and go
Adjusting our cosmic vision
And letting our spirits flow.

There is no final word
In this universal scenario
Continually soul searching
With spirits that must flow.

Love me my darling
Love me my dear
Love me without anger
Love me without fear.

For each of us is a lover
And each of us need love
The eternal act of righteousness
Is to have fun and to love.

sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,838
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@ebuc
An emotion filled diatribe with not a single legal argument. There is nothing to respond to with regard to the purpose of the Supreme court and the purpose of the Senate.
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,080
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
-->
@sadolite
"The Senate will vote to protect Roe V Wade." Sooo the Supreme Court serves no purpose as the Senate can just vote to override any ruling the Supreme Court makes based not on the law but feelings. I see no point in the taxpayer funding the judicial branch of govt any longer. The Senate is both the legislative and Judicial branch of govt. The Supreme court no longer has any legal standing it is just the opinions of 9 people that can be overridden at anytime by the Senate.  The legal opinion of any judge sitting on the supreme court carries no more weight than my legal opinion. The Supreme Court no longer  decides what laws are Constitutional, the Senate does. Again what purpose does the Supreme court serve if their rulings can be overridden by the Senate? I'll wait for your legal opinion,  it carries the same weight as a Supreme Court justice.
The legislative branch does not have the power to literally protect Roe V Wade as in the ruling made by the supreme court. What they do have the power to do is enact legislation that encapsulates the ideas behind Roe v Wade (access to abortion) into law. And that should be perfectly fine as the supreme court has simply ruled that the right to abortion is not one guaranteed by the constitution. This does not bar such rights being enacted at either the federal or state level.

3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@dustryder
The legislative branch does not have the power to literally protect Roe V Wade as in the ruling made by the supreme court. What they do have the power to do is enact legislation that encapsulates the ideas behind Roe v Wade (access to abortion) into law. And that should be perfectly fine as the supreme court has simply ruled that the right to abortion is not one guaranteed by the constitution. This does not bar such rights being enacted at either the federal or state level.
well stated
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,838
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@dustryder
The sole purpose of the Supreme Court is to rule on weather any legislation passed by Congress is in continuity with the Constitution. Any law passed by congress can be immediately challenged and the supreme courts sole purpose is to hear that case and rule on its Constitutionality.  If congress tries to pass a law saying all 50 states have to make abortion legal it will be immediately be sent back to the supreme court and most likely lose. It's a state right issue and bad law to begin with in my opinion. The constitution does not say anywhere that woman have a right to an abortion. It doesn't say that because abortion is a first world modern luxury convenience. Not to mention the fact that you would have to force any doctor anywhere to perform that abortion making them slaves to govt. You cant force another person to work for you against their will to exercise a right.

3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
Not to mention the fact that you would have to force any doctor anywhere to perform that abortion
even a dentist ?
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Make abortion illegal, make women felons, felons can't vote, women can't vote.