proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

I haven't been out for a while.... But when I was younger, I did carry it for protection....not only against pregnancy...

DASHY

I believe that a woman's right to life trumps (no pun intended) the rights of a fetus.

American Vet

An EXTREMELY rare situation.....

better try something else.

DASHY

I'll try this. A******n, sometimes called miscarriage, has always been a fact of life, a medical procedure, not a deprivation of life. Women matter more than fetuses do.

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

Miscarriage is medical emergency, is different from a******n...

American Vet

A******n is an intentional act - a miscarriage (in layman's terms) is not an intentional act.

K*****g an unborn child is a deprivation of life.

Try again.

DASHY

Keeping in mind, a woman's right to privacy, is an induced miscarriage an intentional act? How would you deal with a spontaneous a******n? Is the "morning after pill" a murder weapon? How about RU-486?

DASHY

The U.S. Constitution safeguards the rights of Americans to privacy and personal autonomy. When a woman chooses to use a self-administered method to end her pregnancy, is that act really any of your business?

son of witless

Woop, woop woop. This is the spelling Police. Shut off your engine and pull to the curb, Sir. What the heck is a " crudgel " ? Do you mean a cudgel ? A short heavy stick or club whose primary utility is as a weapon ?

Besides beating Joe Biden with a cudgel would be redundant. He ain't going to get any smarter and the country cannot afford for him to get any more stupid.

American Vet

K*****g an unborn child is everyone's business.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

I have been following this case as well~~ thought you might enjoy reading what Justice Samuel Alito said in blasting the twisted news media~~

Admittedly my very first thought was~ oh so now the Supreme Court of the United States gets to see how the lying media really works. As if they didn’t know it anyway but perhaps different when it’s them being attacked.

Also all of this stems from a pending Mississippi case where 15 weeks gestation is that issue and more on the constitutionality issue.. They didn’t rule here because they’re saving wh**ever ruling they’re going to make for that case I’m almost positive…

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito slammed the “false and inflammatory” rhetoric that l*****ts and mainstream media outlets are using to “intimidate” the high court during a speech Thursday at the University of Notre Dame.

Alito and the four other justices who decided not to block the Texas heartbeat law in September have been facing massive criticism, including “sinister” claims about “shadow dockets” and middle-of-the-night rulings – all of which is very misleading, Alito said, according to the Associated Press.

“My complaint concerns all the media and political talk about our sinister shadow docket,” Alito said. “The t***h of the matter is that there was nothing new or shadowy about the procedures we followed in those cases. It’s hard to see how we could handle most emergency matters any differently.”

Earlier this week, Senate Democrats criticized the conservative majority on the Supreme Court for using what lawmakers called a “shadow docket,” or an emergency ruling that a court issues before hearing oral arguments about a case.

The Supreme Court did this with the Texas heartbeat law, which prohibits a******ns once an unborn baby’s heartbeat is detectable, about six weeks of pregnancy. Texas is the first state to be allowed to enforce a heartbeat law, and pro-life leaders estimate as many as 100 babies are being saved from a******n every day.

Alito said critics are just angry that the court did not rule the way that they wanted it to, and the picture that they are painting “is very sinister and threatening, but it is also very misleading,” according to the report.

“The catchy and sinister term ‘shadow docket’ has been used to portray the court as having been captured by a dangerous cabal that resorts to sneaky and improper methods to get its ways,” Alito said, according to The Observer.

He pointed out that the parties in these cases are the ones requesting emergency orders, not the court, and these emergency rulings have been a well-accepted practice for many generations of judges.

“The Supreme Court and the lower federal courts have a lot of power, but here’s the power they do not have: they do not have the power to make the world stand still while litigation takes place,” Alito said.

He also slammed critics’ “rank nonsense” for suggesting the justices secretly ruled on the Texas case in the middle of the night, as well as their “false and inflammatory” claim that the court basically already overturned Roe v. Wade, Reuters reports.

When the court ruled on the Texas pro-life law, the majority stated that their ruling was temporary and should not be interpreted as their final say on its constitutionality. They refused an emergency request to temporarily block the law and sent the case back to the lower courts for consideration.

Alito said the criticism is all part of a larger strategy to undermine and intimidate the court.

“This portrayal feeds unprecedented efforts to intimidate the court or damage it as an independent institution,” he said.

<snip>

https://www.lifenews.com/2021/10/01/justice-samuel-alito-blasts-media-defends-supreme-court-upholding-texas-a******n-ban/

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Quite correct, at least for now…

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Where was Biden’s name even mentioned?? And yes the potential ruling coming out affects all of us..Do we maintain our individual right of choice or is it yet another crunch of a constitutionality issues to take away from the constituents of the United States???

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

And you are here because your mother chose not to abort you, right?

The true ruling was not on a******n but rather the right of privacy and choice as cited in the supreme court ruling itself. Roe v. Wade was a landmark legal decision issued on January 22, 1973, in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas statute banning a******n, effectively legalizing the procedure across the United States. The court held that a woman’s right to an a******n was implicit in the right to privacy protected by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Prior to Roe v. Wade, a******n had been illegal throughout much of the country since the late 19th century.

That is the true issue in Roe versus Wade.. And that is exactly what is at risk once again. The right of privacy and the right of choice.

And given the Row versus Wade decision I rather doubt they’re going to strike it down. They have only rendered furtherance to previous rulings 101 times times Since the enactment of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Never eradicating the ruling but adding to it. Which is exactly what they will do here it’s just not on this case look for what takes place in the Mississippi case before them.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

I do not support a******n especially when used as a contraceptive. I do however support the right of choice and privacy and more importantly our constitutional rights guaranteed. We should not be going backwards we should be moving forward.

We are under constant attack of our constitution specifically amendments 1 and 2 Along with just about everything in the Bill of Rights. We cannot allow a tyrannical government to quash our rights, to me that is the real issue… A******n for incest, rape or illness to the mother or where the fetus is already malformed, not likely to sustain life etc. yes that I do support