Supreme Court strikes down Roe v. Wade, ending constitutional protection for abortion

Not until they're 18.

 

Seventeen year olds are human too, but we make them wait. I agree with the point though. A voter should at least be able to feel and think before (s)he can vote. I sometimes have the impression that's not always the case with our electorate, but we give them the benefit of the doubt. I find it hard to believe that an entity without a brain or nervous system can do either of those things, or anything else we expect even of baby humans.

 

??? We may be mis-communicating. Last I looked, the voting age in the U.S. is still eighteen years old. That was set during the Vietnam war, and was based on eligiblity for the draft. We start calculating the age of humans when they are born. Maybe, if a zygote or blastocyst is a living human (which I find hard to believe) and we still want to let them vote when they are 18 years old, we should let people vote at 17 + three months. I don't think they should be able to vote in the womb or Petri dish, and certainly wouldn't want the poor kids to be sent to the front before they've seen the light of day! They'd be a major disciplinary problem for any drill sergeant, and if the enemy just stepped on one of them, it would be the end for him/her/it !

 

That's true. But I'm glad we don't look at it that way. It's bad enough as it is!

 

Here's the solution!

Pregnant mothers get TWO votes!!!

It's only fair because the life she carries is subject to the whims of political whores.

 

This is a little off the subject, but on my way to this site, I just spotted the following: Maine GOP lawmaker says Lewiston shooting was God's wrath in response to law expanding abortion access Yes, it's NBC, but I doubt they made it up. It really scares the hell out of me that people can be that irrational. If God has unleashed a mass shooter in retribution for something, how do we decide what He's pissed off about? For all we know, it could be MTG or the Orange Bible salesman! I'm surprised both of those didn't get lightning bolts up the ass!

 

God seems a little busy these days, what with all the wars and death going on . I'm sure he / she will straighten all this out soon. Yeah. Real soon. We can count on it.

 

-

 

No it didn't. The Tenth Amendment "explicitly" states :"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Nothin' there about "explicitly"; you slipped that in. Art I,sec 8,cl.18, gives the feds the power to do what's "necessary and proper" to carry out its enumerated powers, and Chief Justice John Marshall, in the landmark case of McCulloch v. Maryland back in 1819, said that this gave the federal government the implied power to charter banks, even though the Constitution says nothing explicitly about that. He said (wisely): "We must never forget that it is a constitution we are expounding.” Constitutions are meant to last for generations to come. Thank God for Chief Justice Marshall. If we hadn't taken that course, the U. S. would have been crippled early on, and we might be speaking French, or Spanish, or maybe Chickasaw. Powder my wig! Your approach would take us back to 1818.

There's also the matter of racial segregation. My state of Oklahoma used to have Jim Crow, until the Warren Court came along and told them they couldn't cuz it was damaging African-Americans. Where does it say that explicitly in the Constitution? It doesn't. But what it says is all persons have a right to equal protection of the laws. And the Court thought there was enough evidence to say African-Americans weren't getting that.

 

...

 

...

 

...