šŸŒŽ Politicians and Judges Know More Than Doctors?

ElephantStomp

ElephantStomp

Member
Iā€™m sure some of you have heard about the woman from Texas Kate Cox thatā€™s fetus had a terminal diagnosis and she wanted to terminate said pregnancy because carrying it to full term could lead to her not being able to carry another one to full term.

Ken Paxton and the rest of the Repubs in that state are draconian, right wing, fake Christian jackoffs. They all wanted body autonomy when it came to vaccines, but a woman canā€™t have autonomy even when her doctor says a procedure is needed.

www.nytimes.com

Texas Supreme Court Rules Against Woman Who Sought Court-Approved Abortion

Hours before the ruling, a group representing the woman, whose fetus received a fatal diagnosis, said she was leaving Texas for an abortion.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
This is a situation where you need to sit back, wait a day or two, and read what's happened. Listen to different reports...they are coming.

Think about where the blame needs to lie here. The ruling of the court was the Doctor didn't present the right evidence. That's where this starts to get convoluted.

It's also in Texas. I live in South Carolina. I don't agree with some things that happen in Oregon. Or California. But, this is a constitutional republic. The people in Texas created their laws. You, nor I, have the right to criticize their decisions. It's not our state. We can critique, IMO.

A friend who lives around the corner said something the other day that struck me. "We have separation of church and state, but people struggle with the separation of state to state."
 
The blame lies with the right wing Supreme Court and that corrupted Ken Paxton. A lower court looked at the same evidence and their opinion was different than the Supreme Court, the difference? The lower court isnā€™t all republicans like the Supreme Court.

Itā€™s no longer my state as I donā€™t live there any longer. We can criticize and critique just as you and others have with California And/or their governor and the laws theyā€™ve created.

People struggle with state to state?
 
ElephantStomp said:
The blame lies with the right wing Supreme Court and that corrupted Ken Paxton. A lower court looked at the same evidence and their opinion was different than the Supreme Court, the difference? The lower court isnā€™t all republicans like the Supreme Court.

Itā€™s no longer my state as I donā€™t live there any longer. We can criticize and critique just as you and others have with California And/or their governor and the laws theyā€™ve created.

People struggle with state to state?
Click to expand...
You struggle with state to state decisions and laws. We've talked about this on a few subjects: among them, abortion.

IF, by your definition, a "right wing SCOTUS" ruled in favor of the constitution of the United States, what would have a "left wing SCOTUS" rule?
 
Rsedge72 said:
I havenā€™t really followed this particular story, as it is another states issue/law/failure/success. so Iā€™ll hold my criticisms for later.
Click to expand...
This is just like the football forum and stories/rumors, bruh. Stop. Wait. Let the story develop. And then judge or opine. It may take a day, or two. Sometimes a week or two. But, as Mulder said...
 
TerryP said:
You struggle with state to state decisions and laws. We've talked about this on a few subjects: among them, abortion.

IF, by your definition, a "right wing SCOTUS" ruled in favor of the constitution of the United States, what would have a "left wing SCOTUS" rule?
Click to expand...
The one that found a universal right to abortion irrespective of state laws.
 
TerryP said:
You struggle with state to state decisions and laws. We've talked about this on a few subjects: among them, abortion.

IF, by your definition, a "right wing SCOTUS" ruled in favor of the constitution of the United States, what would have a "left wing SCOTUS" rule?
Click to expand...
They didnā€™t rule in favor of the constitution at all. Abortion isnā€™t in the constitution
 
TerryP said:
You are right. The argument that the 14th allowed it was without foundation. The right to privacy allows abortion?

Constitutional Republic.
Click to expand...
The right to privacy in fact does allow medical decisions to be private, you know like when all the moron antivaxers screamed their medical decisions were privateā€¦.no different than like body autonomy. I donā€™t know why pro-life people have a hard time grasping this. Medical decisions should be between the person and their medical team not the government federal or state
 
ElephantStomp said:
The right to privacy in fact does allow medical decisions to be private, you know like when all the moron antivaxers screamed their medical decisions were privateā€¦.no different than like body autonomy. I donā€™t know why pro-life people have a hard time grasping this. Medical decisions should be between the person and their medical team not the government federal or state
Click to expand...
This is stickyā€¦.
If a person feels that life begins at inception, then itā€™s murder to destroy that child. This is a volatile subject, and if you want someone that feels life begins at inception to allow abortions. Then why not abort a 2 year old that cramps your lifestyle.
On that, 99% of abortions are not for the health/safety of the mother, itā€™s simply birth control.
I for one canā€™t fault a mother that has a true honest to god health risk, but just treating this like itā€™s just like any other health procedure is awful and inforgivable.
 
Rsedge72 said:
If a person feels that life begins at inception, then itā€™s murder to destroy that child. This is a volatile subject, and if you want someone that feels life begins at inception to allow abortions. Then why not abort a 2 year old that cramps your lifestyle.
Click to expand...
You want a crazy conversation? Ask a vegan when a plant's life begins. Listen, and then juxtapose that same question to another seed. (The sticky one.)
 
The murder of helpless, innocent babies through abortion is money laundering by the dims to keep campaign $ coming to them for reelection. The party of ā€œcompassionā€ they call themselves, more like the party of murder.
 
Rsedge72 said:
This is stickyā€¦.
If a person feels that life begins at inception, then itā€™s murder to destroy that child. This is a volatile subject, and if you want someone that feels life begins at inception to allow abortions. Then why not abort a 2 year old that cramps your lifestyle.
On that, 99% of abortions are not for the health/safety of the mother, itā€™s simply birth control.
I for one canā€™t fault a mother that has a true honest to god health risk, but just treating this like itā€™s just like any other health procedure is awful and inforgivable.
Click to expand...
Iā€™m not going to go down the hole of a big abortion convo, but any healthcare choice should be between a woman and her healthcare team and nobody else.
 
Back
Top Bottom