Thoughts on the Recent Supreme Court Decisions (Page 4): You sound like you are at a ball game cheering for America to lose. God help you and your country if it does. Maybe you should...

EmilyD

RascalRiley wrote:

Emotions do come into play when one side is trying to control the other.

People object strongly

You sound like you are at a ball game cheering for America to lose. God help you and your country if it does. Maybe you should be rooting for our success?

And again....this is not "one side controlling the other"...it is our government doing what is best, by correcting a mistake it made years ago.

That is what you SHOULD be rooting for! But again...you don't have a dog in this fight. Move here and v**e if you want to....

FallenOak Loc: St George Utah

RascalRiley wrote:

How 6 Supreme Court Justices Undid Decades of Progress in Just 6 Wee

https://www.vice.com/en/article/epzd94/supreme-court-term-a******n-c*****e-c****e-guns?utm_source=email&utm_medium=editorial&utm_content=news&utm_campaign=220702

The decades of progress is the decline in crime after the ruling. It didn't happen immediately but was gradual and the effect began under Reagan who was not the one responsible for the decrease in crime but the decrease in children born into families with no father. That out come was not expected and now in 15 or so years we will see crime escalate to the level of pre Roe v Wade. More crime, more shootings, unintended consequences of this decision.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

DASHY wrote:

Roe v. Wade did not legalize a******n in the U.S. and its repeal did not outlaw it. It is left to the states to decide IF and WHEN a******n is murder and HOW to punish the murderers. These decisions will likely be based on political beliefs of the lawmakers rather than on public opinion (60% favor) about a******n. We can look forward to continued legal challenges on all sides of these decisions.

Just the opposite. By letting the states decide the decision will be much closer to the people. If state legislators pass laws the states populace doesn't like they can be v**ed out. Exactly how it's supposed to work.

EmilyD

JFlorio wrote:

Just the opposite. By letting the states decide the decision will be much closer to the people. If state legislators pass laws the states populace doesn't like they can be v**ed out. Exactly how it's supposed to work.

YES!! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

DASHY

EmilyD wrote:

"Federalizing" means making it a federal... (show quote)

Legalizing a******n was never a federal law. The Roe decision guaranteed women's rights and ended women's deaths from botched a******ns. Legalizing a******n was never a federal law. Overturning Roe was a political decision and means a******n will be legal in blue states and restricted or banned in red states.

DASHY

EmilyD wrote:

What lefties "favor" or not is not the issue. It is what is the right thing to do. A wrong has been righted.

Deal with it.

.

The will of the people IS the issue. 60% of Americans want a******n to be a legal medical procedure. Calling a woman who has an a******n a murderer is wrong.

DASHY

EmilyD wrote:

The wrong that has been righted is simply a matter of what judicial branches of our government - both state and federal - do what. Your emotional efforts to make our country's laws into what YOU think they should be are amusing, to say the least. You don't have a dog in this fight. Maybe you should be getting emotional about your own country's laws.....

What is your "dog in this fight"?

DASHY

EmilyD wrote:

Yes. The Constitution's laws - the Supreme laws of our country - have always been about control. And it is about who does the controlling....the government or the state. That's it. That's all this is about. Getting emotional about it does nothing.

You are starting to sound a bit emotional!!!

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

DASHY wrote:

The will of the people IS the issue. 60% of Americans want a******n to be a legal medical procedure. Calling a woman who has an a******n a murderer is wrong.

We aren't a pure Democracy. You imbeciles should go back to school. If 60% of Americans, willing to v**e, in any one state decide they want legislator's who are pro a******n they will have pro a******n laws. Wrong according to the law? Calling a cop a murderer for k*****g an armed suspect in the line of duty, a murderer is wrong IMO. However; it is done all the time.
Why are you so scared that some states don't want fetus's, future human life, ripped apart? Think about the actual procedure if you have the guts. It's barbaric and very r****t, but you'll never get it.

DASHY

EmilyD wrote:

You sound like you are at a ball game cheering for America to lose. God help you and your country if it does. Maybe you should be rooting for our success?

And again....this is not "one side controlling the other"...it is our government doing what is best, by correcting a mistake it made years ago.

That is what you SHOULD be rooting for! But again...you don't have a dog in this fight. Move here and v**e if you want to....

This a******n debate has a ball game feel to it. Red Team (Conservative right wingers) against Blue Team (liberal lefties). The umpire calling a woman who has an a******n a murderer is all about punishment.

Strycker Loc: The middle of somewhere else.

FallenOak wrote:

The decades of progress is the decline in crime after the ruling. It didn't happen immediately but was gradual and the effect began under Reagan who was not the one responsible for the decrease in crime but the decrease in children born into families with no father. That out come was not expected and now in 15 or so years we will see crime escalate to the level of pre Roe v Wade. More crime, more shootings, unintended consequences of this decision.

The idea of reducing procreation to reduce future crime seems a very big stretch and a dangerous line to cross. Wouldn't it make more sense to address the issue of families with no father and crime. Search for the possible causes and solutions rather than blame it on the separate a******n issue. Fathers were leaving before a******n was legal and it accelerated after a******n was legalized.

DASHY

JFlorio wrote:

We aren't a pure Democracy. You imbeciles should g... (show quote)

Swallowing a pill to stop a pregnancy is not all that barbaric. 50% of all a******ns are medically induced, many of them in the privacy of the home.

RascalRiley Loc: Somewhere south of Detroit

Strycker wrote:

The idea of reducing procreation to reduce future crime seems a very big stretch. Wouldn't it make more sense to address the issue of families with no father and crime. Search for the possible causes and solutions rather than blame it on the separate a******n issue. Fathers were leaving before a******n was legal and it accelerated after a******n was legalized.

‘Search for the possible causes and solutions’

Like republican states are going to increase taxes to fund socialist policies

Strycker Loc: The middle of somewhere else.

RascalRiley wrote:

‘Search for the possible causes and solutions’

Like republican states are going to increase taxes to fund socialist policies

Actually it is the socialist policies and particularly how they are structured that is the largest cause of fatherless family units.

RascalRiley Loc: Somewhere south of Detroit

Strycker wrote:

Actually it is the socialist policies and particularly how they are structured that is the largest cause of fatherless family units.

So what do you see as positive steps to decrease fatherless children?