Triple G

Of course, the challenges have to go through the lower courts first, but with almost 100% laser focus on getting conservative judges in all courts but especially SCOTUS, it begs the question of why not make use of all that effort.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/01/13/how-trump-compares-with-other-recent-presidents-in-appointing-federal-judges/

Tex-s

You speak truly in this case. I live every day with the fear that my saying exactly what you just said, that contraception is a key, even THE key, will set me at odds with my employer. I just happen to believe the religious have it right in one way, though not for the reasons they think. After 30 years of working with young ladies (teens) I can promise you that a great number of them end up with lifelong emotional issues after deciding to engage in sex too early in their lives. And when I say 'too early' I simply mean that these girls typically are choosing sex to avoid losing a boyfriend, not actually choosing sex because it's what they desire. That dynamic is very similar to domestic violence in its after-shocks to a girl of say 16. Most if not all of these girls end up with negative images of themselves when they split with a guy with whom they have had sex. Sex ed and contraception are surely important, but there have to be more of us willing to train boys to stop pressuring the girls, and need to train girls to protect their youth from adult problems.

A girl of any age ending in 'teen' SHOULD be making every choice (just like the boys, mind you) to put themselves on a path to a successful future. Education, work experience and financial literacy top the list, but emotional, bacterial, viral, or pregnancy (completed OR terminated) baggage can bring the future plans to a screeching halt. I'll repeat. The religious are promoting a good plan when they promote abstinence. It is the best idea, as temporary frustrations are preferable to life-long ones. Not having sex has a 100% success rate of avoiding pregnancy too. Their problem is they cloak the idea in 2000+ year old texts, which, even if true, were written for women with a life span of 42 years, who had no ability to survive a breech birth, no antibiotics, and an utterly subservient roll in society. No one, even Conservatives or Libertarians (which is what I label myself) would advocate for such a roll for women in today's world.

My views are two-fold. 1) Abortion is exponentially the worst (pronounced 'evil') way to avoid having a child, and 2) that leftists don't actually believe the unborn are not living humans. I'm sure it's suppressed, but a few years ago, Bill and Hillary Clinton announced on Facebook or some such that they were anxiously awaiting their next grandBABY, a BABY that was not due for 7 months. It actually seems that it's a BABY if you want it and a cluster of cells, zygote, blastula, or fetus if you don't. To me, that's the hypocrisy of the left on full display, denying reality by butchering language.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

In the case of the Clintons, you are confusing emotions with science. Regardless of ones views on young people having sex, by the time abortion is up for consideration, that ship has sailed. I've known a few girls who have had abortions. For some there was a lot of guilt involved. Guilt that I believe came from societal pressure, not from the actual procedure. Others have given it as much thought as you might give having polyps removed. I challenge you to prove that having an abortion is more damaging to the girl/woman than having a child at 14, or 15, or at a time and under circumstances where one is not prepared to deal with it. A great many abortions are preformed on women who are old enough to know what they want. Holding a dime between one's knees is not an effective form of birth control. In the heat of passion, the dime almost always gets dropped. One loudly self proclaimed Christion on this sight has promoted anal sex as contraception. While I see anal sex as a personal choice and am neither for or against it, I doubt that that is where you are coming from. There might be circumstances under which I would work for a company that employed "thought police", but it would only be for as long as it took me to find a decent employer. Are your skills not on a level that gives you a choice in employment? I thought you were all in for free speech and such. If you really have no other choices, my condolences, and I hope you survive, but maybe you haven't really tried. I don't know your position on drugs and the law, but if you believe recreational use of drugs should be illegal, and abortion should be illegal, just what is it that makes you believe you are a libertarian?

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

Impeachment articles have already been brought forth in the House against Bite-me.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Just a minor correction. There are no AR-15 assault weapons.
--Bob

letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.

Doesn't your spell check work, actually it does, maybe it was auto corrected wrongly. CHRISTION

redlegfrog

So are we happy that we can get back to killing babies? What ever makes the lefties smile! Just don't use a gun in the process, it makes the lefties frown!

Frank T Loc: New York, NY

A fetus is not a baby any more than an egg is a chicken.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

OK, I trusted the cheap useless spell check program someone probably paid admin to use. I shouldn't have, but copying every post into word and then copying it back is quite tedious. You are right, but I generally only say something about someone's spelling if the UHH spellchecker points it out. Still, an error on my part, but no disrespect intended towards my audience.

redlegfrog

You like scrambled or fried?

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

I always stay out of right to discussion but have always wanted one question answered by the right to life side.

If life begins at conception and new life is totally innocent why is there always an exception carved out for rape or incest?

That always seemed rather hypocritical.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Yes, there is precedent, of course not in the constitution but rather by the courts. Reading the contemporary writings at or near the writing of the constitution one could make a clear argument that there should be no restrictions. Why is it that liberals refuse the amendment process?

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

You are right⭐

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

Doesn't a woman faced with the choice of having an abortion, or giving birth to a child she isn't prepared to care for, have enough problems without you piling on? Maybe you could use a hobby. Traumatizing young women doesn't really count.

mikee

"invented by the SCOTUS, first in Griswold and then in Roe."

The supreme court interprets, it does not invent.