Supreme Court overturning Roe v Wade?

I hope you realize that it's not so important how many likes you get than the importance of your truth💖
You asked me not to reply to you, yet you are baiting me. Why can't we have peace? I've always liked you very much. I didn't agree with you, so what?
 
Question for @Pepper since I can't ask in the other looked thread where it seemed you don't like the word viability. To me, viability means the age at which a fetus can survive without medical intervention. Don't want to argue it (and may have totally misunderstood your feelings about the word) but if you are opposed, I sincerely want to know what it means to you if you don't like the word/definition.
 
Question for @Pepper since I can't ask in the other looked thread where it seemed you don't like the word viability. To me, viability means the age at which a fetus can survive without medical intervention. Don't want to argue it (and may have totally misunderstood your feelings about the word) but if you are opposed, I sincerely want to know what it means to you if you don't like the word/definition.
I came home exhausted last night and thought the word was 'not viable.' I goofed because I was tired, that's all. Meant that if a non-viable baby was born the hospital would do nothing to save it, which is not the same thing as deliberately killing it. Sorry for the mix-up.
 
To be honest, abortion pits one right against another. There's no middle ground, and I don't see a solution. I think the SCOTUS's wavering back and forth over the issue proves that. Really, the decision doesn't change much, except women have to travel to abortion acceptable states. Maybe that is the only solution in both banning, and allowing abortions.
 
I'll start to agree with those who are against abortion when I see them lining up to adopt all the unwanted children that are born every year.
I wouldn't. Women aren't brood mares. A woman shouldn't be forced to be pregnant & give birth to to supply and fill the orders for adoption needs. Too many kids wind up in permanent foster care and don't get the fairy tale end.
 
To be honest, abortion pits one right against another. There's no middle grouynd, and I don't see a solution. I think the SCOTUS's wavering back and forth over the issue proves that. Really, the decision doesn't change much, except women have to travel to abortion acceptable states. Maybe that is the only solution in both banning, and allowing abortions.
It's such a step backwards though when time is of paramount importance. It reminds me of when I was a teenager and there was all that worry and expense trying to find a free state. :confused:
 
I wouldn't. Women aren't brood mares. A woman shouldn't be forced to be pregnant & give birth to to supply and fill the orders for adoption needs. Too many kids wind up in permanent foster care and don't get the fairy tale end.
I live on the side of the tracks where tens-of-thousands of men and women who don't give a crap about the kids they have with multiple partners also live. Right here at my apartments are 2 women, one who has 5 kids, another who has 7, and neither of them is 30 yet. All these kids have been taken and returned by CPS three times and more. Still, I'm not in favor of terminating a pregnancy in the final trimester. I am very much in favor of better prevention; a better pill or whatever, completely free to anyone. I also wish there was a law that required sterilization for any man or woman declared incapable of raising children due to physical abuse (of children), drug addiction proven resistant to treatment, mental illnesses that cause violent behavior, and habitual criminality.
 
Last edited:
I have a question.
With this overturned law, will that include the morning-after pill?

There's no way of knowing how far some of these states will go, Tish. Presumably if they're outlawing abortions that will also include morning after pills and other medical interventions.

Just wait until these states see their social services rolls swell.
 
I live on the side of the tracks where the tens-of-thousands of men and women don't give a crap about the kids they have with multiple partners also live. Right here at my apartments are 2 women, one who has 5 kids, another who has 7, and neither of them is 30 yet. All these kids have been taken and returned by CPS three times and more. Still, I'm not in favor of terminating a pregnancy in the final trimester. I am very much in favor of better prevention; a better pill or whatever, completely free to anyone. I also wish there was a law that required sterilization for any man or woman declared incapable of raising children due to physical abuse (of children), drug addiction proven resistant to treatment, mental illnesses that cause violent behavior, and habitual criminality.

I have been shouting this from the rooftops for more years than I can remember
 
In have been watching the live protest at the Supreme Court. I like the feeling of imagining I am there, screaming out my indignation at this outrageous ruling. There are presently 30,000 watching.


A protest at the Arizona State Capital turned violent last night.

 
Last edited:
More likely because they disagree strongly with their employees' rights being stripped from them. If you read about these companies in depth you'll see that the majority (all?) of these companies extend the same offer to their employees' dependents. So it's not just about a company's immediate pocketbook.

Salesforce, a software company, will assist with employee relocation. "According to CNBC, the message said, 'If you have concerns about access to reproductive healthcare in your state, Salesforce will help relocate you and members of your immediate family.”'

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maggie...ng-abortion-related-benefits/?sh=5fce58a51c94

Hoping many more companies will jump on this train.
And who do you think will end up paying for these trips? Surely you don’t think the company will pay for these trips from their shareholders payouts, or do you?
 
Here's your mistake. The very same folks who bring suit against abortion are likely to bring suit against contraceptives, bringing us back to pre Margaret Sanger days. If the Supreme Court is the same, guess what? They are not fans of gay marriage either. Buckle up, it's a wild ride!
Clarence Thomas has suggested a ban on contraceptives , a ban on same sex marriage, a ban on transgendered people. Oddly enough(not too oddly) he of course stays away from a ban on interracial marriage.

By the way I think Mrs Thomas may very well be the person who leaked the Extreme Court was going to end Women's rights. She seems to think she is hot stuff because she is married to a Extreme Court judge.
 
In have been watching the live protest at the Supreme Court. I like the feeling of imagining I am there, screaming out my indignation at this outrageous ruling. There are presently 30,000 watching.
As I see it, nothing more than theater! I'm not moved or impressed. Results only come from voting self-interest. What good is all the screaming and anguish when come November they will either not vote or otherwise support the anti-abortion party because of tunnel vision and/or short memory?
 
In have been watching the live protest at the Supreme Court. I like the feeling of imagining I am there, screaming out my indignation at this outrageous ruling. There are presently 30,000 watching.


A protest at the Arizona State Capital turned violent last night.

It's all up to states now, so pro-choice people can do more targeted protests and maybe even vote! They can vote out anti-choice state congresspeople and governors and vote for candidates who respect the separation of church and state.
 
I was not going to speak in the thread, but I cannot take it anymore…..30,000, 50,000 a million can scream they are mad, but those little innocent ones only get to scream when they are killed.
 

Back
Top