Do you own your body?

[butters]

Ahhh, but, when you pee everyone knows what you are carrying!’

Expect “pee stations” in airports in the “right to life” states, can’t let babies be lost out of state.
Trains? Ok. Doable

How do they stop automobiles??

Granted, rich females will be allowed to sign a slip of paper promising not to abort a child out of state or country.

Lord forbid you have a miscarriage!! You will have to prove it was God’s will. What God would allow a baby to die!?? Off with her head!!!

fuck!!! that's scarily prescient

 

[Pad_Foot]

fuck!!! that's scarily prescient

How the hell will they enforce the laws they plan to enact?
Or have they already said leaving the state is not allowed to pregnant women
They already said, in dine places, anyone that helps enable an abortion is liable as well.
Beware Uber drivers!!

 

[YDB95]

Not to worry, Justice Beer has said roadblocks at state lines won't happen because they're unconstitutional.

Of course, the Constitution does not specifically say anything about them any more than it says anything about abortion. Which just goes to show his "philosophy" is purely situational. But I think we all knew that.

 

[Pad_Foot]

Ummm? I would say taking an embryo over state lines is like taking a juvinal, so, yeah
Taking a kid with the intention of murder, in their eyes? Hell yes they will outlaw it!
Screw SCOTUS they own them

 

[rockcasbah]

Do fetal rights in the USA include the ability to sue for wrongful death in a miscarriage due to drinking?

Asthma due to the poor prenatal eating habits of the mom?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Ummm? I would say taking an embryo over state lines is like taking a juvinal, so, yeah
Taking a kid with the intention of murder, in their eyes? Hell yes they will outlaw it!
Screw SCOTUS they own them

Kavanaugh and Roberts filed a concurring opinion indicating their view that states cannot prohibit residents from crossing state lines for abortion. Like the Thomas opinion, this concurring opinion has no bearing on the majority opinion or precedent. Just their personal opinions.

However, IF a state were to try and prohibit crossing state lines for an abortion (I’m not sure any will), their opinion strongly suggests there are at least two conservative (and probably more) votes that would join the three liberals in allowing it.

I suspect there is also an abundance of precedent in interstate commerce and medical procedure case law that makes this question a non-issue. Abortion tourism industry is already blossoming in certain states.

 

[adrina]

More lies and obfuscation.

Next step for the lying fanatics: go for a national ban.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

I saw a Tweet from a woman yesterday; "How can I become a gun?"

 

[rockcasbah]

as the owner of your body, please take your melatonin now.

Signed
Scotus

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

I saw a Tweet from a woman yesterday; "How can I become a gun?"

Same way she can become a man. Just self-identify as one.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

Same way she can become a man. Just self-identify as one.

Thanks for proving that you don't know how women, law, or guns work, boomer.

 

[rockcasbah]

Thanks for proving that you don't know how women, law, or guns work, boomer.

luksplaining!

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Thanks for proving that you don't know how women, law, or guns work, boomer.

Good point. Self identifying as a gun will not solve her problem if her goal is to have an abortion in a state where it’s banned. Even tougher to grow a fetus inside a real gun. Her best bet is to travel to a different state.

 

[zipman]

You act like this site isn't filled with people who lie about who they are or their reasons for being here.

It makes me wonder about you.

Don't blame others for the fact that you're a scumbag.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Not deflecting. I was asking you a question. But, let me answer it for you.

There is no ceremony that takes place during birth that grants a fetus human rights. There is no light from the sky, no voice from beyond, no blooming lotus flowers that signals any significant change between a fetus 5 seconds before it is born and 5 seconds after it is born. There is no event that takes place that grants human rights, and if you don't have human rights in the womb, there is nothing that gives them to you after you are born.

Fetuses have human rights because fetus is a human. If you look at the biology of human development, you will see that human beings begin when a sperm and an egg join and the genetics resolve themselves into a unique combination. Once this happens, this is a human, and if we are to live in a world where human rights exist at all, then we must say that all human beings have these rights.

As far as compelling physical material support - your body agreed to produce this human being. Whether your conscious brain did or not. Your body created the fetus. Your body is providing for the fetus. Your body is the part of you that is on board with providing physical material support. Your problem is with the continued support your own body is giving to the fetus. No one else is forcing you to support it - they are just saying you can't actively kill it.

Ok, so it’s just your personal opinion that a fetus has “human rights”.

 

[phrodeau]

Pregnant people can’t be prevented from traveling across state lines, regardless of their intent.

 

[rockcasbah]

Pregnant people can’t be prevented from traveling across state lines, regardless of their intent.

Conspiracy to commit infanticide?

 

[ll74]

Conspiracy to commit infanticide?

Abortion doesn't involve an infant.

 

[mayfly13]

Pregnant people can’t be prevented from traveling across state lines, regardless of their intent.

no, they can't.

but apparently a doctor can tell, in half of the cases if a woman has had a surgical abortion in the past.

If Red States criminalise women who actively undergo abortion (in Red States), what will happen with those discovered during routine visits, to have had one (even if iin a Blue State)?

 

[mayfly13]

Conspiracy to commit infanticide?

exactly.
see my previous post too.

You being a lawyer, you probably can foresee that there will be all sorts of ramifications

 

[Dribble]

Why even allow women to vote? If SCOTUS doesn't want to enforce equal rights among sexes...why even given slaves the right to vote?

 

[Dribble]

Wonder why no one has answered my question from a couple pages ago. Given this ruling...and the laws states are enacting...why isn't a non-genetic miscarriage 2nd degree murder? What exactly is the difference?

 

[butters]

exactly.
see my previous post too.

You being a lawyer, you probably can foresee that there will be all sorts of ramifications

lace is no lawyer

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Why even allow women to vote? If SCOTUS doesn't want to enforce equal rights among sexes...why even given slaves the right to vote?

The SCOTUS ruling determined WHO decides abortion policy, not WHAT the policies should be. Your problem is not SCOTUS, it’s representative government. Try the ballot box.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Wonder why no one has answered my question from a couple pages ago. Given this ruling...and the laws states are enacting...why isn't a non-genetic miscarriage 2nd degree murder? What exactly is the difference?

These are questions you need to direct towards state legislatures. SCOTUS has not banned abortion.