Fundamentalist Fetal Fray?
Will the state decide to have compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a "tool of modern-day eugenics"?
Once again, not to be mistaken for Tuesday's With Morrie, it's Tuesdays With Trump...
Following up on New Law For The Hoo Ha? Regardless of your political leanings, whether you're blue, red, or just fed up with politicians, the MSM and their BS...
Not to be outdone by North Dakota (2013), Arkansa (2013) and Iowa (May 2018), in 2019 Kentucky, Mississippi, Ohio, Georgia and Alabama recently passed law's banning abortion.
Less than two weeks ago, Missouri and Louisiana also joined what might be called the "new law for the hoo ha?" or "fundamentalist fetal fray"?
The ACLU says the Alabama abortion law violates Roe v Wade. None of the "heartbeat bills" have yet gone into effect, and all have or are likely to be challenged in court.
The North Dakota (33), Arkansas (67), Iowa (37), Kentucky (46), and Mississippi (64) bans have been blocked by courts, and Ohio’s (52) ban is being challenged. No doubt Georgia (54), Missouri (42), Louisiana (65) and Alabama's (58) will be challenged as well.
What were those numbers in parentheses next to the state names? Their percentage of births paid for by Medicaid, mostly out of wed lock, and the national average is 50%. Think those numbers might go up, just a wee bit?
One might want to blame the religious fundamentalist's or Evangelicals? Perhaps for the nonsensical laws which attempt to challenge Roe v Wade? Not so fast Joe, or you finish outside, which might have been better to start with in many cases? Said finger wagging is a two edged sword.
It's not the Evangelicals fault people don't abstain, use contraceptive methods, and that the latter day MSM indoctrination treats sex not as a means of procreation, but as a chic recreational pursuit and diversion. You play, somebody pay's, how about you pay, taking ownership and people in glass houses come to mind. Moving West...
And what of "disability-selective" abortions? Will the court stretch its interpretation with the goal of protecting children with syndromes, disabilities and other disfavored characteristics from what could be termed, invidious discrimination?
Will the court attempt a ruling to cover gender, race or disability under the auspices of preventing "eugenics"? Back to our original query, will the state decide to have compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a "tool of modern-day eugenics"?
Eugenics? Really? Oh yes Baby Ducks, and one might want to read the fresh BOX v. PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF INDIANA AND KENTUCKY, INC. decision to see what Justice Clarence Thomas is thinking, as well as the statistics contained therein....
Once again, not to be mistaken for Tuesday's With Morrie, it's Tuesdays With Trump...
Following up on New Law For The Hoo Ha? Regardless of your political leanings, whether you're blue, red, or just fed up with politicians, the MSM and their BS...
"If we put another two or perhaps three justices on, that will happen. And that will happen automatically, in my opinion, because I am putting pro-life justices on the court."Just what might result from POTUS 45's comments and subsequent Supreme Court appointments of Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh?
Not to be outdone by North Dakota (2013), Arkansa (2013) and Iowa (May 2018), in 2019 Kentucky, Mississippi, Ohio, Georgia and Alabama recently passed law's banning abortion.
Less than two weeks ago, Missouri and Louisiana also joined what might be called the "new law for the hoo ha?" or "fundamentalist fetal fray"?
The ACLU says the Alabama abortion law violates Roe v Wade. None of the "heartbeat bills" have yet gone into effect, and all have or are likely to be challenged in court.
The North Dakota (33), Arkansas (67), Iowa (37), Kentucky (46), and Mississippi (64) bans have been blocked by courts, and Ohio’s (52) ban is being challenged. No doubt Georgia (54), Missouri (42), Louisiana (65) and Alabama's (58) will be challenged as well.
What were those numbers in parentheses next to the state names? Their percentage of births paid for by Medicaid, mostly out of wed lock, and the national average is 50%. Think those numbers might go up, just a wee bit?
One might want to blame the religious fundamentalist's or Evangelicals? Perhaps for the nonsensical laws which attempt to challenge Roe v Wade? Not so fast Joe, or you finish outside, which might have been better to start with in many cases? Said finger wagging is a two edged sword.
It's not the Evangelicals fault people don't abstain, use contraceptive methods, and that the latter day MSM indoctrination treats sex not as a means of procreation, but as a chic recreational pursuit and diversion. You play, somebody pay's, how about you pay, taking ownership and people in glass houses come to mind. Moving West...
And what of "disability-selective" abortions? Will the court stretch its interpretation with the goal of protecting children with syndromes, disabilities and other disfavored characteristics from what could be termed, invidious discrimination?
Will the court attempt a ruling to cover gender, race or disability under the auspices of preventing "eugenics"? Back to our original query, will the state decide to have compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a "tool of modern-day eugenics"?
Eugenics? Really? Oh yes Baby Ducks, and one might want to read the fresh BOX v. PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF INDIANA AND KENTUCKY, INC. decision to see what Justice Clarence Thomas is thinking, as well as the statistics contained therein....
"Enshrining a constitutional right to an abortion based solely on the race, sex, or disability of an unborn child, as Planned Parenthood advocates, would constitutionalize the views of the 20th-century eugenics movement." - THOMAS, J., concurring - Decided May 28, 2019One cannot say, they have not been forewarned, now discuss amongst yourselves. As for the recent passing of the Alabama law, not surprisingly many expressed their contempt as follows....
More to come in An Assault On Liberty? Stay tuned, no flippin.
Comments