SCOTUS

[kramerica.inc]

Your post is exactly why it should be in its own thread. I like "celebrated." It really shows your narrow mulishness. No one celebrates anything around the decision to terminate a pregnancy. No one calls anything around termination of a pregnancy a "blessing." But that is the sort of narrative -- distinct from a discussion

quote=DMac post_id=198242 time=1603990157 user_id=582]

I’m not making any law. We were having a discussion about abortion compromises. I proposed eliminating it as an elective surgery and adding education and contraception.

You didn’t budge and still want open abortion access to all.

So I’ve got plenty of right to call it as I see it. Most women take their decision to abort to the grave with them, telling no one.

If abortions weren’t tragedies, or were “blessings” people would probably celebrate them. But we haven’t seen too many “abortion announcements” floating around.

But perhaps that’s the next new wave after this gender reveal balloon fad goes away...

You can add all the education (better start it at about six years old and pound it home hard too) and contraception you want, there are still going to be plenty of unwanted pregnancies. There's a reason for the "off like a prom dress" expression. In the real world, the heat of the moment (particularly with teens) is more often than not going to throw caution to the wind. Just the facts, ma'am.
Don't believe you in that most women tell no one. I've been blown away over the years by the number of little Catholic girls I've known who had abortions during their HS years (maybe kids are smarter about it today than in my time, but I doubt it). Seems to me as if a lot of them told their brothers which is where I learned it from. Have heard many a father of young girls tell me of their trips to the abortion clinics too. You say there are 600K+/yr. Yup, don't doubt it.
Yes, these trips were a blessing for many despite how you feel about it.

What was that?

We celebrate blessings, right?

[seacoaster]

Just dumb. You're embarrassing yourself. Do it on another thread.

[kramerica.inc]

Just answering the question, counselor. Apparently some DO call abortions “blessings.”

[MDlaxfan76]

Enough, cradle.
You've told us this 100 times.

Start a new thread if you want to actually tell us another 100 times.

Did you NOT read me say I'm done with it. I was responding to something Mr seacoaster said. Your reading comprehension is not up to snuff this morning. I suggest another cup of coffee. BTW, how many times have you told us all that your a lifetime republican? That little gem could probably use its own thread too.

Then the above about your wife watching can be the last on this thread.

[DMac]

Would welcomed convenience be a better way to put it (ultimately means the same)?
I respect your conviction, kram, gotta ask you this though, why are rape victims pardoned from your condemnation?
Same deal, an unwanted pregnancy (just like little 16 year old Catholic school girl's is) ending with the same gruesome procedure? How do you differentiate that unborn from the school girl's?

[MDlaxfan76]

Just answering the question, counselor. Apparently some DO call abortions “blessings.”

We also sometimes call the passing of a person with serious dementia or pain...a "blessing".

In other deaths, we usually don't call it a "blessing".

We don't celebrate their death, we often do celebrate their life.

In these ended pregnancies, the experience may or may not be felt as a 'blessing', that's very much a matter of the individual circumstance and up to that individual, not the rest of us.

Just as we typically don't celebrate a lost pregnancy (though parents may well feel that loss desperately, as my wife and I did twice), we don't celebrate terminated pregnancies either.

It's a really ugly argument, Kram.

In my limited experience, the women I've spoken with use words more like "relief" than "blessing", some certainly regret having been in such a position, for others their view is that it was a medical procedure, not a moral question. I've also spoken to one woman who years later regretted her earlier decision, though defended her younger self as not feeling she had a viable choice. It's mixed.

My bottomline is that I don't think government should be involved with the decisions made by women, based on both privacy and equal treatment under the law. That's where this overlaps with SCOTUS.

Barrett is on the Court.
More cases restricting access to choice are coming, and more states will be passing all the more restrictive laws emboldened by the tilt of the Court.

I also favor the ERA, yet even now it's not been ratified...

[kramerica.inc]

Would welcomed convenience be a better way to put it (ultimately means the same)?
I respect your conviction, kram, gotta ask you this though, why are rape victims pardoned from your condemnation?
Same deal, an unwanted pregnancy (just like little 16 year old Catholic school girl's is) ending with the same gruesome procedure? How do you differentiate that unborn from the school girl's?

Because I'm not condemning the people at all.

But the laws and the act? Yes. Abortion is totally against natural law and human nature.

I don't think any abortion is morally "right." But we are talkign the leagality and fuine print of the laws. My suggestion was a compromise in the discussion. The hope was to quiet the other side that argues rape, incest and the mother's health are needed, special exceptions for abortion. Fine. I'll concede those rare instances if it means eliminating walk-ins. Where is the compromise on the other side? I'm also pro contraception and pro education.

The numbers are trending down...but that's still a lot of abortions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_ ... and%201998.

IMO, the numbers are especially egregious when you hear the moan and cry from some pro-abortion people about deaths due to a natural occurring virus.

We care about the 230k, why not the 600K+? Neither group had any choice in their fate.

[kramerica.inc]

Just answering the question, counselor. Apparently some DO call abortions “blessings.”

We also sometimes call the passing of a person with serious dementia or pain...a "blessing".

In other deaths, we usually don't call it a "blessing".

We don't celebrate their death, we often do celebrate their life.

In these ended pregnancies, the experience may or may not be felt as a 'blessing', that's very much a matter of the individual circumstance and up to that individual, not the rest of us.

Just as we typically don't celebrate a lost pregnancy (though parents may well feel that loss desperately, as my wife and I did twice), we don't celebrate terminated pregnancies either.

It's a really ugly argument, Kram.

In my limited experience, the women I've spoken with use words more like "relief" than "blessing", some certainly regret having been in such a position, for others their view is that it was a medical procedure, not a moral question. I've also spoken to one woman who years later regretted her earlier decision, though defended her younger self as not feeling she had a viable choice. It's mixed.

My bottomline is that I don't think government should be involved with the decisions made by women, based on both privacy and equal treatment under the law. That's where this overlaps with SCOTUS.

Barrett is on the Court.
More cases restricting access to choice are coming, and more states will be passing all the more restrictive laws emboldened by the tilt of the Court.

I also favor the ERA, yet even now it's not been ratified...

I can understand that. The women who have abortions own what they have done. FOr the good and bad. THat's for them to have to cope with their whole life. SOme can, others cant.

But the problem is, IMO, the argument needs to be real. For the good or the bad.

What are we REALLY discussing. A law or an act?

In a time where people are searching for truth, why is the reality of what abortion is always glossed over? From the act itself to the effects afterwards. There ARE women who are relieved or later regretful. Or not.

But the reality of what the law MEANS needs to be discussed. Some being scared of the discussion and the truth of the topic is quite telling IMO.

[ABV 8.3%]

Would welcomed convenience be a better way to put it (ultimately means the same)?
I respect your conviction, kram, gotta ask you this though, why are rape victims pardoned from your condemnation?
Same deal, an unwanted pregnancy (just like little 16 year old Catholic school girl's is) ending with the same gruesome procedure? How do you differentiate that unborn from the school girl's?

Because I'm not condemning the people at all.

But the laws and the act? Yes. Abortion is totally against natural law and human nature.

I don't think any abortion is morally "right." But we are talkign the leagality and fuine print of the laws. My suggestion was a compromise in the discussion. The hope was to quiet the other side that argues rape, incest and the mother's health are needed, special exceptions for abortion. Fine. I'll concede those rare instances if it means eliminating walk-ins. Where is the compromise on the other side? I'm also pro contraception and pro education.

The numbers are trending down...but that's still a lot of abortions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_ ... and%201998.

IMO, the numbers are especially egregious when you hear the moan and cry from some pro-abortion people about deaths due to a natural occurring virus.

We care about the 230k, why not the 600K+? Neither group had any choice in their fate.

can a third, or late term abortion. like the law Virginia's covid Positive Gov. loves, ALSO be considered a covid death? I mean, legally, if it's medicaid that is paying for it in the first place, will the clinic get the additional funds like all the other health care providers? boy,, timing IS everything

[MDlaxfan76]

Just answering the question, counselor. Apparently some DO call abortions “blessings.”

We also sometimes call the passing of a person with serious dementia or pain...a "blessing".

In other deaths, we usually don't call it a "blessing".

We don't celebrate their death, we often do celebrate their life.

In these ended pregnancies, the experience may or may not be felt as a 'blessing', that's very much a matter of the individual circumstance and up to that individual, not the rest of us.

Just as we typically don't celebrate a lost pregnancy (though parents may well feel that loss desperately, as my wife and I did twice), we don't celebrate terminated pregnancies either.

It's a really ugly argument, Kram.

In my limited experience, the women I've spoken with use words more like "relief" than "blessing", some certainly regret having been in such a position, for others their view is that it was a medical procedure, not a moral question. I've also spoken to one woman who years later regretted her earlier decision, though defended her younger self as not feeling she had a viable choice. It's mixed.

My bottomline is that I don't think government should be involved with the decisions made by women, based on both privacy and equal treatment under the law. That's where this overlaps with SCOTUS.

Barrett is on the Court.
More cases restricting access to choice are coming, and more states will be passing all the more restrictive laws emboldened by the tilt of the Court.

I also favor the ERA, yet even now it's not been ratified...

I can understand that. The women who have abortions own what they have done. FOr the good and bad. THat's for them to have to cope with their whole life. SOme can, others cant.

But the problem is, IMO, the argument needs to be real. For the good or the bad.

What are we REALLY discussing. A law or an act?

In a time where people are searching for truth, why is the reality of what abortion is always glossed over? From the act itself to the effects afterwards. There ARE women who are relieved or later regretful. Or not.

But the reality of what the law MEANS needs to be discussed. Some being scared of the discussion and the truth of the topic is quite telling IMO.

Law.
And a woman's right to make these decisions for herself should not be abridged by any law.

Again, there are all sorts of ways that we can reduce the # of abortions without restricting this right.

The discussion of the act and its non-legal ramifications can be discussed elsewhere IMO.

[DMac]

We care about the 230k, why not the 600K+? Neither group had any choice in their fate.

These are not comparable, IMO, different subject altogether. One is an issue of morality as one sees it, the other is not.
As for the fine lines and laws, I'll leave that part to the experts (so called) to figure out. I'm fine with where I stand, I look at it in real world, real life circumstances/situations and my view is not influenced by what people say is God's word. That, I believe, is what the big difference is here.....and how does a Christian, specifically here a Catholic Supreme Court Justice, separate themselves from human law and the word of God?

[jhu72]

Abortion is not against "natural law". What the fu*k is a miscarriage? Nature's abortion!

... by the way, where is Cradle when God needs a good dressing down for performing abortions?

[DMac]

Further, how many people/babies are alive today because man goes against natural law??
Many a premie not alive today if natural law is applied at birth. How many people live
two, three weeks/months longer because we interfere with natural law. Can't have it
both ways. God intend for that premie to die? The old timer much sooner?

[ggait]

and how does a Christian, specifically here a Catholic Supreme Court Justice, separate themselves from human law and the word of God?

I guess this stupid pointless zombie thread can't be killed.

So I will tell you how:

1. Legal abortion is the law in the USA. Has been for 50 years. Will be for the next 50 years. As it is legal in basically every other part of the developed world.

2. Polls say that 56% of Catholics say abortion should be legal in most/all cases.

People decided this issue a loooooong time ago. We get you guys disagree. We don't care. Surveys say 80% of Americans don't care what you think either. Pro-life/pro-choice sentiment is basically the same as it was 50 years ago. It will be mostly the same 50 years from now.

Perhaps we could discuss something else with more current relevance: VCR vs. Betamax -- who do you think the winner is going to be?

The only relevant thing to discuss today is a fairly narrow legal issue of RvW's continued status (which has little practical effect today), and its implications for court packing, SCOTUS reform, etc.

Please go discuss in a religion/adoption/contraception thread if you want to. The title of this thread is SCOTUS. It isn't "What is the word of God?"

[kramerica.inc]

Abortion is not against "natural law". What the fu*k is a miscarriage? Nature's abortion!

... by the way, where is Cradle when God needs a good dressing down for performing abortions?

Correct. Mother nature is choosing to do it.
A mother intentionally and willfully choosing to abort their kid is against natural law. Against natural phenomena. Taking a viable pregnancy and ending it.

[jhu72]

Abortion is not against "natural law". What the fu*k is a miscarriage? Nature's abortion!

... by the way, where is Cradle when God needs a good dressing down for performing abortions?

Correct. Mother nature is choosing to do it.
A mother intentionally and willfully choosing to abort their kid is against natural law. Against natural phenomena. Taking a viable pregnancy and ending it.

... and man is part of nature and man chooses to abort, so this is natural as well.

[DMac]

Obviously we don't much care what you think either, ggait. As was pointed out earlier this was a concern with the new Justice which is why it came up and is being discussed here. Not a big deal, just wait it out, it'll come back around to where you want it. Don't let us stop you for posting what you want, we certainly don't let you stop us from posting what we want. Pretty fair, no?

[kramerica.inc]

Abortion is not against "natural law". What the fu*k is a miscarriage? Nature's abortion!

... by the way, where is Cradle when God needs a good dressing down for performing abortions?

Correct. Mother nature is choosing to do it.
A mother intentionally and willfully choosing to abort their kid is against natural law. Against natural phenomena. Taking a viable pregnancy and ending it.

... and man is part of nature and man chooses to abort, so this is natural as well.

There are many things people CAN do. But the overwhelming natural instinct is to want to carry/protect/care for your child. Not kill it.

[kramerica.inc]

and how does a Christian, specifically here a Catholic Supreme Court Justice, separate themselves from human law and the word of God?

I guess this stupid pointless zombie thread can't be killed.

So I will tell you how:

1. Legal abortion is the law in the USA. Has been for 50 years. Will be for the next 50 years. As it is legal in basically every other part of the developed world.

2. Polls say that 56% of Catholics say abortion should be legal in most/all cases.

People decided this issue a loooooong time ago. We get you guys disagree. We don't care. Surveys say 80% of Americans don't care what you think either. Pro-life/pro-choice sentiment is basically the same as it was 50 years ago. It will be mostly the same 50 years from now.

Perhaps we could discuss something else with more current relevance: VCR vs. Betamax -- who do you think the winner is going to be?

The only relevant thing to discuss today is a fairly narrow legal issue of RvW's continued status (which has little practical effect today), and its implications for court packing, SCOTUS reform, etc.

Please go discuss in a religion/adoption/contraception thread if you want to. The title of this thread is SCOTUS. It isn't "What is the word of God?"

We have to read the blathering of you and others on a myriad of threads. Get over it, and yourself.

But since now I know someone you are reading- What polls do you keep referencing? Got a link?

Pics or it didn’t happen.

[cradleandshoot]

and how does a Christian, specifically here a Catholic Supreme Court Justice, separate themselves from human law and the word of God?

I guess this stupid pointless zombie thread can't be killed.

So I will tell you how:

1. Legal abortion is the law in the USA. Has been for 50 years. Will be for the next 50 years. As it is legal in basically every other part of the developed world.

2. Polls say that 56% of Catholics say abortion should be legal in most/all cases.

People decided this issue a loooooong time ago. We get you guys disagree. We don't care. Surveys say 80% of Americans don't care what you think either. Pro-life/pro-choice sentiment is basically the same as it was 50 years ago. It will be mostly the same 50 years from now.

Perhaps we could discuss something else with more current relevance: VCR vs. Betamax -- who do you think the winner is going to be?

The only relevant thing to discuss today is a fairly narrow legal issue of RvW's continued status (which has little practical effect today), and its implications for court packing, SCOTUS reform, etc.

Please go discuss in a religion/adoption/contraception thread if you want to. The title of this thread is SCOTUS. It isn't "What is the word of God?"

One undeniable truth counselor, once you get a lawyer talking you can never get them to shut up. No one was forcing you to post here counselor, that was your choice. You are out of order sir, if you keep it up you will be charged with contempt of thread. I hope you understand, because i know you are a lawyer that i am busting your balls. My nephew is a lawyer, Cornell grad, UNY law school grad. His specialty is immigration law, he is damn good at his craft. He never goes to court. he spends his days dicking with the government and sending forms back and forth with government lawyers. My family had a number of lawyers that were family friends. One of them was a good friend of my grandfather. He had a golden rule that the only people lawyers could ever trust were other lawyers. Reading the back and forth here only reminds me and reinforces those words to me. The only people lawyers ever really trust are other are other lawyers. You all will always stick together like a den of thieves. At least there is some consistency there that proves to me something I have always known... lawyers only really trust their fellow lawyers.