Roberts Sides With Liberals on Abortion
- Thread starter RTH1800
- Start date
In the similar '16 case, he dissented from the leftist + kennedy majority. I guess he can't hide anymore with kennedy gone.
Sure, murdering unborn babies is okay...
But magazines with the capacity of 15 rounds or more can be "constitutionally" banned...
But magazines with the capacity of 15 rounds or more can be "constitutionally" banned...
7 in NYSure, murdering unborn babies is okay...
But magazines with the capacity of 15 rounds or more can be "constitutionally" banned...
Yeah nobody cares anymore. Do whatever the fuck you want that you deem moral and decent. If murdering people is ok then I don’t see how in the hell mag bans should be an argument. Sorry. I’m sure companies will bow down to their masters tho.
Roberts doesn’t SIDE with liberals, he IS a liberal.
I'm torn on this one, but I cant leave the thought I have had on this for a while: as heinous as this practice is, it may also be providing benefit from a purely practical aspect. Looking at the demographics, if the ones getting the abortions (regardless of race) are denied one, then it will in all probability make the children a ward of the state either in totality (abandonment) or by virtue of welfare benefits. This doesn't help to create an ever improving society, it produces a permanent social class of dependency. Our current situation is one where a minority of people (percentage-wise) paying taxes and the others eating from the work of the producers - how bad would it be for the State's fiscal coffers if there wasn't abortion? What would the US look like today? More dependents pulling more from the workers via Federal and state taxation.
I cannot imagine what a woman goes through emotionally to go down this path; it must be horrible. But I do wonder about this "dark positive". Not saying that two wrongs make a right, but if people are willing to have unprotected sex outside of wedlock, why is everyone else responsible for the consequences of their misdeeds?
If this argument is taken from this perspective then Justice Roberts may be the most conservative judge ever. But really I think he is as liberal as he needs to be in order to be popular and historic.
I cannot imagine what a woman goes through emotionally to go down this path; it must be horrible. But I do wonder about this "dark positive". Not saying that two wrongs make a right, but if people are willing to have unprotected sex outside of wedlock, why is everyone else responsible for the consequences of their misdeeds?
If this argument is taken from this perspective then Justice Roberts may be the most conservative judge ever. But really I think he is as liberal as he needs to be in order to be popular and historic.
The whole purpose of the Louisiana Law was to require that the person performing the abortion have admitting privileges at a local hospital. Sadly, current law allows abortions to be performed by someone who is not an MD. If something goes wrong, and it does happen, then you are going to have to rely on a physician at the local hospital who does have admitting privileges.
The LA law was about medical care of a mother. Not about abortions.
This is a poor choice.
It doesnt effect me directly, but does effect a lot of women when stuff goes wrong getting an abortion. And it does.
We are determined to make Sodom and Gomorrah look like childs play.
This is a poor choice.
It doesnt effect me directly, but does effect a lot of women when stuff goes wrong getting an abortion. And it does.
We are determined to make Sodom and Gomorrah look like childs play.
I am aware, but it was also being touted by many as the first step in banning abortions, as it would do this effectively for many places if done nationally. In that light it was about re-banning abortions IMO, or at least it was a desired consequence by more than a few.
I could make the same argument for all kinds of things that produce waste, but we aren’t killing them off. I mean look at people in prison for example that are taken care off in many cases for life after they’ve committed a violent crime. How many people like that are actually rehabilitated and released back into society to be producers of society? Yet we still do it. Heck one could even make the argument that politicians do nothing but leech off of us and cause a financial drain. See where I’m going here? How do you morally justify getting rid of people because of financial waste? What about seniors that have produced all of their lives and just want to live a couple decades to do things that they want to do. Some could argue that they are a drain on the system to. But they’ve paid into it. Don’t they deserve to use what they’ve paid into? Sorry, I’m not a fan of death panels be it abortions or people who are no longer working or whatever. I get what you are saying but where does one draw the moral line?
I honestly do not know. I don’t think abortions are moral nor are any of the other situations you have identified. I’m only throwing out my own personal thoughts and internal conflict on the subject. It our own moral failures as a culture that have brought us to this place.
It can’t be right to kill another, especially the defenseless. But is the net negative of this practice smaller than the net positive for the extension of the well-being of the nation? Good answers are hard to come by, and are non-existent if you keep the current moral climate in the equation.
The question is this: is it justifiable to have some evil in the nation for the sake of national security? If so, how much? How do you control it and when can it be used? If you cannot control the population from reproducing, and you cant keep throwing them all in jail, then what? Less abortions may very well increase prison inmates, potential rioters, etc. Just a thought I had on this whole thing. Wake up 2-3 decades after abortion is made illegal again and wonder why our country has really gone to shit. Its a dichotomy for sure, at least it is for me.
Last edited:
There is no doubt he is correct. He's is becoming to the left of the obama crowd!!!!
To the baby murdering leftist, anything they can scream will limit or end abortion they scream about.
Here in CO, the Respect Life license plate came into existence after Columbine. Has our state flower the columbine on it.
Once heard a leftist pussy say it was all a plot to end abortion.
Which he was a fan of because of the times it had vindicated him of any personal responsibility.
Here in CO, the Respect Life license plate came into existence after Columbine. Has our state flower the columbine on it.
Once heard a leftist pussy say it was all a plot to end abortion.
Which he was a fan of because of the times it had vindicated him of any personal responsibility.
I used to be against abortion. Not anymore. In fact, I think abortion should be mandatory for liberals.
Robert's is another Bush atrocity. Both father and son had a penchant for appointing "conservative" Justices who then turned out to be liberals.
This is why I appreciate that Trump tells us up front who he would appoint. Creepy Sleepy Joe can't/won't do that because it would read like a communist/leftist who's who.
This is why I appreciate that Trump tells us up front who he would appoint. Creepy Sleepy Joe can't/won't do that because it would read like a communist/leftist who's who.
Abortion is settled law since 1973, and conservatives continue to make themselves look foolish trying to overturn it. There are plenty of reasonable moderate suburban women who consider abortion rights their equivalent of 2A for most of us, and it prevents them from voting for conservatives. Give it up already so we can bring that group of the middle to our side. Keep this shit up if you want to lose.
I don’t like the idea of abortion being used as routine birth control, but I certainly endorse not forcing someone to bring a life they don’t want into our society where the rest of us are responsible for it.
Oh, and Roberts is scum.
I don’t like the idea of abortion being used as routine birth control, but I certainly endorse not forcing someone to bring a life they don’t want into our society where the rest of us are responsible for it.
Oh, and Roberts is scum.
Saying something is settled law is surrendering an issue to a bunch of want to be tyrants. If I said what I think about the scotus and settled law getting banned here would be the least of my problems.
I honestly don't believe that a vast number of liberals/women would vote Republican if the Conservatives were for killing babies.
Nobody is forcing you or your family to get an abortion, I don't see how they are a bunch of wanna be tyrants. I actually think the religious right are the tyrants here, trying to impose their moral code on others who don't believe as they do.
My wife is right on the edge, she votes conservative, but sometimes begrudgingly because of her feelings on right to choose. I know a bunch of other women in our peer group who feel the same. We might not get all of them, but some of them couldn't hurt.
It's similar to immigration and hispanics. Hispanics are generally conservative catholics, but since the perception that conservatives hate them means they vote for the welcoming democrats. Some may be here for free shit, but most hispanic immigrants I've met are hard working people. A little outreach could go a long way. The country is turning brown, get over it and embrace potential allies.
My comment was about calling a ruling by political hack want to be tyrants settled law. It really has nothing more to do with abortion than scotus decisions have to do with the constitution and law.
Btw, the whole be less conservative / accept some leftist values in order to get elected is a fairy tale.
This statement fails to hold water - aren't you doing the very thing you are accusing them of by wanting to impose your morality upon the religious right by demanding to keep something that goes deeply against their conscience?
Slavery was settled law at one time.
Letting women vote caused 99 percent of the mess we are in
You sound like a democrat.
And this country isn’t turning brown. It’s being turned brown by women/charities/democrats bringing in shithole people from shithole countries that are always going to vote for more free shit. Never for liberty.
That is a big ol stick you are stirring the pot with, Sir. Wont be sharing this thread with my favorite female now. Nope....
But I laughed out loud and snorted, so well played.
I agree. I know people who would vote R except for the abortion issue. I'm kind of Libertarian on it. It's not my place to impose my will on a person who thinks abortion is the right decision for their situation. We would have a lot more people voting with us if not for this single issue.
That and every other popular SJW issue of the day. Keep bending over and kissing your own ass to please the crowd. Worked for McCain and Romney, right...
When did a democrat force a conservative or religious person to have an abortion? that right, never. Right to choose is just that, a choice by the individual. Someone here will argue about the decisions related to health insurance and employment and religious organizations. I agree that religious organizations shouldn't be forced to hire people who don't share their beliefs, but if I have to pay for maternity coverage for me I don't see where paying for contraception is the end of the world.
I've voted the R ticket in every election since 1994 when I turned 18.
Regardless of immigration, birth rates for whites have been falling steadily while non whites are staying steady. I agree with your statement that too many people from shithole countries are being brought here by the groups you describe.
Actually, democrats have forced plenty of abortions. Old School democrats getting rid of the undesirables. Btw, eugenics is proven science. Really!
Well, it has happened that nuns via Obamacare have had to pay for contraceptives against their will, along with men and post-menapausal women. Contraceptives area form of pre-abortion, sooo....
And it was recently held up in court that a person cannot be discriminated against for their real or desired gender or their sexual orientation - it was left very unclear as to whether the religious institutions fell under this SC ruling. Guaranteed to be going to trial again.
Yes, democrats are very good at imposing their beliefs upon the religious in this country.
Not much different than having their tax dollars finance it.
I'm not interested in paying for anybody else's shit.
Here's a quote, "my body my choice". You want to make adult choices the bill comes with it.
Birth rates for whites are down because they have been taxed into making the choice about affordability.
Same in Europe while they pay for the imports to have 20.
R
^ yup. Taxed to death to pay for all the brown (as our poster above says) baby’s and then brainwashed into thinking there are too many people on this planet.
That argument is pretty thin. Abortion and contraception are two different things. Paying for contraception doesn't mean they have to use it, and the contraception they are paying for is not actual abortion. We all got fucked by obamacare, how is their claim any worse than me paying for maternity coverage for myself? I don't believe that I should have to pay, but I'm not crying about some fictitious man in the sky and an ancient often misinterpreted text telling me it's wrong.
Im with you here on the libertarian angle of it.
If people could divorce their political and moral stances on some things this is one of them... LGBTQXYZWXRP is another...
Morally I am opposed to LGBTQ and abortion, but politically, it aint covered in the constitution so the federal.gov shouldnt be involved. It should go to states rights.
Do you think that is why people are against abortion? Because of the Bible?
Not because it is straight up murder of the most innocent among us?
The left is strange. Fight fiercely to get rid of the death penalty for the most depraved rapist and murderers while at the same time wanting to kill innocent babies
Great to see you are open to discussion. Guess you've decided what's right for everyone. You're wrong and I'm right.
While I agree with you in general, in this particular frame of reference, the correct city reference would be Ashkelon.
That is discussion. Maybe you're used to more participation awards than the rest of us???
Religious indoctrination more than the Bible specifically. How can you ”straight up murder” something that isn’t sentient yet? How many fertilized eggs are naturally expunged from the woman without growing to gestation? Do we have funerals for miscarriages? I think George Carlin put it best when he said “not every ejaculation deserves a name”. To me it’s not a person until it’s viable outside the womb, before that it’s a collection of cells. I strongly disagree with third trimester abortions, but would be in favor of using them on defective units. No parent should be subjected to a life sentence of a retarded child.
I agree with you completely on the death penalty issue. Why warehouse some shitbag child rapist, just kill them for the good of society.
Not surprising. Roberts is a disappointment now for life. I like Thomas's insight and i miss Scalia.
Ah yes...viability.
By your own definition no child is a person.
If I drop you off in the Artic, you are no longer a person....or you won't be for long.
"Viable" another meaningless fucking term.
Definition of VIABLE
capable of living; having attained such form and development of organs as to be normally capable of surviving outside the uterus; capable of growing or developing… See the full definition
www.merriam-webster.com
1a: capable of living
b of a fetus : having attained such form and development of organs as to be normally capable of surviving outside the uterusa 26-week old viable fetus
Similar threads
