South Dakota Bans Abortion

Nick Douglas

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 31, 2000
3,688
15
0
47
Los Angeles, CA, USA
ctownguy is typically uninformed, so I almost shouldn't respond here...

Even the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court acknowledges that the legal right to an abortion is settled federal law. He was nominated by one of the most fundamentally religious presidents we've ever had. What more needs to be said?
 

ctownguy

Life is Good
Forum Member
Jul 27, 2000
3,065
16
0
SoCal
Nick Douglas said:
ctownguy is typically uninformed, so I almost shouldn't respond here...

Even the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court acknowledges that the legal right to an abortion is settled federal law. He was nominated by one of the most fundamentally religious presidents we've ever had. What more needs to be said?

Now look who is the moron.
 

Penguinfan

Thread banned
Forum Member
Dec 5, 2001
10,393
190
0
Vanished into vortex
Roger Baltrey said:
My reply is this: You dont support abortion rights until your girlfriend (who you have no intention of marrying) tells you she's pregnant.

Asshole.

So your hanging around with some slut who your just with so you can **** her for the time being.

Your not smart enough to avoid an unwanted pregnancy.

You feel because the above two statements are true that it should give you (and probably the welfare system) the right to retroactive birth control.

Asshole.
 

ctownguy

Life is Good
Forum Member
Jul 27, 2000
3,065
16
0
SoCal
Nick Douglas said:
ctownguy is typically uninformed, so I almost shouldn't respond here...

Even the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court acknowledges that the legal right to an abortion is settled federal law. He was nominated by one of the most fundamentally religious presidents we've ever had. What more needs to be said?

Here moron read this and see who is uniformed you pompous ass:

Settled law is settled until it is unsettled


Michael Gaynor
Michael Gaynor
July 28, 2005


"Separate but equal" was settled law from 1896 until 1954.

About 58 years.

Lower courts respected it.

As they were required to do.

Then the United States Supreme Court decided to unsettle it.

As it was entitled to do.

And so Plessy v. Ferguson was rejected in Brown v. Board of Education.

With the Court stating:

"We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment."

Roe v. Wade was judicial activism at its worst.

It has been settled law since January 22, 1973.

Less than 33 years.

A quarter of a century less than the period of time "separate but equal" was settled law.

Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont (that's Howard Dean's home state) announced that he may oppose Supreme Court nominee Judge John Roberts over the issue of abortion.

He will vote against Judge Roberts if he determines that Judge Roberts

will be an "activist" judge on issues like abortion. That is, vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, to which Senator Leahy apparently is committed with the fervor to which many were committed to Plessy v. Ferguson.

Senator Leahy put it this way: "I want to find out if he's going to be as active as this ? as people like Justice (Antonin) Scalia and Justice (Clarence) Thomas, who have almost willy-nilly overruled things."

And added: "I don't see how somebody who said that they didn't consider Roe vs. Wade settled law ... I don't see how they get confirmed."

Senator Leahy really wants a pledge that Judge Roberts will consider future abortion cases with a closed mind.

Ignore scientific progress that undermines Roe v. Wade.

And refuse to revisit the merits under any circumstances.

AND SENATOR LEAHY IS THE RANKING DEMOCRAT ON THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.

Judge Roberts is fit to sit on any court.

Senator Leahy is unfit to sit in judgment of Judge Roberts' fitness.

Judge Roberts told the Senate Judiciary Committee during his 2003

confirmation hearing that he considered Roe v. Wade to be "settled law."

I don't doubt him, or disagree.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales recently pointed out that as a Supreme Court justice, Judge Roberts would not have to abide by the precedent.

That's right as well.

And if Alberto is not prepared to overrule Roe v. Wade, then President Bush's next United States Supreme Court nominee should be Judge Roberts' wife!

Senator Leahy's opposition would be a badge of honor for Judge Roberts.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
I am going to stay on the outside of the discussion on Abortion, because I have mixed feelings on it. I have dealt with these issues in my personal life, and many of my friends and relatives have as well. This is one topic where I feel both sides have some good points. But the discussions about abortion/right to choose, whatever, are rarely done in a civilized manner and break down to nastiness. A lot of that here already.

What I do have a pause for cause about with the South Dakota situation is that it seems to be a very pointed attack from the right in that state (probably backed by some heavy behind the scenes artillery in other areas) to challenge Roe v. Wade. The timing of it cannot be ignored, and there has been much publicly from the supporters that they want this to get to the Supreme Court, now with the two new justices there that seemingly would entertain ideas against the ruling. I don't know enough about it, or the justices to know for sure what would happen, but the timing and publicity cannot be ignored.

Another example of why voting for elected officials, especially at higher levels, is important for everyone, and more people (I think) should make it important despite having a generally negative feeling towards the process.
 

bjfinste

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 14, 2001
5,462
18
0
AZ
penguinfan said:
Asshole.

So your hanging around with some slut who your just with so you can **** her for the time being.

Your not smart enough to avoid an unwanted pregnancy.

You feel because the above two statements are true that it should give you (and probably the welfare system) the right to retroactive birth control.

Asshole.

Wow... two asshole references in one post. How does that make him an asshole? Wanting to have options? Give me a break.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
If folks don't like it the way it happens now days . Give them a pill to make it so it's know one's dam business. I know it's not mind. Let it be the woman and her doc were it belongs.
 

Penguinfan

Thread banned
Forum Member
Dec 5, 2001
10,393
190
0
Vanished into vortex
bjfinste said:
Wow... two asshole references in one post. How does that make him an asshole? Wanting to have options? Give me a break.

You have options, even disreguarding abortion, you still have options.

Come on BJ, you have to see where I am coming from on this one.

I said earlier "I guess when it comes down right down to it I am against abortion". I am not a fanatic on either side thought and see where sometimes it may be necessary/right thing, HOWEVER, I will repeat that as retroactive birth control I am very much against it.
 

bjfinste

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 14, 2001
5,462
18
0
AZ
I completely agree that in many cases it is retroactive birth control. The only difference between us on that aspect is that that doesn't bother me.

I just didn't think Rick came off as an asshole at all. You made it sound like he was one simply by having sex with some "slut" that he didn't intend on marrying (which I assume you know is pretty common) and wanting to have the option of termination if they would choose to.
 

Penguinfan

Thread banned
Forum Member
Dec 5, 2001
10,393
190
0
Vanished into vortex
If he/anyone is in a "relationship" with the intention of going no farther than having sex I don't think it is out of the question to hold them accountable to use one of the MANY options available before abortion.
 

dawgball

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 12, 2000
10,652
39
48
49
pf -- you are insane if you think people should have personal responsibility!
 

Nick Douglas

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 31, 2000
3,688
15
0
47
Los Angeles, CA, USA
ctownguy, you have taken moron status to a new level. You post a column from a right wing zealot (Gaynor) as "proof" that abortion is not settled law. Wonderful.

I am not going to get into a contest of posting radical writings from either side of this debate. If I posted something from Randi Rhodes stating that abortion was settled law, would that mean a darn thing to you? I think not.
 

Roger Baltrey

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 13, 2005
2,888
17
38
Hey Penguinfan (douchebag),

I stick by my statements. Did you take precaution every time you got laid?? Didn't think so! So shut your pie hole you lying hypocrite!!! It ain't about you and your insular opinions of the world. It's about choice and I'm glad women have it.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,896
133
63
16
L.A.
gardenweasel said:
more importantly.....

who is the bigger star ... neil patrick harris or fred savage?
After seeing Harold and Kumar go to White Castle, the answer is NPH easily.
 

ctownguy

Life is Good
Forum Member
Jul 27, 2000
3,065
16
0
SoCal
Nick Douglas said:
ctownguy, you have taken moron status to a new level. You post a column from a right wing zealot (Gaynor) as "proof" that abortion is not settled law. Wonderful.

I am not going to get into a contest of posting radical writings from either side of this debate. If I posted something from Randi Rhodes stating that abortion was settled law, would that mean a darn thing to you? I think not.

The point of the post no matter who wrote it is that supposed settled law in the past doesn't necessarily mean it can't be changed.

THAT WAS THE POINT, you idiot AND SINCE YOU DO NOT HAVE A REPLY TO THAT EXCEPT SOME DODGE ANSWER ABOUT WHO WROTE ABOUT IT, YOU ARE STILL CLUELESS.
 
Last edited:

ctownguy

Life is Good
Forum Member
Jul 27, 2000
3,065
16
0
SoCal
Roger Baltrey said:
Hey Penguinfan (douchebag),

I stick by my statements. Did you take precaution every time you got laid?? Didn't think so! So shut your pie hole you lying hypocrite!!! It ain't about you and your insular opinions of the world. It's about choice and I'm glad women have it.

You sound like one of those pussy whipped husbands married to a now member, poor sap.
 

bear

Registered User
Forum Member
Jan 17, 2000
1,883
12
38
77
Fairfield, CT., USA
Raise a child !
Hold a baby of your own !
Feel the little heart beat!
Feel the baby moving in the womb!
Comfort a child in pain!
Then tell me about the merits of a BRUTAL death that is abortion.....
How it is so necessary to provide options to those who cannot accept the control and responsibility for their own body with its ability to create life...pre-pregnancy.
There are other options!!!!!

How the hell did this country get by before Roe v Wade??
Yeah, I know about the illegal abortions, adoptions etc.
I also know about how people had a lot more respect for their bodies.....a higher moral compass, and a fear of the consequences of an unwanted pregnancy. Pre-marital sex became a lot more easy after babies became disposable (jmho) and birth control measures became desirable but not mandatory.

1973 was prime time for me... I could not believe it then and can not believe it now.. In my opinion abortion is wrong and has no place in a civilized society.

bear
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top