XPost: alt.abortion, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net
"Attila" wrote in message
news:av91ej9ub73dtao70jlt6qfm8hesa48lpv@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 13:15:41 -0500, "Scout"
> in alt.abortion
> with message-id wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"Attila" wrote in message
>>news:5psudjp8iudu337t35ua4q5pqi3hqob6b2@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 09:24:28 -0700, "john h."
>>> in alt.abortion with message-id
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 9/8/2024 1:54 PM, Attila wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 08:20:35 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>> in alt.abortion with message-id
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/8/2024 8:13 AM, Attila wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 07:57:08 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>> in alt.abortion with message-id
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/8/2024 4:25 AM, Attila wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 00:27:33 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>> in alt.abortion with message-id
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 9/7/2024 11:49 PM, Attila wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Right! Like it or not, Roe is gone. And therefore, legislatures
>>>>>>>>>>>> can ban
>>>>>>>>>>>> abortion even though a fetus is not a person.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> True. But that can be reversed with the proper legal steps.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are expecting SCOTUS to reverse course and reinstate Roe?
>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, no.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Of course not, but there could be legislation and/or
>>>>>>>>> Amendments or other court cases that effectively do the same
>>>>>>>>> thing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There can't be other court cases that apply the federal
>>>>>>>> constitution.
>>>>>>>> SCOTUS has spoken and all other courts are bound by their decision.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sigh. Another SCOTUS case of course.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> WTF? You just said "of course not" to whether SCOTUS will reinstate
>>>>>> Roe,
>>>>>> and argued that *other* court cases can do the same job. What *other*
>>>>>> SCOTUS court cases are you talking about?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, there can be legislation by Congress that forbids the states
>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>> banning abortion (even though you said Congress can't do that).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not an attorney. I will not argue specific laws
>>>>>>> because I am not qualified to do so, and neither your
>>>>>>> opinion or mine will impact legal procedures.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And of course there are several drugs available.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what happens to you, but is illegal in Alabama to
>>>>>>>> mail,
>>>>>>>> receive or use these drugs for abortions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I doubt that will survive a court challenge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Roe is wrong. SCOTUS said Alabama can ban abortion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At this point I am torn between whether you are an idiot or a troll.
>>>>>
>>>>> Neither, I simply support anything that would reestablish
>>>>> the right of a woman to decide whether or not to terminate
>>>>> her pregnancy. Not being an attorney I don't know what
>>>>> legal path would be necessary.
>>>>
>>>>Abortion is a political red herring. Women have been killing babies and
>>>>themselves for centuries. In modern times, it's used for ethnic
>>>>population control.
>>>
>>> In some locations, yes. Not in the US.
>>
>>The numbers for abortions could tend to suggest otherwise.
>>
>>Location: United States
>>White: 30%
>>Black: 42%
>>Hispanic: 22%
>>Other: 5%
>>Total: 95%
>>(I'm assuming the other 5% weren't reported.)
>>
>>https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/state-indicator/abort
ons-by-race/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Loca
ion%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D
>>
>>US Population
>>White: 59.3%
>>Black: 12.6%
>>Hispanic / Latino: 18.9%
>>Other: 7.3%
>>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_United_States
>>
>>
> I would suggest
Your 'suggestion' is irrelevant. The facts suggest something contrary to
your assertion.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
