what's wrong with Alabama?

ofparadise · Post by **ofparadise** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:19 am

title speaks for itself....

why are they this obtuse? Are they just stupid or dumb?

If you don't know what i mean, ... it's about the Alabama bill which is part of a broader effort among some
conservative states to restrict abortion, including proposals and new laws in North and South Carolina,
Georgia, Louisiana and others around the South and Midwest.

frank lee bent · Post by **frank lee bent** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 4:41 am

Talibama

Brody · Post by **Brody** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:29 am

beaker · Post by **beaker** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:03 am

IraHayes · Post by **IraHayes** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:10 am

Do people only listen to MSM talking points?
The Alabama abortion law is specifically worded to counter Roe Vs Wade. One of the guys involved in writing it even said this was the reason. They knew it would be blocked and their intention is to get it to be heard by SCOTUS.

And it is as extreme as the recent NY bill that basically allows for a mother giving birth to decide, NO, i don't want this baby now so after it is born please kill it.

Doc67 · Post by **Doc67** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:57 am

That was my understanding of this move; the pro-life group are planning another run at Roe v Wade.

What is the balance of the Supreme Court, in terms of pro-life/pro-choice, now that Brett Kavanaugh got confirmed?

IraHayes · Post by **IraHayes** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 9:17 am

Doc67 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:57 am That was my understanding of this move; the pro-life group are planning another run at Roe v Wade.

What is the balance of the Supreme Court, in terms of pro-life/pro-choice, now that Brett Kavanaugh got confirmed?

Kavanaugh said RvW was settled law prior to his confirmation. But... that was then and who knows how he will side once this goes before the SCOTUS. Also, RBG is living on borrowed time. Age and multiple medical problems are taking their toll on her. I expect Trump will be replacing her before his presidency ends tbh.

And getting back to the OP... who said “Are they stupid or just dumb”.... they are neither... they are positioning themselves to challenge RvW by asserting a baby in the womb is a person and thus covered by the same laws as the rest of US citizens. Then there’s the angle that should abortions be covered constitutionally? The problem is it is being pushed as just another method of birth control by PP et all when in all fairness there are plenty of effective birth control solutions already. And the small number of women having multiple abortions are really just outliers from a small demographic.

I am open to discussion on that last paragraph above as I may have made sweeping generalisations while not having all the facts... so present facts with your opinions if you wish to discuss

angkorjohn2 · Post by **angkorjohn2** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 9:44 am

As far as I see it is, and always has been about controlling women's bodies. It is nothing about protecting a child, or as is usually the case of abortion a collection of cells with no cerebral function. To begin to criminalize women the way this bill is positioning itself is disgusting espceially in cases of incest or rape, if it were not so serious a subject I would joke that the reason Alabama included these things is because thats how half the people there are conceived. Women who want an abortion will always go to seek ways to have that, always have always will. The choice as lawmakers and politicians is, do you offer women a safe medical facility to do this or do you put them in harms way at some back alley set up. Guaranteed the politicians who signed up to this will still be able to get the abortions for their mistresses.

Doc67 · Post by **Doc67** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 9:55 am

IraHayes wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2019 9:17 am
Doc67 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:57 am That was my understanding of this move; the pro-life group are planning another run at Roe v Wade.

What is the balance of the Supreme Court, in terms of pro-life/pro-choice, now that Brett Kavanaugh got confirmed?
Kavanaugh said RvW was settled law prior to his confirmation. But... that was then and who knows how he will side once this goes before the SCOTUS. Also, RBG is living on borrowed time. Age and multiple medical problems are taking their toll on her. I expect Trump will be replacing her before his presidency ends tbh.

And getting back to the OP... who said “Are they stupid or just dumb”.... they are neither... they are positioning themselves to challenge RvW by asserting a baby in the womb is a person and thus covered by the same laws as the rest of US citizens. Then there’s the angle that should abortions be covered constitutionally? The problem is it is being pushed as just another method of birth control by PP et all when in all fairness there are plenty of effective birth control solutions already. And the small number of women having multiple abortions are really just outliers from a small demographic.

I am open to discussion on that last paragraph above as I may have made sweeping generalisations while not having all the facts... so present facts with your opinions if you wish to discuss

Yeah, I noticed that the two clinton appointees, RBG and Steven Breyer are 86 and 80 respectively. I assume that they are both pro-choice being Clinton appointees?

It seems there's a 5-4 split in favour of Republican nominees and the two Clinton ones could go within this Presidency and almost certianly will should Trump be re-elected. That would make it 4 appointees to Trump, 3 to the Bush's and just the 2 Obama appointees; so 7/2 split in favour of the Republicans. That doesn't sound terribly balanced to me.

No wonder the pro-life side are gearing up for a fight...

Feel free to 'school me' if I am missing something...

cptrelentless · Post by **cptrelentless** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 10:11 am

What I find dumb about it is that Republicans always complain about how much money they government spends and yet instead of supporting a couple of hundred dollars for an abortion they want to bring an unwanted and unsupported child into the world where it will spend 80 years being a burden on the state. People have abortions because they don't want the damn kid. Even if you stick it in a cage like a Mexican kid it'll still cost the state a fortune. Neglected children become a state's responsibility and then they inevitably go to jail or spend their lives on benefits. Also now their parents need state support, too, because they have a child and can't work. It makes no financial sense.

what's wrong with Alabama?

what's wrong with Alabama?

Re: what's wrong with Alabama?

Re: what's wrong with Alabama?

Re: what's wrong with Alabama?

Re: what's wrong with Alabama?

Re: what's wrong with Alabama?

Re: what's wrong with Alabama?

Re: what's wrong with Alabama?

Re: what's wrong with Alabama?

Re: what's wrong with Alabama?

Who is online

Register/Login to CEO with your Social Media Account: