I'm not going to really weigh in on the abortion issue, and neither did the SCOTUS. I won't weigh in on it because I don't care about it, either way. I realize that men are allowed to get themselves pregnant now, but I won't be one of those pregnant guys, because I know how to control myself. Not my problem if someone else can't control themselves. I see religion being mentioned, and biblically, if you want to kill kids, ONLY the parents have the right of life or death over a kid. But religions don't make US secular law.
The SCOTUS didn't say yeah or nay on abortions, either, despite what Marxists like Pelosi are screaming in their foam flecked rage. This decision had one thing at heart, and one thing only, and that thing was not abortion. What it did was preclude a centralized tyranny. The Central Planning Comittee of Comrades in DC has no damn business making decisions for people in far flung areas they will never see, and this decision recognizes that by returning the responsibility locally, to the states. It says that, in affirmation of the Constitution, if a thing is not mentioned in the Constitution (and abortion is not), then it is a matter for states, localities, or the People to decide, not the proper purview of a centralized tyranny to decide FOR them.
If anyone be contentious, the decision provides a remedy - all you have to do to make abortion a nationally-recognize right, unassailable by your state, is point out to the SCOTUS where the Constitution mentions it and guarantees it as a right. Simples, no? Don't take my word for it - read the decision YOURSELF instead of relying on what others say ABOUT the decision. The remedy I mentioned is right there in it, in black and white.
.
The SCOTUS didn't say yeah or nay on abortions, either, despite what Marxists like Pelosi are screaming in their foam flecked rage. This decision had one thing at heart, and one thing only, and that thing was not abortion. What it did was preclude a centralized tyranny. The Central Planning Comittee of Comrades in DC has no damn business making decisions for people in far flung areas they will never see, and this decision recognizes that by returning the responsibility locally, to the states. It says that, in affirmation of the Constitution, if a thing is not mentioned in the Constitution (and abortion is not), then it is a matter for states, localities, or the People to decide, not the proper purview of a centralized tyranny to decide FOR them.
If anyone be contentious, the decision provides a remedy - all you have to do to make abortion a nationally-recognize right, unassailable by your state, is point out to the SCOTUS where the Constitution mentions it and guarantees it as a right. Simples, no? Don't take my word for it - read the decision YOURSELF instead of relying on what others say ABOUT the decision. The remedy I mentioned is right there in it, in black and white.
.
Diogenes was eating bread and lentils for supper. He was seen by the philosopher Aristippus, who lived comfortably by flattering the king.
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’