Roe v Wade overturned ?

[Occam's Banana]

I have had a rough time recently on the internet with being misunderstood and I guess I was a bit overly cautious. I also went off on someone recently. Hell. I'm just fed up with the internet. I may take some time off and hug a tree or something.

Been there, done that.

 

[Pauls' Revere]

It's hilarious watching these people chant my body my choice when they want to cut people out of society for not wanting to take an unsafe and ineffective experimental vaccine.

Yep, I why I couldn't give a dam if its overturned. Where were peoples rights when they have to choose between a vax or your job.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Meanwhile over at imgur.com

So women have no right to destroy the body of the child for their own benefit?

 

[Swordsmyth]

Good start, but not good enough. Next overturn the gay marriage ruling. Overturn the anti-sodomy ruling. Overturn the school prayer ruling. Never stop. The left doesn't.

 

[acptulsa]

So women have no right to destroy the body of the child for their own benefit?

You don't understand.

It's not for her benefit. Her fetus just self-identified as a quadriplegic zombie.

 

[devil21]

They're already on it ...

https://twitter.com/JohnFetterman/status/1521299340169560065

... and the sniping and backbiting has already begun ...

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1521530328397099008

Congress can't codify Roe v Wade as it would be a gross violation of the 10th Amendment, especially given the Murphy vs NCAA ruling I referenced earlier in the thread. SCOTUS' original Roe ruling was contrary to the 10th and they knew it but didn't care at that time, for whatever reason. If Congress attempted to codify Roe v Wade, and if this ruling is issued substantially the same as the draft, SCOTUS would just strike down the federal codification of Roe.

I know there's lots of people who would respond that SCOTUS pretty much ignores the Constitution already, but from what I've seen, outside of a handful of limited scope rulings, they actually do follow the Constitution way more than most people realize. They may not directly reference the Constitution in rulings but their rulings usually follow it (see: OSHA vax mandate which violated the 10th, even though SCOTUS never mentioned the 10th). The problem is that most people have no clue about legal issues and the reality of the legal framework we currently live under.

 

[Philhelm]

Women like this are outraged and foaming at the mouth right now.

jmdrake's wife (except none of the aborted children were his).

 

[Occam's Banana]

:ded:

https://twitter.com/michaelmalice/status/1521587149468020736

 

[acptulsa]

 

[acptulsa]

 

[acptulsa]

 

[Anti Federalist]

 

[Anti Federalist]

I'm not arguing against you, but my first reaction was: Why now after 50 years? What are they hiding? What do they want to stir up? This may be the start to end the filibuster and pack the court.

The Marxists knew they were going to get blown out of the water in the fall, so they came up with this.

Very effective.

 

[paleocon1]

that 'woman' looks to be a trans and if not too butt ugly to have ever got even one sperm donor.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

https://twitter.com/willchamberlain/status/1521685985712615426

 

[Brian4Liberty]

https://twitter.com/willchamberlain/status/1521685985712615426

 

[Brian4Liberty]

https://twitter.com/CommodoreBTC/status/1521837006904602625

 

[Occam's Banana]

Constitution v Wade: The End of an Error? - A Rant
Pucker up. It's going to be a bumpy ride.
https://odysee.com/@RazorFist:1/constitution-v-wade-the-end-of-an-error:6

 

[Anti Globalist]

 

[ClaytonB]

It's only been a few weeks and we've already forgotten...