Jane Roe to ask Supremes to vacate Roe v. Wade

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
Look back a few years, a woman couldnt have her tubes tied with out the spouses permission. yet you men could go get fixed without your wifes permission wtf is up with that?

Simple. That is just traditional male chaovanist society at work. Of course that violates the equal protection clause of the constitution as well as a woman's right to prvacy but since all of the law makers were men they didn't care much about that.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Berzerker
That ain't the baby's fault, there's always adoption.

And there's always the fact that fetuses under a certain age aren't alive at all and a woman has the right to decide what occurs in her body. I realize that is a revolutionary idea to some people though.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Berzerker
We jail people for using certain drugs, therefore we either have no right to our own bodies or we need greater recognition and enforcement of all our rights stemming from this autonomy. Pro-choicers claiming a right to own their bodies while supporting the punishment of others for exercising the same right doesn't impress me. Liberals claiming the authority to "tax" away the fruits of my labor to pay for what they want raises another paradox if I "own" my body.

It seems very consistant to me and to the vast majority of Americans. Maybe if you keep bitaching though you might sway a percentage point or two.

[Berzerker]

Amen.

I'm playing devil's advocate I just can't decide which devil to speak for.

And there's always the fact that fetuses under a certain age aren't alive at all and a woman has the right to decide what occurs in her body. I realize that is a revolutionary idea to some people though.

What age? Measured in hours or days? That is a revolutionary idea, but not all revolutions deserve success.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Parents don't have a choice about raising children other than adoption.

You missed the point.

There should be a choice in deciding whether or not to have a baby. Of all people, you should support this choice.

[Berzerker]

It seems very consistant to me and to the vast majority of Americans.

What is consistent about claiming an autonomous right to kill a baby before its born but no autonomous right to smoke pot?

Maybe if you keep bitaching though you might sway a percentage point or two.

Then to be consistent, all rights should be subject to majority rule.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Berzerker
What is consistent about claiming an autonomous right to kill a baby before its born but no autonomous right to smoke pot?

It seems extremely straight forward to me. One harms a living human and the other doesn't. Throw in the negative social effects of drug use and how it overtly harms society and you have a compelling case.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Berzerker


We jail people for using certain drugs, therefore we either have no right to our own bodies or we need greater recognition and enforcement of all our rights stemming from this autonomy. Pro-choicers claiming a right to own their bodies while supporting the punishment of others for exercising the same right doesn't impress me. Liberals claiming the authority to "tax" away the fruits of my labor to pay for what they want raises another paradox if I "own" my body.

You are comparing apples with oranges now. While it is true you do own your body, your greater politician and do gooders made the laws against drugs. You can do drugs put them in your body tear it up its ur choice dont get caught is the rule of thumb there. Thats the beauty of the constitution it was made by man to be changed to fit society as society grows. Not to mention i have never seen a woman coming from an abortion go completly wack and infict harm on another person like i have a wackko wacked on crank rip a family apart

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Oerdin


It seems extremely straight forward to me. One harms a living human and the other doesn't. Throw in the negative social effects of drug use and how it overtly harms society and you have a compelling case.

Im not sure how any one can think that anytype of drug use doesnt harm a human. The person using the drugs is human arent they? Cigarettes can cause cancer, coke can cause a heart attack alochol can cause liver damage and all of these can cause death, dont get me wrong i smoke and drink with the best of um but its my choice.

[Berzerker]

It seems extremely straight forward to me. One harms a living human and the other doesn't. Throw in the negative social effects of drug use and how it overtly harms society and you have a compelling case.

So if I smoke pot, I should be punished because someone else who smokes pot did something bad? Does banning drugs overtly harm society? Btw, many women die or are severly injured in botched abortions, so according to your argument, abortion should also be banned.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Berzerker


So if I smoke pot, I should be punished because someone else who smokes pot did something bad? Does banning drugs overtly harm society? Btw, many women die or are severly injured in botched abortions, so according to your argument, abortion should also be banned.

The odds your claiming are not as high as you think. I work in the operating room and have seen patients die from having their tonsils taking out. Any invasive procedures have risks whether it be an abortion or a tonislectomy to an open heart by pass. The point is you as the patient are informed of those risks and you have to make the choice. If you want to smoke pot u shouldnt be punished if you sont get caught. I say again the people who made those laws are people you voted for.

[Dinner]

Women who go to real medical clinics to get abortions do just fine. It is ignorant bastards such as your self who attempt to robe women of their right to abortions which cause the back ally abortions where all the harm is caused.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Now on the other hand if your stoned out of your gore crash into my car and harm my family and me then H*ll yeah you need to be punished.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Berzerker


So if I smoke pot, I should be punished because someone else who smokes pot did something bad? Does banning drugs overtly harm society? Btw, many women die or are severly injured in botched abortions, so according to your argument, abortion should also be banned.

Risk death during abortion? If you make abortion illegal women wil;l still get the abortions, they just wont be getting them in a safe sterile enviromentby a certified doctor.
Instead they will get them illegally in unsafe conditions which in all likelyhood will increase the number of women deaths due to abortions.
ACK!

[Berzerker]

Mrs Tuberski

The odds your claiming are not as high as you think.

Where did I post odds?

I work in the operating room and have seen patients die from having their tonsils taking out.

Then according to Oerdin we shouldn't have the right to pay someone to remove our tonsils. Oh, Oerdin says women who have abortions in "real" clinics do just fine. You might want to ask him about that.

If you want to smoke pot u shouldnt be punished if you sont get caught. I say again the people who made those laws are people you voted for.

You dont know who I vote for, but then abortion should be banned and women can have abortions as long as they dont get caught, right? Apply the same standard to this "right" to own one's body?

Now on the other hand if your stoned out of your gore crash into my car and harm my family and me then H*ll yeah you need to be punished.

Who said we should have a right to crash our cars into your family?

Oerdin

Women who go to real medical clinics to get abortions do just fine.

Ah, I thought some died or suffered severe injuries. You're changing your "consistent" definition of autonomy. Under your new definition no one is free to act if someone else out there screwed up and hurt someone. Of course this includes so many of our freedoms you get to pick and choose when to apply the definition, i.e., freedom means you get to decide who is free.

It is ignorant bastards such as your self who attempt to robe women of their right to abortions which cause the back ally abortions where all the harm is caused.

Gee, where did I say I wanted to outlaw abortion? You "praised" me for pointing out that constitutional protections belong to the born, not the conceived. Now I want abortion banned? Strange turn of events...