According to Dr. Oz, local politicians should be involved in abortion decisions

The only politician who should be involved in abortion decisions is Herschel Walker, because it's probably his kid.

(credit to Trevor Noah for this one)

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Reason10 · 70-79, M

As a matter of fact, the Supreme Court made it possible for local politicians (as in STATE LEGISLATURES) to call the shots. Roe was bad law that never should have been legislated. Overturning it has not prevented ONE since liberal slut from killing her baby.
The decision was sent either to the states or the federal government.

Maybe you Woke children should be asking yourselves why this Democrat Congress didn't pass an Abortion On Demand bill and the unelected pedophile sign it into law. I'm sure all of you called your Congressmen, DEMANDING this goose stepping move after Dodd.

Bottom line, local politicians SHOULD make the call, not some robed monarch.

SW-User

@Reason10 no difference between feds and state politician's except the stat e politicians are wanabes. How can the state tell someone what to if tge fed government can't?

LeopoldBloom · M

@Reason10 Do you feel the same way about slavery? Let the local politicians decide?

Why should some politician decide if women can be forced to serve as incubators? But I'll bet if we have a blue tsunami and the Democrats pass a law legalizing abortion nationwide, you'll be rooting for the Supreme Court to declare it unconstitutional. You people are so transparent.

Reason10 · 70-79, M

@SW-User @SW-User Wannabes? So far, state governments seem to be acting on the subject of baby killing. Your Fascist state of Virginia had no problem in legislating a FINAL SOLUTION for babies.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47066307

The Democrat who sponsored the measure said it would allow abortions at any point in pregnancy up until the point of childbirth in certain cases.

Critics said the bill, which failed on Monday to be voted out of subcommittee, would have allowed infanticide.

And that was before Dodd.

So you have to ask yourself why the uber left wing federal government (which is about to change in less than a month) hasn't already drafted a similar NINE MONTH baby killing bill and had the unelected senile signed it.

Reason10 · 70-79, M

@LeopoldBloom Funny you mentioned slavery. (Here is where you might want to find someone with an education you can consult on history) Roe was based on a legal concept called "Substantive Due Process." The FIRST time that precedent was utilized was in [b]Dred Scott v. John F.A. Sandford[/b] also known as the Dred Scott Decision.

As far as forcing women to become incubators, I would say their actions (being sluts without protection) did that. And your side of the aisle wants to allow women to become concentration camps. (The SAME concept "eugenics" applies.)

Since you REALLY want this Eugenics/Holocaust idea to blossom (yeah, I'll bet you had no idea as to the origins of abortion and PLanned Parenthood) perhaps you would embrace another tenet of Eugenics, where certain groups of allegedly inferior types be involuntarily sterilized. (It actually happened here in the United States, not too long before this idea made its way to Europe and morphed into the concentration camps.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment