The Republican Utopia

[Scarlet]

26 minutes ago, nic said:

Wait. Maybe I didn’t read all the posts. You are saying that marriages are in jeopardy because of the leaked SCOTUS potential ruling? Are they on different sides of the abortion opinion spectrum and this  news event brought it out?

Maybe you should read all the posts then.

[Born N Bled Red]

Next up they get rid of all age limits for marriage. Got to get them girls pregnant, barefoot and in the kitchen as quickly as possible. 

 

Plus then the orange cheeto, Epstien, Gaetz and the rest can be absolved of their sex crimes. 

[BigRedBuster]

 

[ActualCornHusker]

3 hours ago, ZRod said:

The viability of a fetus outside the womb is still a highly debated topic, and the Bible even alludes to the fact that an unborn baby is not equivalent to a full grown human. There's a verse in the old testament about causing a woman to miscarry only being a fine, where murder is punished with death. I don't believe anything close to abortion is ever mentioned in the new testament. So the modern Christian assumption is entirely man made.

 

I always find it odd that any self proclaimed libertarian could actually say the government has a decision in what a woman does with her body for a given period of time.

 

Libertarians from a social perspective typically abide by the non aggression principle. You can look it up if you're unfamiliar. And I'd say in the different libertarian forums I've had discussions in, the abortion issue is pretty split. 

 

Bottom line for me, it's not the woman's body that is being harmed here - it's her baby's.

[BigRedBuster]

 

[Danny Bateman]

10 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

Bottom line for me, it's not the woman's body that is being harmed here - it's her baby's.

 

I'm not usually stay in your lane guy, but stuff like this makes me reconsider.

[ZRod]

11 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

Bottom line for me, it's not the woman's body that is being harmed here - it's her baby's.

And where is that located until birth?

[ActualCornHusker]

15 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

I'm not usually stay in your lane guy, but stuff like this makes me reconsider.

 

According to Democrats men can give birth now too so I guess we all get opinions on abortion now according to the also ridiculously dumb logic of "only women should have a say on the abortion issue"

[Danny Bateman]

2 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

According to Democrats men can give birth now too so I guess we all get opinions on abortion now according to the also ridiculously dumb logic of "only women should have a say on the abortion issue"

 

You sound halfway interested! Please carry a child to term and report back how the process rejuvenated your body. Your insights will be appreciated.

[nic]

2 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

He's saying the logic the conservative SCOTUS is using to overturn Roe is going to be similarly applied to gay marriage because they (Alito) already stated in this opinion he doesn't believe them to be "deeply rooted in history."

 

AKA they aren't specifically guaranteed in the original Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

 

AKA he could apply this logic to anything from gay marriage, to the right to contraception, to women or blacks being able to vote, etc. etc.

 

Civic society evolves over time for a reason. They may be looking to pump the brakes on some of that pesky progress.

Thanks . Too many posts to keep up with. A return to the Victorian age.

[knapplc]

13 minutes ago, nic said:

Thanks . Too many posts to keep up with. A return to the Victorian age.

 

A return to the 1950s. When minorities couldn't vote, when Jim Crow laws ran rampant, when women literally could not refuse their husband's demand for sex.

 

It's what "Make America Great Again" has always meant.

[Lorewarn]

4 hours ago, ActualCornHusker said:

Bottom line for me, it's not the woman's body that is being harmed here - it's her baby's.

 

 

Carrying a pregnancy to term is 100% a case of a woman's body being harmed. Usually the harm is considered a worthy price to pay but not always and that's up for individuals to decide. Nonetheless, that does not exempt it from being harm. That's a flimsy bottom line.

[teachercd]

7 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

You sound halfway interested! Please carry a child to term and report back how the process rejuvenated your body. Your insights will be appreciated.

Ha...no kidding!

 

I have never met a woman, who after giving birth, was like "Oh wow, I just love my new body"

[BigRedBuster]

9 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

A return to the 1950s. When minorities couldn't vote, when Jim Crow laws ran rampant, when women literally could not refuse their husband's demand for sex.

 

It's what "Make America Great Again" has always meant.

I always wondered when they say Make America Great Again......when do they mean?  What era do they want to go back to?

 

[knapplc]

2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I always wondered when they say Make America Great Again......when do they mean?  What era do they want to go back to?

 

Funny how no one ever answered that question, isn't it? But now their actions are speaking for them.

 

I'm just waiting for the attack on Griswold v. Connecticut, and Obergefell, and by extension Lawrence vs. Texas. And Brown v. Board of Education, because why not?