Roe vs Wade Overturned

#3,254
#3,254
whodeycin85 said:
Its an actually higher percent of false rape claims then there are abortions for rape.
Click to expand...
We don't know the exact numbers on abortions of pregnancies which resulted from rape. Some places try to make estimates, but that is all that they are, You are talking out of your butt.
 
#3,256
#3,256
whodeycin85 said:
Your right....the rainn org is completely falae because you dont like the stats...good day
Click to expand...
They are not exact numbers. There is no way to know the exact numbers. There are states such as California, who has the highest overall population, with easily the highest number of abortions, has never required women to give a reason for their abortion.
 
#3,260
#3,260
Roberts Clears Way for Indiana to try to Implement Law Restricting Abortion Access For Minors
https://www.cnn.com/profiles/ariane-de-vogue-profile
By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter

(CNN) Chief Justice John Roberts on Monday cleared the way for Indiana to attempt to implement a law that restricts a minor's access to abortion.

In a procedural order, Roberts granted a request from Indiana to bypass normal procedures and quickly transmit the court's opinion from June overturning Roe v. Wade to a federal appeals court so that the state can attempt to put in place its strict parental notification law that had been blocked.

Indiana had sent its request to Justice Amy Coney Barrett, but she took no part in the case presumably because she was sitting on the Chicago-based federal appeals court when the case was initially before it. As a result, the application was handled by Roberts.

Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky had said it would not object to expediting the judgment.

At issue in the dispute is a state law that requires parents to be notified if a minor seeks an abortion, unless a court finds that the notification is not in the best interest of the child. Lower courts -- citing Supreme Court precedent -- had invalidated the law and Indiana asked the Supreme Court to step in back in March 2021. But the justices sat on Indiana's petition for months while the court contemplated Dobbs v. Jackson. Once it decided Dobbs and reversed Roe v. Wade, it sent a handful of pending abortion related petitions back down to the lower courts with instructions to revisit their earlier decisions.

Roberts clears way for Indiana to try to implement law restricting abortion access for minors | CNN Politics

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/17/media/reliable-sources-indiana-ohio-abortion-coverage/index.html
 
#3,261
#3,261
'He's judging the US from his lectern': Prince Harry is slammed for 'virtue-signaling' UN speech where 'he tried to make America sound like a mess' by saying it was 'rolling back constitutional rights'

  • Prince Harry made a thinly-veiled dig on the Supreme Court's Roe v Wade ruling
  • The 37-year-old said it was part of a 'global assault on democracy and freedom'
  • He and wife Meghan, 40, attended the UN General Assembly hand in hand today
Prince Harry has been slammed for 'virtue-signaling' as he waded into US politics yet again during his speech at an informal meeting of the UN General Assembly.

The Duke of Sussex, who was accompanied by Meghan Markle, launched a thinly-veiled attack on the Supreme Court's Roe v Wade ruling last month that handed abortion rights back to individual states.

The comments, heard by a mostly-empty room at the United Nations for Nelson Mandela Day on Monday morning, were the latest broadside at US politicians.

It comes after his wife Meghan described how the Duke had a 'gutteral' reaction to the Supreme Court's bombshell overturning of Roe v Wade last month.

Protesters also stood outside of the UN General Assembly in New York, with one holding up a sign which said 'why are they here'.

60417017-11025847-image-a-49_1658176035389.jpg

Protestors outside of the event in New York could be seen holding signs which demanded to know why the royal couple had attended the event

Prince Harry is slammed for 'virtue-signaling' UN speech with comments on US constitutional rights | Daily Mail Online
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#3,263
#3,263
Louisiana Abortion Ban Remains Temporarily BLOCKED by judge who says the state's three abortion clinics can continue operating for now

  • State District Judge Donald Johnson gave both sides until Tuesday to help their cases in regard to Louisiana's 'trigger law' that seeks to ban abortion in the state
A court order that keeps Louisiana authorities from enforcing a ban on most abortions remained in effect Monday after a judge asked for more information from both sides in a lawsuit over the state's 'trigger law.'

State District Judge Donald Johnson said both sides have until Tuesday morning to submit their 'proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law' in the case.

Johnson is pondering whether to allow enforcement of the abortion ban that was written in anticipation of the U.S. Supreme Court overturning the 1973 decision that established abortion rights.

Louisiana abortion ban blocked as judge demands information in lawsuit over state's 'trigger law' | Daily Mail Online
 
#3,264
#3,264
McDad said:
We mooted English Royalty's opinion of us about 250 years ago.
Click to expand...


My Pappaw had a funny story from when he was a young airman. British royalty came to give a speech for whatever reason...he said there was a decent crowd there to heckle them ...some with signs that said "leeches go home". Lmao...pretty sure the royal family are net givers to England these days, but how did they amass the billions to ever get this way?? From the blood, sweat, and tears of the peons they have been shaking down for centuries
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb and McDad
#3,267
#3,267
They voted on "access to contraceptives". What exactly does that mean? The left is obviously attempting to paint it as an issue of overall legality. Is that accurate? Or is it about the government providing contraceptives, or contraceptive services? Anyone seeking to make contraceptives illegal is an idiot. But if the argument is whether or not the government should be involved in providing contraceptives or services, I think there is a legitimate argument to be had.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, Orangeslice13, Vol8188 and 1 other person
#3,270
#3,270
Weezer said:
They voted on "access to contraceptives". What exactly does that mean? The left is obviously attempting to paint it as an issue of overall legality. Is that accurate? Or is it about the government providing contraceptives, or contraceptive services? Anyone seeking to make contraceptives illegal is an idiot. But if the argument is whether or not the government should be involved in providing contraceptives or services, I think there is a legitimate argument to be had.
Click to expand...

We can’t with one breath say , the federal government should stay out of making decisions for us , then turn around and ask the government to make decisions for us with these political gotcha bills . Smoke and mirrors is all it is .
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and Orangeslice13
#3,272
#3,272
Vol8188 said:
The law forced doctors to provide contraceptives to anyone who requests them even against medical advice. Also will interfere with charities.

And no one is attempting to make birth control illegal. If you can name an example I’d be interested
Click to expand...
SCOTUS Clarence Thomas made his intentions very clear.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top