the right to choose

Looks like not in America

Because the government (now 50) may say so. Based on...their opinion.

America...the freest country in the world ?

Now we may have to say: with all its faults, still the best there is

What country has more freedom the America??
It's not a trick question.
Didn't you alread start a thread on this issue??

https://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=2855512

You folks on the left have come unwound on this ruling!!

He won’t finish his term.

He won’t finish his term. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Oh really what's going to happen?

Oh really what's going to happen? Originally Posted by Levianon17

Let see mouthy make a prediction...

Did he just threaten a sitting USSC justice? RED FLAG RED FLAG RED FLAG

Where is it written that you have a Right to choose? (Which I presume you mean killing an unborn child as opposed to choosing regular versus menthol)
From whence do Rights emanate?

Where is it written that you have a Right to choose? (Which I presume you mean killing an unborn child as opposed to choosing regular versus menthol)
From whence do Rights emanate?

You must stop using 3 syllable words if you want a libturd to understand. It has been against the rules to choose to kill just about for forever.

I can’t say there is no reason to abort a child, but gender and/ or convenience is not nor will it ever be an acceptable answer. They call them justices because their duty is to rule according to the constitution of the US A.

Let's see, if I make a list of "choices" you may not make according to law, how long would that list be? Of course there are "choices" you may not make.


Now by federal law, you no longer have the choice to get an abortion but your state might give you that choice.

...Now by federal law, you no longer have the choice to get an abortion but your state might give you that choice. Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Well... that was not actually what the court ruled, but it appears in that context. What the court ruled is that the Court did not have the power to make the Roe rule in the first place. In essence, they had made a mistake and were correcting it.

Mark Levin:
The Supreme Court has been shooting from the hip on abortion now for about half-a-century. And that’s why you have all these cases keep working their way to the Supreme Court from federal district courts, and so all these pro-abortion groups constantly litigating to prevent the states from having any regulation whatsoever.

And let’s be clear about what this decision says. This decision says something really unique in American history. We have a very, very powerful body, the Supreme Court, saying, we don’t have any power. When’s the last time you heard Congress or the president or the bureaucracy say, we don’t have any power, so we’re going to give this authority where it belongs, back to the people in the states?

It’s that simple. They’re interpreting the Constitution. It’s not taking anybody’s rights away. It’s not giving rights to anybody. First of all, God does that. But, that said, there’s 50 states for a reason. We’re not a parliamentary system like in Canada, like in France. We have 50 states for a reason, 50 legislatures for a reason, so that decisions can be made by the people in these states.

So having said all of that, it boils down to Federal usurpation of States and Peoples rights. But I think the bigger view is more along the line of instilling Communism, i.e. control of others from a central power, in that those very same people want to dilute the States rights by Federal over reach. To do that, they have to increase their numbers to exert control over others.

EX: The peoples of Commifornia and New York, dictating what we do in Texas. It is really that simple. Sounds corny, I know. But do you ever hear tell of a Progressive extolling the virtues of a Constitutional Republic and how it is designed and functions? Or do you always hear about a Democracy, the popular vote and other things that are essentially delusive to the States and their people?

The Dem's have relied on the SC for decades to do things that they could never get done in all 50 States so they hoped they could put people like Sotomayor,on the court who rules on her feelings on what she thinks is best for the country not what the Constitution says.


Now all that is fine and dandy as long as it's a Democrat's "feelings" but what happens when you get people who actually apply the law and don't give a shit about "feelings"?


Another good question to ask a Democrat beyond a definition of "Democracy".


What happens if you abolish the SC which the AOC crowd is calling for? Wait for it, wait for it............


You get State courts making decisions. I mean this whole debate from Democrats is laughable and if it was a logic class, it would be laughed out of that class. All Democrats have are "feelings" and identity politics and right now if your not transgender, what you think doesn't matter one bit.

You have a right to choose which provider you want to hire but it is still illegal in most states.
You have a right to choose whether or not to smoke but it is still stupid to start up.
You have a right to choose to drink and drive, illegal and stupid.
Since abortion will remain legal in many states, where did anyone lose their right to choice?