Roe vs Wade

A Georgia Superior Court judge has overturned the state's law banning abortions as early as six weeks of pregnancy, ruling it unconstitutional and saying it cannot be enforced.

The decision from Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney makes the procedure legal in the state again until at least 20 weeks of pregnancy, effective immediately. The judge's order comes in response to a lawsuit that sought to strike down the ban on multiple grounds and will apply statewide.

~Scamp

@2..Agreed.....its not children doing this its old white men

When you resort to name calling you've pretty much already lost the debate.

Wow...someone has some serious anger issues.

@One

5 posted that.

"TB.. it’s proven.. you are just a cunt.."

Which intellect posted that?

Something tells me you’re blocked by them also.

I'd say you used several nerves as a trampoline, but maybe the poster is just extra tetchy.

That the GOP caught the car is not actually a surprise. That they didn't plan for it is definitely a head scratcher.

"TB.. it’s proven.. you are just a cunt.."

I think I hit a nerve there...

I think the republicans spent years teasing social conservatives on abortion. They talked about it on the campaign trail, but never appointed judges to overturn it. Until Trump. Now the republicans are like a dog that caught the car. Here in Michigan, it looks like the increased female turnout will benefit the democrats quite a bit. That and having train wreck candidates.

TB.. it’s proven.. you are just a cunt..

"I backed checked that they did indeed say that."

No quotes.

Quotes or you are lying.

Al if there was any doubt you were lying.

@5

"As best I can determine, taxpayers subsidize roughly 24% of all abortion costs in the U.S. with 6.6% borne by federal taxpayers and the remaining 17.4% picked up by state taxpayers. If we apply the 24% figure to the total number of abortions, this is equivalent to taxpayers paying the full cost of 250,000 abortions a year, with about 70,000 financed by federal taxpayers and 180,000 financed by state taxpayers"

Interesting article.

Very very very very very very slanted. And that is not enough very's. Look at what the two authors have penned before and after.

While I don't doubt that there are some abortions paid for by fed funds, to argue that it is common is far off. That article also detailed that they did admit that there were state funds that paid for abortions. But what was misleading is that those same funds could have paid for a broken leg or pneumonia. The feds and states do subsidize hospitals. If someone who is not covered by insurance has a procedure and doesn't pay, well, do you classify the subsidy as paying for the treatment even though it is a general subsidy?

TB Cunt.. and your point is? The fact that there are legislators that will stand by their bills shows a whole lot more than the Dems who won’t. Lying by omission or not answering is nothing more than stonewalling by any political affiliation.

TB cunt.. yep just as I thought.. I gave you 3 at the federal senatorial level but you just cruised on by.l I gave you the people.. I backed checked that they did indeed say that. You can do the same. And omission of an answer is just as good as a posative answer and 90% of Dens will not answer the question. Ur I know.. you are good with that..

A Texas lawmaker has filed a bill that would abolish and criminalize abortions, leaving women and physicians who perform the procedure to face criminal charges that could carry the death penalty.

The legislation, filed Tuesday by state Rep. Bryan Slaton, does not include exceptions for rape or incest. It does exempt ectopic pregnancies that seriously threaten the life of the woman “when a reasonable alternative to save the lives of both the mother and the unborn child is unavailable.”

Louisiana Republicans voted Thursday night to gut a highly controversial bill that would have classified abortion as homicide and allowed prosecutors to criminally charge women who undergo the procedure.

The measure attracted national attention when it passed out of committee last Wednesday with a 7-to-2 vote, less than 48 hours after the leak of a draft opinion that showed the Supreme Court is potentially poised to overturn Roe v. Wade.

North Carolina House Bill (HB) 158, sponsored by a Republican state representative, Larry Pittman, proposed that abortion be considered first-degree murder and would have allowed civilians to use deadly force to prevent someone from ending a pregnancy.

While presenting his bill that would outlaw chemically induced abortions and abortion pills, Missouri State Rep. Brian Seitz (R-Branson) appeared to express openness for a future bill calling for the death penalty for abortion providers.

Seitz made the comments after Rep. Wes Rogers (D-Kansas City) highlighted the severity of punishment in the bill, which goes up to a Class A felony (minimum of 10 years imprisonment and a maximum of 30 years to life in prison).

“It’s a very serious issue, what we’re talking about — what I could consider to be the murder of an infant in the womb and the possible harm and even the [cause] of death if they’re using these drugs in an illegal manner. It could actually kill the woman,” Seitz said. “And I think that penalty is probably not even strict enough.”

“So you’d even go as far as offering the death penalty as a solution?” Rogers asked.

“We’ll have to look at that in other legislation,” Seitz responded.

And where did anyone of them say "abortion up to and including birth"...

No doubt there are a few individuals somewhere who say that. But no Democratic politicians at the federal level, and probably none at the state level.

I'll bet you there are more Republican politicians calling for death for abortion providers than there are Democrat politicians calling for abortion on demand up to and including birth...

Here ya go TB Cunt..

From Forbes..

As best I can determine, taxpayers subsidize roughly 24% of all abortion costs in the U.S. with 6.6% borne by federal taxpayers and the remaining 17.4% picked up by state taxpayers. If we apply the 24% figure to the total number of abortions, this is equivalent to taxpayers paying the full cost of 250,000 abortions a year, with about 70,000 financed by federal taxpayers and 180,000 financed by state taxpayers

Here are 3 senators for ya.. you can find more and you can do the congress.. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Mark Pryor (D-AR), and Kay Hagan (D-NC). Now I know it’s going to come back from you that they are not well known but it doesn’t make a difference.. their votes count..

I’m done looking your shit up for you. If I’m wrong.. you prove it..

If I were the MAGA people . . .

I'd pray that SCOTUS is suddenly ok with stare decisis and not overturn Brandenburg. Hell . . . I'd find it completely fucking hilarious if they did.

All the Jan 6 people would be in jail. And to steal a line from Mickey, FACT.

I understand RO's position. In the nerd world, he is looking at a negative unit test :)

If abortion is a means to end a pregnancy, why should there be rights to make sure the pregnancy goes through? That is what inducing and c-sections are. They are guaranteeing a result.

If he is looking at it that abortion can protect the life of a mother and that is no longer a valid reason, if the mother's life is in danger why is she entitled to a c-section?

It took 50 years of bullshit to get this overturned. Roughly 3 generations of women have had this right. Something seems very wrong when old men tell women to carry a baby and how they should care for their vaginas and eggs through legislation.

In my life, I have 5 women that are, what I would say, are close to me. Three of them have had abortions.

This argument about Roe is getting split. There are two arguments here. One, SCOTUS overturning a 50 year right and the other is the actual act; abortion. I think women are mobilizing like a MOFO on the act. I think a lot of men are pissed at the overturning of the ruling. If nothing is settled, nothing is a right.

While the fucktards in some of the redstates really want to make America look like the EU, that is purely stupid and ignorant.

What major political figure is demanding "abortion on demand up (to) and including birth and then point to me where it says that American taxpayers should pay for it?"

Hey SN… and then there is this…

On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court issued a 7–2 decision holding that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides a fundamental "right to privacy", which protects a pregnant woman's right to an abortion. The Court also held that the right to abortion is not absolute and must be balanced against the government's interests in protecting women's health and prenatal life.[5][6] The Court resolved these competing interests by announcing a pregnancy trimester timetable to govern all abortion regulations in the United States. The Court also classified the right to abortion as "fundamental", which required courts to evaluate challenged abortion laws under the "strict scrutiny" standard, the most stringent level of judicial review in the United States.[7]

Did you catch the part where it says not ABSOLUTE. Now try reading the rest of the decision and again point out where it says up and until birth and at taxpayer expense.

You like millions of others are taking liberties out of ignorance. Give them an inch and they will want the whole fucking mile.

Hey SN… where in all of the original writings did it say “ abortion on demand up and including birth and then point to me where it says that American taxpayers should pay for it?

You can be a fucking murderer but you can’t force me to be an accessory..

Pretty much.

Sounds like an argument in search of an issue that isn't an issue.

"I contend..."

Well, there are people who contend the earth is flat and the moon landing was staged, but that doesn't make it true. And while I'm seriously unhappy with the Dobbs decision, even the most retrograde state legislation out there does not make induction or C-section any part of abortion law.