Originally Posted by Ptmckiou (Post 2114862)

It’s only just begun. “Miscarriage prosecution” is going to become a big money maker for lawyers. Women will have to prove it was no fault of their own that they actually had a natural miscarriage. Otherwise, they can be charged with manslaughter now, because the Supreme Court has essentially given “people” status to fetuses and people are ALL governed by constitutional rights. This ruling has women’s lives a potential horror show, along with monetary hardships of having to defend themselves and their doctors. Abortion may be viewed by many has horrendous, but many also believe a bigger horrendous act is bringing thousands of children into this world that are not wanted. We have enough unwanted children in the world as it is, and we can’t take care of many of them adequately. Especially minority children. Before abortion was legal in many places, I remember having an orphanage in our town. Are we going to be forced to go back to that? It can be daily mental torture to a child growing up unwanted. I wish that life for no one. Being pro-life does NOT stop at birth.

Originally Posted by Worldseries27 (Post 2114808)

texas will simply amend the law to say the second passenger must be in a seperate, buckled up seat.

Originally Posted by George Page (Post 2114795)

We have. The unintentional consequences of overturning R vs W are minuscule compared to the intended consequences of abortion.
In this case, let’s compare a traffic violation to millions of terminated lives.
It is an easy decision for intelligent people, but apparently not for many who are uneducated or educated beyond their intelligence.

Originally Posted by Vermilion Villager (Post 2114842)

Have you really? Don't kid yourself for a minute. If little debutant Kimberly gets preggo you don't think their rich, ultra conservative, pro-life parents will be sending them to "visit" a relative in another state...or country??? Paaalleeeaaassseeee!:a20:

Originally Posted by Wyseguy (Post 2114889)

Respectfully many people need to read the SC decision. It does not give "people" status; it does not even address the topic. Simply stated, it said that there is not a constitutional right to abortion. It was sent to the states to decide.
On a separate note, any argument that says abortion should be legal because the child's life would be difficult is on dangerous ground. Not only are people fighting for abortions in cases where the baby will be born with some deformity, but now the child's financial status growing up is reason to abort? In my opinion the only reasonable difference of opinion among people would be when does life begin. Arguments that use fetal imperfection, or financial abilities of the parent(s) run the risk of becoming racist.

Originally Posted by billethkid (Post 2114739)

Another indicator of the day we live in.

One person in the car....give her a ticket and send her packing....instead the "incident" (trying to remain polite) is presented as worthy news hence validating the charade.

Complete/utter BS!

Originally Posted by Wyseguy (Post 2114889)

Respectfully many people need to read the SC decision. It does not give "people" status; it does not even address the topic. Simply stated, it said that there is not a constitutional right to abortion. It was sent to the states to decide.
On a separate note, any argument that says abortion should be legal because the child's life would be difficult is on dangerous ground. Not only are people fighting for abortions in cases where the baby will be born with some deformity, but now the child's financial status growing up is reason to abort? In my opinion the only reasonable difference of opinion among people would be when does life begin. Arguments that use fetal imperfection, or financial abilities of the parent(s) run the risk of becoming racist.

Originally Posted by George Page (Post 2114904)

Yes I have, and I’m not kidding myself the least bit. I fully expect some will pursue alternate means of accommodation where permitted by likeminded people.
No law has been passed by Congress to permit nationwide abortion access. Why do you think that is the case? Multiple times, the Democrats have had the Presidency as well as the majority in both the House and Senate.

Originally Posted by MartinSE (Post 2114911)

Two more things, it did not just say there is no right to abortion it says there is no right to anything not explicitly stated in the constitution. For example, interracial marriage, or maybe putting cream in your coffee.

I recall many here arguing that anything not explicitly denied is implicitly allowed. Apparently that applies to abortion, same sex marriage, et Al, abut not to guns.

Originally Posted by YeOldeCurmudgeon (Post 2114921)

Can we please stop allowing someone else's religion to rule our lives? And that means you, SCOTUS

This is an example of the insanity now rupturing the fabric of our nation.

Originally Posted by George Page (Post 2114795)

We have. The unintentional consequences of overturning R vs W are minuscule compared to the intended consequences of abortion.
In this case, let’s compare a traffic violation to millions of terminated lives.
It is an easy decision for intelligent people, but apparently not for many who are uneducated or educated beyond their intelligence.

Originally Posted by MartinSE (Post 2114728)

Young woman is suing Texas because she got s ticket for driving alone in the HOV. She is pregnant and claims she was not alone, her fetus is a person according to Texas law.

Pregnant woman says her fetus should count as a passenger in HOV lanes. She got a ticket