Roe v. Wade at 40: Most Oppose Overturning Abortion Decision

  • Thread starter Thread starter Al_Moritz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dem Co-Chair of Pro-Life Caucus: ‘Without the Right to Life, No Other Rights Can Exist’
The right to life is the most important right of American citizens, Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) said at a news conference to mark the 40th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide.
“Yesterday, we heard from President Obama in his inauguration harkening back to our founders, who laid out our God-given, inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” Lipinski, co-chairman of the House Pro-life Caucus, said on Tuesday on Capitol Hill.
“And we all know that without the right to life, no other rights can exist,” Lipinski said.
alling that right “the foundation of our country,” Lipinski said the high court’s decision “took away that right to life for the most vulnerable amongst us.”
Lipinski joined Reps. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), co-chairman of the caucus, and Diane Black (R-Tenn.), who held the conference to introduce to the media women who shared their stories on how abortion resulted in years of suffering for them, from myriad problems, including depression and anxiety to eating disorders.
One woman, Marcia Carroll, spoke about her 14-year-old daughter, who was taken across state lines by her boyfriend’s family to get an abortion even after the teenager and her family had decided to keep the child.
“As a result of this legal abortion that was completed and unbeknownst to me, my daughter suffered years of depression, intense grief, post-traumatic stress disorder, nightmares, thoughts and even attempts of suicide,” Carroll said. “Only after years of counseling are we able to cope with the affects and the consequences of that day.”
cnsnews.com/news/article/dem-co-chair-pro-life-caucus-without-right-life-no-other-rights-can-exist
 
During slavery Blacks were seen as non persons, as the unborn is seen by many today; people could choose to sell, kill or buy; it was legal

Unborn are seen as non persons by many; people can choose to kill; abortion is legal
Where the comparison (of any of these) with abortion fails for me, is in the assumption that because the justification offered is similar, the solutions must also be similar.

IMO, abortion, is unique in the sense that unless a woman chooses to reveal the truth, she is more likely going to be able to keep it hidden. She does not have to reveal pregnancy, she does not have to go to a doctor, she does not have to tell the truth about her role in the events even if she does go to a doctor.

Any other death is much less easily hidden because someone, somewhere, at some point is going to notice the person is missing. Not to mention that natural death is very common and the causes much less clearly understood, in the case of the unborn.

All that being so, I find it hard to see how the solutions to slavery etc, can be assumed to apply effectively to abortion.
 
Where the comparison (of any of these) with abortion fails for me, is in the assumption that because the justification offered is similar, the solutions must also be similar.

IMO, abortion, is unique in the sense that unless a woman chooses to reveal the truth, she is more likely going to be able to keep it hidden. She does not have to reveal pregnancy, she does not have to go to a doctor, she does not have to tell the truth about her role in the events even if she does go to a doctor.

Any other death is much less easily hidden because someone, somewhere, at some point is going to notice the person is missing. Not to mention that natural death is very common and the causes much less clearly understood, in the case of the unborn.

All that being so, I find it hard to see how the solutions to slavery etc, can be assumed to apply effectively to abortion.
Get over it, some of us don’t want to be on the side of the Left Wing’s genocide against Minorities!
 
Is there some “it” you’re having trouble with? How may I be of assistance?
There’s only one abortion clinic in states like Mo. and Ms. War is being won. Some others have rights too.

Just because population concentrated states like Calif. NY, NJ and Illinois want abortion doesn’t mean most states want all of this.
 
There’s only one abortion clinic in states like Mo. and Ms. War is being won. Some others have rights too.

Just because population concentrated states like Calif. NY, NJ and Illinois want abortion doesn’t mean most states want all of this.
“Only one clinic” says as much about who has abortions, as ‘only one gun shop’ might say about who has guns.
 
Good grief, CMatt … it’s not “a discussion about slavery.” It’s a discussion about humanity and personhood.

The point is that it’s not fine and dandy to have the “personal choice” to define certain groups as being “not really people”. In your prior post that I responded to, you mentioned that not everyone in the USA agrees with the definition of “person”… the point is, earlier in our history, some people “personally chose” to define people on the basis of of ethnicity. Some people today want to “personally choose” to define people by age or stage of development.

The point is that we don’t have to wait until “everyone agrees” to defend certain marginalized classes of human beings.

Sometimes, we have to do the right thing, even when it’s painful and not “agreeable.”

.
Don’t worry, CMatt is notorious for using these type of mental gymnastics to blindly support the Democratic party and poke fun of people who do not subscribe to their world view.
 
What I find absolutely absurd and chilling is - to quote another longtime CAF poster - “a child can be a child if I say it is, but not be a child if I say it’s not.” This completely flies in the face of science and all common sense.
 
Where the comparison (of any of these) with abortion fails for me, is in the assumption that because the justification offered is similar, the solutions must also be similar.

IMO, abortion, is unique in the sense that unless a woman chooses to reveal the truth, she is more likely going to be able to keep it hidden. She does not have to reveal pregnancy, she does not have to go to a doctor, she does not have to tell the truth about her role in the events even if she does go to a doctor.

Any other death is much less easily hidden because someone, somewhere, at some point is going to notice the person is missing. Not to mention that natural death is very common and the causes much less clearly understood, in the case of the unborn.

All that being so, I find it hard to see how the solutions to slavery etc, can be assumed to apply effectively to abortion.
Abortion is unique. And some good points why its comparison to the etc’s fail.
 
There’s only one abortion clinic in states like Mo. and Ms. War is being won. Some others have rights too.

Just because population concentrated states like Calif. NY, NJ and Illinois want abortion doesn’t mean most states want all of this.
And how did the vote on that personhood amendment in Mississippi work out for ya?
 
This was interesting, coming from an abortion supporter:

"What is frightening about Roe is that this super-protected right is not inferable from the language of the Constitution, the framers’ thinking respecting the specific problem in issue, any general value derivable from the provisions they included, or the nation’s governmental structure. Nor is it explainable in terms of the unusual political impotence of the group judicially protected vis-a-vis the interests that legislatively prevailed over it.” --John Hart Ely, writing in the Yale Law Journal.

In other words, it’s not even constitutional law. They just made it up, having no constitutional basis to go on.
 
youtube.com/watch?v=YEMnyiDKUJI

Centre for Reproductive Rights put out ad an celebrating the 40th anniversary of Roe v wade. This videos shows how women are seen by the pro abortion movement, and revealingly shows how abortion has given men the non worry about the consequences of sex with a woman, aka a baby, so women can be used without any consequences
 
hat she wanted was for the city of Boston to turn over three vacant two- and three-family buildings to her religious order to create housing, daycare and recreation space for unwed mothers and their infants and young children.
City attorney Joe Mulligan was with my wife, Kathy, at the time. Joe advised us that we didn’t have the authority under the City Charter to give the property away to any group, regardless of the need or merit. It could only be sold through a public auction, with the property going to the highest bidder. All the back, uncollected taxes would have to be paid to the city by the new owner.
Repeated explanations [were given] by me, with an emphatic, “I’m sorry, Mother, but the law does not allow the mayor or anyone else to deed over this or any other parcels of property.” The meeting lasted almost an hour, with Mother Teresa smiling and assuring us how lucky we were to be able to help these beautiful children.
After each moving presentation, we responded with the same apologetic refusal. However, I did agree to voluntarily raise several hundred thousands of dollars, which I felt would be enough money to get one house in an open auction. But, even with that, she said the children needed three houses.
The deadlocked meeting finally ended when my press secretary informed me that a lot of media were waiting outside on the porch. I did not call for a press conference, so it must have been Mother Teresa’s staff who did. Besides, I didn’t have anything positive to say. Saying No to Mother Teresa is not a good story.
When we got out on the porch, there were at least 10 TV cameras and reporters all around us, waiting for the news. I saw the president of the union, the president of one of the leading banks and a host of prominent people. “What are you doing here?” I asked.
“Your office called us; they said you needed us here.”
Just then, Mother Teresa stepped in front of the cameras to tell everybody how fortunate the people of Boston are to have such a nice, caring man as their mayor. I looked at my housing advisor and whispered to him, “What the hell is going on here?” He shrugged his shoulders and said, “I don’t know; I’m Jewish.”
I knew I was rolled, but there was nothing I could do about it. Do you think I would win the next election if I refused her request? Not on your life.
Thanks for link to story about Mother Teresa and Mayor of Boston:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top