Stance on Abortion?

[Sailsia]

Abortion is always a useful topic if you want to find out whether or not a person is patently ignorant.

[Raeyh]

The only reason permitted under Roe vs Wade is for safety.

Fire your Con Law teacher.

I don't think that was even a course in high school. It would be covered under history, I guess.

[Sailsia]

Fire your Con Law teacher.

I don't think that was even a course in high school. It would be covered under history, I guess.

That would explain why you're knowledge of both is lacking...

[Deus Malum]

Abortion is always a useful topic if you want to find out whether or not a person is patently ignorant.

I just can't believe that in the year 2012 people exist who have access to the internet, have a good enough command of the English language to engage in a coherent discussion, and yet are so thoroughly ignorant of life as to not know that the human immune system can fight off disease on its own.

[Samuraikoku]

Fire your Con Law teacher.

I don't think that was even a course in high school. It would be covered under history, I guess.

I'm awaiting a response to my link.

[Sailsia]

Abortion is always a useful topic if you want to find out whether or not a person is patently ignorant.

I just can't believe that in the year 2012 people exist who have access to the internet, have a good enough command of the English language to engage in a coherent discussion, and yet are so thoroughly ignorant of life as to not know that the human immune system can fight off disease on its own.

Wait, what? Who didn't know that?

[Yewhohohopia]

An excellent cost-saving device and emancipatory thing all bundled into one.

[Neo Art]

And her physician has to "balance against the state's two legitimate interests in regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting women's health."

So if the mother's health isn't at risk, the doctor isn't supposed to go through with the operation. If he does, he should be arrested.

I just noticed this, so I'm going to go back and correct some misconceptions and errors. First, the phrase you have quoted "balance against the state's two legitimate interests in regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting women's health" does not appear at any point in the text of Roe v. Wade. It, in fact, appears only in the Wikipedia page summarizing the decision

Your feebile attempt to pass it off as the words of the Court itself as a pathetic dishonesty.

Second, you failed to fully quote even the Wikipedia summary. It states:

"Decided simultaneously with a companion case, Doe v. Bolton, the Court ruled that a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that right must be balanced against the state's two legitimate interests in regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting women's health. Arguing that these state interests became stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the trimester of pregnancy."

The underlined point is the crucial one. It is discussing the interests of the state in criminalizing abortion procedures. As is common with constitutional law, determining something to be a fundamental right is a balance of interests. The woman's interest in preserving her privacy, and the state's right to protecting prenatal life and women's health through outlawing abortion.

Thus in the analysis present in Roe v. Wade, "preserving woman's health" was not considered an argument in FAVOR of allowing abortion rights. It was, somewhat paradoxically, an interest asserted by the state in order to permit PREVENTING abortion.

The Court, in Roe, weighed the woman's right to privacy AGAINST the interest in "protecting women's health" and "protecting prenatal life" and determined that, at least until the first trimester, the state's interest in "protecting woman's health" did NOT outweight the woman's interest in preserving her privacy, and thus found the state's interest not sufficiently compelling to violate her privacy right.

Your whole argument is filled with this pathetic dishonesty and intellectually vapid distortion that I mentioned before. You should be ashamed.

[The Holy Dominion of Inesea]

Abortion is wrong. It is Murder.

[Raeyh]

I don't think that was even a course in high school. It would be covered under history, I guess.

I'm awaiting a response to my link.

I don't know, summarize it. I seem to be misinterpreting something.

[Divair]

Abortion is wrong. It is Murder.

99 pages in and we still get crap like this?

[Yewhohohopia]

Abortion is wrong.

That's certainly an opinion.

It is Murder.

This is not a fact, at least in countries which are remotely acceptable.

[Samuraikoku]

Abortion is wrong. It is Murder.

Wrong.

[Neo Art]

Fire your Con Law teacher.

I don't think that was even a course in high school. It would be covered under history, I guess.

So you have no actual education in constitutional law? One would assume that most rational people would not be so willing to speak so authorotatively about a subject they know absolutely nothing about, as you have been about 14th amendment jurispurdence.

Although I'll amend my post above this one. your utterly eronious arguments about the content of the Roe v. Wade decision is either intentional duplicity or breathtaking ignorance.

I'll let you pick which.

[Samuraikoku]

I'm awaiting a response to my link.

I don't know, summarize it. I seem to be misinterpreting something.

It's already summarized and underlined for your convenience.

[Sailsia]

Abortion is wrong. It is Murder.

99 pages in and we still get crap like this?

>Name is Holy Dominion
>Was founded in June
>Has a Crusader-Cross on flag
>Below 100 Posts

Don't even bother responding to him, it's a hopeless cause.

[Des-Bal]

Can you sue someone for so egregious a misunderstanding of a ruling?

No, I checked. My History Professor told us continental drift was caused by hurricanes. My College History Professor.

[Sailsia]

I'm awaiting a response to my link.

I don't know, summarize it. I seem to be misinterpreting something.

This is usually the point where you leave the argument.

[Des-Bal]

Wait, what? Who didn't know that?

Rayeh, he also believes that your sexuality is only influenced by who is willing to have sex with you and that the middle east is the most sexually open region on earth.

[Farnhamia]

Can you sue someone for so egregious a misunderstanding of a ruling?

No, I checked. My History Professor told us continental drift was caused by hurricanes. My College History Professor.

Well, history ... I mean, you never believe anything a humanities major says about science. Ever. Unless it's me.

[Sailsia]

Wait, what? Who didn't know that?

Rayeh, he also believes that your sexuality is only influenced by who is willing to have sex with you and that the middle east is the most sexually open region on earth.

Wat? That's silly.

[Raeyh]

I don't think that was even a course in high school. It would be covered under history, I guess.

So you have no actual education in constitutional law? One would assume that most rational people would not be so willing to speak so authorotatively about a subject they know absolutely nothing about, as you have been about 14th amendment jurispurdence.

Although I'll amend my post above this one. your utterly eronious arguments about the content of the Roe v. Wade decision is either intentional duplicity or breathtaking ignorance.

I'll let you pick which.

Ignorance.

It really doesn't make any sense. I went from thinking I had an understanding of how it works, to having no clue whatsoever. It's too difficult to understand, I guess I have to just give up.

[Des-Bal]

Well, history ... I mean, you never believe anything a humanities major says about science. Ever. Unless it's me.

It goes both ways, my Microbiology professor called Shindlers List "Jew Propoganda"

[VonHyden]

its almost funny that every pro-life opinion is quickly marked "wrong" when all they wanted was an opinion. Its like pro-choice people the lack confidence to stand by their answer. Whatever, I'll probably just let everyone stand in their own self righteous ways and watch as the population of "pro-choicers" decreases.

[Farnhamia]

Well, history ... I mean, you never believe anything a humanities major says about science. Ever. Unless it's me.

It goes both ways, my Microbiology professor called Shindlers List "Jew Propoganda"

Gah. The thing I can think of that might be worse than either is accidentally mentioning evolution to Michael Behe.