This just in, the top law authorities in the land know very little about law.

Not sure why this is a thing. It hasnt been made official and likely wont now.

I'd say they're a minority of pro-birth positions, but they're out there, and they're running for (or already hold) political office.

Like this absolute fucking dolt, who is the GOP candidate for Michigan Attorney General.

https://twitter.com/dananessel/status/1522243941982220288

sure, freedom of religion and speech grant everyone the right to make their argument and decide for themselves how they want to handle THEIR pregnancy. the principle of secularism and the freedom of those that don't share such sentiments, however, should prevent the government from making that call though, from telling women they can't have an abortion because that somehow hurts the feelings of people with a different opinion on the topic.

regarding your question as to who exactly supports even the ban of abortions in case of ectopic pregnancies, rape, and incest - does it really matter? FACT is that republican lawmakers in multiple red states introduced legislation to ban even those - so quibbling over what exact percentage of anti-choicers is fine with that seems like a pointless exercise.

and let's be clear here: every single person involved in this debate knows for a FACT that overturning roe v. wade will lead not only to a significant increase of such proposals, but also make them near impossible to strike down. red states are already going full sharia law on this, and not a single person here is gullible enough to realistically expect them to simply tone it down once roe v. wade is gone...

This post was edited by fender on May 7 2022 11:16am

Meanwhile the real problem is turning around a "free" healthcare and more social services availability.
and then Meanwhile, republicans could oppose such services because "it's not in constitution."
That's really an obstructive behavior. Destructive for very poor americans.

Roflmao, she sounds like a college dropout antifa activist, not like a law professor. Sad!



An important piece of context is that we're at the height of primary season right now. It's an expectable part of political theater that GOP candidates, particularly antiestablishment challengers trying to knock off incumbents, are posturing with the most exaggerated, pointed, gung-ho position possibly on an issue that deeply animates the base.

Great point. American government loves to do this shit where they pull some kind of distraction stunt then pull out some other kind of even more heinous trickery in secrecy. They probably want to change something before KBJ gets in there for sure but what is the question.

the revival of a distraction just to keep us out of the WEF agenda.

none of this matters lol

These distractions from "Moderates" or left caviar democrats and republicans are IMO absolutely unacceptable.
Majority clearly wants a well organized universal coverage and others standards like in EU.
The american people should protest very massively and get back its country.

Science doesn't have much say because the same groups that don't like abortion are the same groups that say evolution is false.

They don't actually care about science. When you're intimiately familiar with the stages of development you know there's absolutely no basis for a fertilized egg, or a blastocyst, or an embryo having human rights.

The absolute earliest you can make a cogent argument for while being familiar with development is like 15 weeks. Everything prior to that is theology actively overriding medical knowledge.

Nobody is saying a jar with a fertilized egg in it has the same value as a child. Nobody is legislating against IVF because it kills dozens more people than it conceives. Nobody is arguing that a child conceived on US soil can't be deported.

It's just shitty theology.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on May 7 2022 11:53am