You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #36: Potential Life? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Choice Donate to DU
HockeyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-21-07 06:59 AM
Response to Original message
36. Potential Life?
That term really worries me. Doesn't that go back to the state's argument in not Roe, but GRISWOLD? When you start on that slippery slope, you go back to birth control. Potential life? The state has an interest in seeing that children are born, so the state can ban the use of contraceptives, as well as abortion, to insure that "potential" children are born.

I am not an attorney, but with those words, you can not only ban abortions, but all birth control.

Am I wrong on this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
  -what is the state's interest in a woman's pregnancy? iverglas  Apr-20-07 01:25 PM   #0 
  - I don't know. I do know that Republics care nothing about babies  CottonBear   Apr-20-07 01:28 PM   #1 
  - More taxpayers?  Atman   Apr-20-07 01:29 PM   #2 
  - And cannon fodder.  no_hypocrisy   Apr-20-07 01:32 PM   #3 
     - My thoughts exactly ...  Hepburn   Apr-20-07 01:42 PM   #6 
     - And laborers  MountainLaurel   Apr-20-07 03:37 PM   #26 
  - None  rock   Apr-20-07 01:36 PM   #4 
  - well, once it gets off the latest threads page  iverglas   Apr-20-07 01:39 PM   #5 
  - Actually, in the case of a fetus, I am amazed at the statement...  Hepburn   Apr-20-07 01:50 PM   #7 
  - When it comes to women  Warpy   Apr-20-07 01:59 PM   #9 
  - I can tell you that I am totally disgusted with this ruling.  Hepburn   Apr-20-07 02:12 PM   #11 
  - phew, substance!  iverglas   Apr-20-07 02:13 PM   #12 
  - What it is going to come down to, IMO, is a test case...  Hepburn   Apr-20-07 02:27 PM   #17 
  - For the sake of argument  One_Life_To_Give   Apr-20-07 02:31 PM   #18 
  - that's the point I made  iverglas   Apr-20-07 02:49 PM   #21 
     - Just because 10 states don't have a law  One_Life_To_Give   Apr-20-07 03:00 PM   #24 
  - Question,  Ind4now   Apr-23-07 05:52 AM   #41 
     - what on earth makes you think a fetus DOES have Constitutional rights? n/t  Scout   Apr-23-07 09:37 AM   #44 
  - They really sad thing is  Megahurtz   Apr-20-07 05:03 PM   #29 
     - welllll  iverglas   Apr-20-07 05:08 PM   #31 
        - Lol!  Megahurtz   Apr-20-07 05:51 PM   #33 
        - But you know, she's right.....  foxsux   Jul-13-07 12:21 AM   #89 
  - Competing interests/rights  One_Life_To_Give   Apr-20-07 01:52 PM   #8 
  - One is already human. The other is only a possibility.  Warpy   Apr-20-07 02:00 PM   #10 
  - That is what TRULY gets to me....  Hepburn   Apr-20-07 02:14 PM   #13 
     - Their position needs to be understood  One_Life_To_Give   Apr-20-07 02:24 PM   #16 
        - that's kind of what I'm asking  iverglas   Apr-20-07 02:50 PM   #22 
           - Hay, maybe I found someone to talk to about this...  Ind4now   Apr-23-07 06:09 AM   #42 
  - not really  iverglas   Apr-20-07 02:36 PM   #19 
     - Don't think negatives prove the case  One_Life_To_Give   Apr-20-07 03:15 PM   #25 
        - hooeee  iverglas   Apr-20-07 05:05 PM   #30 
           - Your the one who asked  One_Life_To_Give   Apr-20-07 05:53 PM   #34 
  - i'm only playing devil's advocate -- because i believe that a woman owns her body.  xchrom   Apr-20-07 02:18 PM   #14 
  - clarification  iverglas   Apr-20-07 02:53 PM   #23 
     - well, without getting into meaningless rhetoric that some pro-lifers get into --  xchrom   Apr-20-07 05:49 PM   #32 
  - My suggestion to American women:  Deep13   Apr-20-07 02:20 PM   #15 
  - My thoughts on the matter  Ayesha   Apr-20-07 02:49 PM   #20 
  - very interesting  iverglas   Apr-20-07 04:43 PM   #27 
     - states interest cont'd  Ayesha   Apr-20-07 09:04 PM   #35 
        - I have to stop you right there again  iverglas   Apr-22-07 12:16 PM   #38 
  - Thanks for posting this iverglas!  Megahurtz   Apr-20-07 04:50 PM   #28 
  - Potential Life?  HockeyMom   Apr-21-07 06:59 AM   #36 
  - Yes and no  Ayesha   Apr-21-07 01:12 PM   #37 
  - in a nutshell, indeed  iverglas   Apr-22-07 12:23 PM   #39 
     - That is the reason I brought up Griswold  HockeyMom   Apr-22-07 04:58 PM   #40 
  - It is vary unfortunate that you live in Canada!  Ind4now   Apr-23-07 07:43 AM   #43 
  - not for me!  iverglas   Apr-23-07 02:24 PM   #45 
  - Sorry,  Ind4now   Apr-24-07 04:47 AM   #47 
  - more  iverglas   Apr-23-07 04:11 PM   #46 
     - I would like to start by saying  Ind4now   Apr-24-07 07:36 AM   #48 
        - correction: Suicide is not illegal. Assisting in a suicide is illegal, except in OR. -eom  Justitia   Apr-26-07 03:26 AM   #49 
        - as I understand it  iverglas   Apr-26-07 10:25 AM   #50 
           - Attempted suicide is not prosecuted or punished in any state, it may still be "illegal" in a few  Justitia   Apr-26-07 01:30 PM   #54 
              - I know, eh?  iverglas   Apr-26-07 01:42 PM   #55 
        - problems  iverglas   Apr-26-07 11:19 AM   #51 
  - It's called infanticide...  joshcryer   Apr-26-07 11:44 AM   #52 
  - No, anti-choice zealots like YOU call it that. Speak for yourself. -eom  Justitia   Apr-26-07 12:58 PM   #53 
  - I had plenty of "pro-choice" people in another thread calling for...  joshcryer   Apr-26-07 03:21 PM   #56 
     - So, you are still for forced birth. That's hardly "pro-choice".  Justitia   Apr-26-07 03:37 PM   #57 
        - 13 weeks is too early, The American Journal of Medicine places it at 20.  joshcryer   Apr-26-07 03:51 PM   #58 
           - stick a fork in "viability"  iverglas   Apr-26-07 07:12 PM   #59 
           - Your very stats destroy your argument.  joshcryer   Apr-26-07 08:40 PM   #60 
              - you are ignorant and nasty  iverglas   Apr-27-07 08:09 AM   #61 
                 - How am I being ignorant or nasty?  joshcryer   Apr-27-07 08:25 PM   #63 
                    - abortion is murder, infanticide. I'd call that ignorant and nasty.  uppityperson   Apr-29-07 12:14 AM   #68 
           - well, I guess it's a damn good thing it will never happen to YOU, huh?  Justitia   Apr-27-07 10:47 AM   #62 
              - I am here to provide constructive debate...  joshcryer   Apr-27-07 08:28 PM   #64 
                 - I think that perhaps a good "rule of thumb" would be  Kool Kitty   Apr-28-07 03:07 AM   #65 
                 - I find it unlikely that many here would even consider it my business...  joshcryer   Apr-28-07 03:28 PM   #66 
                    - I don't expect anything of you, associate with whomever you  Kool Kitty   Apr-29-07 12:02 AM   #67 
                       - I don't want to know about your reproductive matters.  joshcryer   Apr-29-07 12:24 AM   #69 
                          - Then take this up with doctors.  Kool Kitty   Apr-29-07 12:28 AM   #70 
                             - Doctors tend to have to adhere to regulations.  joshcryer   Apr-29-07 12:43 AM   #71 
                 - No you are not helping the case and you know it  JetCityLiberal   Apr-30-07 03:26 PM   #72 
  - ah, there you are  iverglas   May-02-07 08:20 PM   #83 
  - I would say it is  Mr. Blonde   Apr-30-07 06:21 PM   #73 
  - yes, well  iverglas   May-01-07 09:29 AM   #74 
  - I wasn't speaking of  Mr. Blonde   May-01-07 02:11 PM   #75 
     - oh well then  iverglas   May-01-07 02:36 PM   #76 
  - Wow - so should society be able to force me to have a child?  lukasahero   May-01-07 08:16 PM   #77 
     - Lebensborn?  HockeyMom   May-02-07 09:56 AM   #78 
        - Indeed, eh?  iverglas   May-02-07 11:28 AM   #79 
           - Again, the argument in Griswold  HockeyMom   May-02-07 02:21 PM   #80 
              - some of us who were there, even  iverglas   May-02-07 03:15 PM   #81 
              - Indeed. I was at the end of no bc for unmarried women, no legal abs unless had money.  uppityperson   May-02-07 03:43 PM   #82 
  - The state's interest is in preventing the killing of human beings  DemBones DemBones   Jun-27-07 07:41 AM   #84 
  - nice anti-choice rant, however you have not said what the state's interest IS...  Scout   Jun-27-07 09:17 AM   #85 
  - after seeing some of the posts here this AM  musette_sf   Jun-27-07 01:24 PM   #86 
     - You took the words  dancingAlone   Jun-27-07 07:31 PM   #87 
  - Please Leave Anti-Choice Views  iverglas   Jul-01-07 09:49 AM   #88 
  - From my own observations, it seems the state is quite comfortable with  Katherine Brengle   Jul-29-07 10:44 PM   #92 
  - To answer your original question, sort of.....  foxsux   Jul-13-07 12:24 AM   #90 
  - Let's look at the VATICAN's interest . . . and they're recognized as a state -- !!!!  defendandprotect   Jul-28-07 10:10 PM   #91 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Choice Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC