Anonymous ID: 166481 Feb. 7, 2019, 9:32 p.m. No.5075368   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5441

judicial philosophy has never addressed the status of the baby, just the wishes of the mother, hoping they will address this issue, like heartbeat or first trimester or some such line the states will be unable to blur, same with 2A

 

>>507530

Anonymous ID: 166481 Feb. 7, 2019, 9:43 p.m. No.5075489   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5523

I agree that R v W muddies what is murder but it was never intended to legalize it, support it, therefore, a limit has to be placed, it will never be overturned, good or bad it's not going away

 

>>5075441

Anonymous ID: 166481 Feb. 7, 2019, 9:51 p.m. No.5075562   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5606 >>5675

You would think a majority consensus would be enough but that was not how they pushed through R v W and once again, precedent is for the court not to walk back previous rulings, if that would happen I'm all for it. Just reading what I see as a realistic outcome

 

>>5075523

Anonymous ID: 166481 Feb. 7, 2019, 9:59 p.m. No.5075641   🗄️.is 🔗kun

yes, but not late term abortion which is really the issue here, the court did not address the status of the child, that is what has to be addressed, not abortion so much as the status of the unborn child, that is where they dropped the ball and need to pick it up

 

>>5075606

Anonymous ID: 166481 Feb. 7, 2019, 10:12 p.m. No.5075748   🗄️.is 🔗kun

They always scream that cause lib women eat that shit up, keeps their troops unified for "the" cause, they think all conservatives are absolute pro life and that takes their power away, I hope you are right and they find out grabbing power from the people is not going to work anymore, that would be great

 

>>5075675