Jump to content

Roe versus Wade overturned


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Tinfoil Hat said:

I'm surprised at the ruling really, since those in positions of authority are so keen to depopulate. Here come the get rich quick, back street abortionists. 

Or thy want the catalyst to start civil war 2.0

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Tinfoil Hat said:

I read briefly that the pro-rights are threatening to burn down the court so it looks like you might both be right. It's certainly a very emotive subject.

 

This is a hot issue in the US. Probably only matched by arms control.

Edited by Mikhail Liebestein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this "ruling" has many facets. They want people to get reengaged in the voting process and for people to get used to having their rights taken away.

 

There are also privacy provisions embedded inside of Roe that have disappeared due to this reversal. Within 1 hr after the announcement, all MSM started talking about is how this reversal should reinvigorate the number of young voters on both sides of the issue, that have been in deep decline. The other thing that serves their agenda, is they know that it will exacerbate the division and fear in this country. I imagine there will be less sex taking place, where this option is not available. Some states are even talking about making it illegal to travel to another state to seek a legal abortion. All in all, there will be less births. 

 

SCOTUS also discussed the banning of birth control and the morning-after pill, which will ramp-up fear and reduce the willingness to have sex. It will provide an excuse when they keep the left in power to continue their 'real' work that they have done for the last 2 yrs.

 

Voting serves one purpose ...... for you to freely give your power to them. Not just in the united states, but everywhere.

 

MrFishStickerPrice_1000_363_273@2x.jpg.cbe64ce4459acd0785c49c88adf08072.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is indeed very odd. Youngsters who have grown up indulging in casual sex..how are they going to behave now? In the early to mid twentieth century ( pre the pill ) young people on the whole acted very differently during dating. It was not assumed by the man that he'd be in bed with the woman at the end of the night like these days.  I noticed that a lot of the supporters of this over turning in the photos I  saw were the 20s age group. Are they prepared to live like their great grandparents and be largely celibate for much of their lives unless they want a baby born every 1-2 years? Are all these young fellas willing to financially support these mothers who have like 6 children and have to stay home to look after them? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Tinfoil Hat said:

I'm surprised at the ruling really, since those in positions of authority are so keen to depopulate. Here come the get rich quick, back street abortionists. 

 

Unlikely...... not everyone is going to queue up for a backstreet abortion..... very few...it is likely to act as a deterrent to  behaving irresponsibly, it's more likely that people will just use birth control.....

 

The Jews have been protesting this vociferously, claiming abortion is a 'Jewish value'..... of course, it's more a case of  'abortion for thee not for me'. Jewish families are deeply conservative within their own communities and having an abortion would be deeply shameful and even unthinkable, but that's not the side they show to the Goy.....that's all kept within the Jewish world.... it is only the Goy who needs to be destroyed after all....and the more Goys are aborted the less of them there will be to contest their will.

 

I consider this a win..... for me this is turning back the apocalypse clock by half an hour or so.....

 

Satanists murder babies in the womb...... it is one of their specific sacrifice rituals:

 

 

Abortion at best is a dubious intervention and at worst, say beyond 15 weeks it is simply infanticide... child murder.

 

Look at who you are siding with:

 

 

Edited by Edgewood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I noticed Boris wading in with criticism of the ruling. As well as Obama & Pelosi (as you'd expect). 

 

Some of the specimins of humanity who've been parading about publicly announcing their practice of shagging around and aborting pregnancies routinely are horrific (imo). But I can still see an argument for a very early termination if you've been the victim of rape - I'm unsure about it, because I can sympathise with those blighted, but it depends whether you believe that a soul is present at conception. I feel  quite strongle that that is the case, but it's debatable. I'm not sure that everyone these days is even created with a soul, but that's a different discussion. 

 

28 years ago, I suffered a miscarriage. My daughter was only 3 weeks old when I concieved again, and the medical opinion was that my body was just not strong enough to support another pregnancy so soon after carrying a child to full term. (That explanation sounds wrong to me, but who knows?) I lost the 2nd baby when just under 3 months pregnant. Even though my tiny daughter brought me tremendous joy, I was still broken up at losing her sibling, and could not stop crying. Soon after, while I was in the throes of this grief, I had the most intense and realistic vision, in which I just saw a baby girl surrounded in golden light and I felt overwhelming peace and contentment and love emanating from the baby and into me. The heartache just vanished instantly and I felt calm and happy for the 1st time since my loss. 

 

According to my (now ex) husband, it was just my own sub-conscious mind that projected the vision to my conscious mind in order to protect and heal myself. Again, I don't profess to know everything, and his explanation seems plausible enough, but at the same time, it was so emphatically real. That's why I feel that a 'fetus' (I hate that word, as it is a cold, clinical term) is much more than just a group of  biological cells. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has nothing to do with saving babies and everything to do with "vaccines". This is about one thing and one thing only; removing the "my body, my choice" argument. 

 

Many people have brought up the pro-abortionists' rally cry, "my body, my choice" with regards to the coercing and forcing of the "Covid vaccines" (and new, potential "vaccines" coming down the pike). Everything else happening in US politics is so extremely liberal, it's at a point of Idiocracy, yet this uber-conservation ruling gets passed?

 

Mark my words, this will now be used to force those who do not want a "vaccine", to get the "vaccine", under some Marshall Law type scenario. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think i am correct that a State can make its own ruling 

 

new york allows killing babies upto birth

 

so thars ok. a state somewhere will allow you to kill a baby if the cord is attached but convict you for murder if its 1 month old

 

it all makes sense

 

 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, zArk said:

i think i am correct that a State can make its own ruling 

 

new york allows killing babies upto birth

 

so thars ok. a state somewhere will allow you to kill a baby if the cord is attached but convict you for murder if its 1 month old

 

it all makes sense

 

 

 

 

Yes, definitely state by state, and could accelerate a split.

 

Below is an old meme from 2002, but joking aside tensions have simmered since the Civil War. May be they need Abe Lincoln back if he isn't too busy hunting Vampires.

 

image.png.a9691b0c86145fca14e4c1e02c5b6cf2.png

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A difficult topic. It would appear some US States are complicit in murder allowing the killing of babies right

up to 40th week if the mother is deemed mentally ill and doesn't want the baby and others have gone the other

way like Texas? saying abortions will be illegal after 6 weeks?

 

All caused imo to divide an already divided USA. They have to cause mayhem in the USA, and other countries will

follow.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I understand this ruling, it basically represents the decentralisation of abortion policy from the federal union to the individual states. Therefore it allows more local decision making, more diversity and multiculturalism across the country. So why do the liberal progressives hate it? Shouldn't they be saying it doesn't go far enough, and power should be further delegated to counties/cities? Or are they outing themselves as centralists? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or as is the case with most of these things there is always another angle. See picture. 

 

Something I didn't realise was straight off the back of Roe v Wade, it opened the door to the pharmaceutical industry to start fetal cell research. God these bastard's are sick. Plus, I've also read that actually she lied, she wasn't raped at all and lied on that basis to get the abortion. It's also come to light that she was a drug addict and was potentially paid to lie. Again, I can't necessarily verify that claim, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit. 

Screenshot_20220627-125057_DuckDuckGo.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...