ToJesusMyHeart Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylD7ajPflqo&list=UUFx_SAQ2UNDQII_C8HC1jnQ&feature=share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 45 seconds before the first major lie occurs. Roe v Wade did not permit abortion at any time during the pregnancy for any reason. That is a flat out lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 http://www.policymic.com/articles/23822/roe-v-wade-a-simple-explanation-of-the-most-important-scotus-decision-in-40-years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToJesusMyHeart Posted January 18, 2014 Author Share Posted January 18, 2014 (edited) 45 seconds before the first major lie occurs. Roe v Wade did not permit abortion at any time during the pregnancy for any reason. That is a flat out lie. Actually it's not a lie. Roe ruled (7-2) that though states did have an interest in protecting fetal life, such interest was not "compelling" until the fetus was viable (placing viability at the start of the third trimester). Thus, all state abortion laws that forbade abortion during the first six months of pregnancy were thereby invalidated. Third trimester abortions were declared to be legal only if the pregnancy threatened the life or health of the mother. The Doe verdict (passed the same day as Roe), however, defined "health of the mother" in such broad terms, that any prohibitions to 3rd trimester abortions were essentially eliminated. According to Justice Harry Blackmun's majority opinion, a woman's health includes her "physical, emotional, psychological, (and) familial" well-being, and should include considerations about the woman's age. "All these factors may relate to health," Blackmun argued, so as to give "the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment." In other words, if a woman is upset about her 3rd trimester pregnancy (psychological health), her doctor has the necessary legal basis to abort. Therefore, abortion is permitted at any time during pregnancy, for any reason that mother can summon for herself, even "this pregnancy is stressing me out and my mental health is suffering." Edited January 18, 2014 by ToJesusMyHeart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 Actually it's not a lie. Roe ruled (7-2) that though states did have an interest in protecting fetal life, such interest was not "compelling" until the fetus was viable (placing viability at the start of the third trimester). Thus, all state abortion laws that forbade abortion during the first six months of pregnancy were thereby invalidated. Third trimester abortions were declared to be legal only if the pregnancy threatened the life or health of the mother. The Doe verdict (passed the same day as Roe), however, defined "health of the mother" in such broad terms, that any prohibitions to 3rd trimester abortions were essentially eliminated. According to Justice Harry Blackmun's majority opinion, a woman's health includes her "physical, emotional, psychological, (and) familial" well-being, and should include considerations about the woman's age. "All these factors may relate to health," Blackmun argued, so as to give "the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment." In other words, if a woman is upset about her 3rd trimester pregnancy (psychological health), her doctor has the necessary legal basis to abort. Therefore, abortion is permitted at any time during pregnancy, for any reason that mother can summon for herself, even "this pregnancy is stressing me out and my mental health is suffering." Ok, so now the claim isn't that Roe allowed abortion at any time in the pregnancy for any reason. Now it's that although the initial claim was flatly and clearly a lie that's ok because the health provisions carved out Doe are vague that it might as well be for any time and for any reason. Gotcha. Never mind that that isn't true and because of the trimester scheme laid out in Roe a woman's access to abortion varies greatly depending on where she lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 Ok, so now the claim isn't that Roe allowed abortion at any time in the pregnancy for any reason. Now it's that although the initial claim was flatly and clearly a lie that's ok because the health provisions carved out Doe are vague that it might as well be for any time and for any reason. Gotcha. Never mind that that isn't true and because of the trimester scheme laid out in Roe a woman's access to abortion varies greatly depending on where she lives. You people need to stop arguing and help me with my peacoat dilemma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 I noticed that the video left out trans-vaginal ultrasounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
add Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 the catholic Governor of New York State said: Pro-life people have “no place in the state of New York†http://hotair.com/archives/2014/01/17/cuomo-pro-life-people-have-no-place-in-the-state-of-new-york/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChristinaTherese Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 http://www.usccb.org/about/pro-life-activities/january-roe-events/nine-days-of-prayer-penance-and-pilgrimage.cfm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
add Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 the catholic Governor of New York State said: Pro-life people have “no place in the state of New Yorkâ€http://hotair.com/archives/2014/01/17/cuomo-pro-life-people-have-no-place-in-the-state-of-new-york/ Does anyone else besides me think that the governor's statement was a bit bold and/or disingenuous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Does anyone else besides me think that the governor's statement was a bit bold and/or disingenuous Yes, if only he was pro-life and said that of pro-abortion advocates, then the media would be running story after story of how mean, closed minded, and hateful he would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 The Doe verdict (passed the same day as Roe), however, defined "health of the mother" in such broad terms, that any prohibitions to 3rd trimester abortions were essentially eliminated. According to Justice Harry Blackmun's majority opinion, a woman's health includes her "physical, emotional, psychological, (and) familial" well-being, and should include considerations about the woman's age. "All these factors may relate to health," Blackmun argued, so as to give "the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment." In other words, if a woman is upset about her 3rd trimester pregnancy (psychological health), her doctor has the necessary legal basis to abort. Therefore, abortion is permitted at any time during pregnancy, for any reason that mother can summon for herself, even "this pregnancy is stressing me out and my mental health is suffering." Exactly. That decision opens up a loophole big enough to sail a fleet of aircraft carriers through. Thus, the reality is that there are no laws banning abortions by trimester of the baby in any states after Roe v. Wade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Yes, if only he was pro-life and said that of pro-abortion advocates, then the media would be running story after story of how mean, closed minded, and hateful he would be. Only liberals have the right to be intolerant. Didn't you get the memo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Only liberals have the right to be intolerant. Didn't you get the memo? 'I don't like big government!! 'I want to empower the federal government to enforce my unfounded religious views and utilize the greatest power the state has, the monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, to coerce women to comply with my religion's claims!' Intellectual schizophrenia FTW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 'I don't like big government!! 'I want to empower the federal government to enforce my unfounded religious views and utilize the greatest power the state has, the monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, to coerce women to comply with my religion's claims!' Intellectual schizophrenia FTW! Science backs up Church's beliefs on the matter, the fact that human life starts at conception, and the fact that that life is a living unique and individual member of the human race. So sorry, but as you know deep down, it is your beliefs that are primitive and unscientific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now