[Sherry8bal]

This crap is what this country is coming to - pure nonsense and B.S. Every Veteran who died for this country has to be rolling over in their grave that they sacrificed their life for this stupidity and selfishness. It keeps getting worse everyday these idiots keep trying to beat the system instead of just obeying the laws.

[Shelby62]

Originally Posted by Wyseguy

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 8the 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.

Another well said commentary.

First, read the opinion. The Supremes put the decision back to the states. Judicial restraint was lost for many years.

Second, we need to tread lightly here. No person should delineate what constitutes a life worthwhile. Elitism at work.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by billethkid

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!

When the LAW says that a fetus is a "person" then by law, the vehicle is occupied by more than one "person" when a pregnant woman is driving.

Can't have it both ways.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by jimbomaybe

Then she should get ticketed for not having the child in an approved car seat?, assuming Texas has that law

Then Texas must provide the opportunity for the woman to - remove her child from her womb and place it in an approved car seat.

Since they have refused to do that, the only other possible intention of the law is to prevent pregnant women from driving.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Worldseries27

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

And that will result in pregnant women being prohibited from being in a moving vehicle at all.

See how messy it gets when you decide that an unborn fetus is legally a "person?"

[Shelby62]

Originally Posted by Ptmckiou

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.

Good thing that thinking wasn't placed upon Tom Monaghan who was placed in an orphanage. He would never have had the chance of founding Domino's Pizza nor would he have had the chance of vowing to die poor while giving away all of his money.

[TheWarriors]

Have any of you ever watched an abortion? Have you seen the fetus move away from the needle that is about to be inserted into the skull to drain the brain matter? One thing we definitely need to do is NOT celebrate abortions, it is always negative. Perhaps if one side didn’t feel they needed the right to terminate a fetus right up to partial birth, none of this would be occurring.
As Ronald Reagan once profoundly said: I notice all of the people arguing for abortions have already been born.

[Jacob85]

Well if it’s a baby the minute the egg is fertilized then it’s a person!

[jimbomaybe]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Then Texas must provide the opportunity for the woman to - remove her child from her womb and place it in an approved car seat.

Since they have refused to do that, the only other possible intention of the law is to prevent pregnant women from driving.

So if I have my uncle's ashes in the glove box I am good to go

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

Did you mean Texas? Because this post is about Texas.

SC = Supreme Court... Not South Carolina...

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

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.

No one made that. argument...

What "many here" were arguing was that the Constitution limits what THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can do, and that those things not determined by the Feds were to be determined by the states...

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Because until this year the right to an abortion was established law.

Except it wasn't... No law was ever codified... They had 50 years to do it, but they either failed or refused to do it.

The skeptic in me believes it was not codified on purpose so that the issue could be used as a political weapon...

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Then Texas must provide the opportunity for the woman to - remove her child from her womb and place it in an approved car seat.

Since they have refused to do that, the only other possible intention of the law is to prevent pregnant women from driving.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

Except it wasn't... No law was ever codified... They had 50 years to do it, but they either failed or refused to do it.

The skeptic in me believes it was not codified on purpose so that the issue could be used as a political weapon...

Two Supreme Court cases said the right was already recognized in the Constitution. There was no need for a separate law to codify what the Constitution already provided. I would have argued against a separate law as redundant and as an attempt to improve on what was already there.

Remember, several Justice candidates stated their belief that this was settled law as well.

And then it wasn't settled at all.

Trying to wrap my head around how it could be used for a weapon. Not doubting that it's a possibility these days, just can't see how that would work.

[billethkid]

Somehow the thread has become all about the unborn child. Somehow the intent of the law/rule/whatever for traveling in the express lane has been understood and a NON-ISSUE.

Before the current "trend" of special interests needs/wants/hopes/desires/etc........we all understood that to use the express lanes there had to be more than one person in the car. At least those who tried the blow up dolls were worth a laugh........the fetus is a passenger?

Now we are in the mode of picking fly specs out of the pepper to fit a case....to not obey the law we have all understood....is as I said previously......utter BS!