It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Justice John Roberts Sides With Liberals to Ensure Maximum Access to Abortions in Louisiana.

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Thursday, February 7, 2019

The U.S. Supreme Court rendered a key abortion-related ruling this evening.


Supreme Court blocks Louisiana abortion law designed to restrict the number of abortions, as John Roberts joins liberal justices in 5-4 ruling. The ruling blocks Louisiana from enforcing a law that women's groups said would have left the state with just one doctor allowed to perform abortions.

By a 5-4 vote, the court said the restrictions must remain on hold while challengers appeal a lower court decision in favor of the law. Chief Justice John Roberts voted with the court's liberal members.

It was the Supreme Court's first significant action on the hot-button issue of abortion since Donald Trump's nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, replaced Anthony Kennedy, who generally voted with the court's liberals to uphold abortion rights.

In Thursday's ruling, Kavanaugh voted with the conservatives — Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch.
More at: www.nbcnews.com...

It's disturbing that our nation is moving in a direction which encourages murdering our children with greater ease and flexibility. There's something broken, or worse, when a conservative Justice like John Roberts sides with cold-hearted liberal justices on this important life and death issue.

ALSO, it looks like Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg voted/participated in today's ruling, but the article doesn't mention her by name. Only the Justices who voted NOT to block the La. abortion law are named. Could Ginsburg be voting electronically from home, during her recovery from cancer surgery?

-CareWeMust

edit on 2/7/2019 by carewemust because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Care, love most of your posts, but gotta call you out on this....

John Roberts is not a conservative.

I also believe someone has dirt on him, and he votes how he is told.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust


Sounds like the SC ruled in favor of not rebuking a lower court's decision, without the decision being made. To me that shows Judicial prudence.
I see nothing to argue against from what you presented.
How can the SC respond to the constitutionality of a court decision if it is tied up in appeals?



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 12:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: theatreboy
Care, love most of your posts, but gotta call you out on this....
John Roberts is not a conservative.
I also believe someone has dirt on him, and he votes how he is told.


If J.R. votes how he is told, that would make him a SLAVE. I wonder who is Robert's master?



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 12:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme
a reply to: carewemust


Sounds like the SC ruled in favor of not rebuking a lower court's decision, without the decision being made. To me that shows Judicial prudence.
I see nothing to argue against from what you presented.
How can the SC respond to the constitutionality of a court decision if it is tied up in appeals?


Why would the Supreme Court waste its time on something that means nothing?



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Certainly not the people he is hired to serve.....



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Ermahgerd..

The moderately conservative justice pulled a tie breaker move and sided with the baby killers. He's officially lost all respect from me and many others, including many of you, as a judge and a human being.

The whole thing is rather extra and symbolic because there's only four doctors in Louisiana that do abortions at three clinics. One of them has the qualification they want to add with the new law about being a doctor at a nearby hospital as well as the clinic, three dont. The entire case is over educated predictions on whether those doctors would be able to get the qualification too. I read Kavanaughs dissent, he calls it a facial. He also said that if those three doctors cant get the qualification like the fourth doctor has, the new law would indeed be obstructing women's health or the ability to have an abortion. I'm not sure everyone knows what this is about exactly.

So what he and the 3 other justices that voted with him are saying is that they think those doctors will be able to get the qualification during a transitional period and to go ahead with enforcing the law. The ones that voted with Roberts think that those doctors getting the qualification is a certainty and are saying no to the new law being enforced yet. The victory for anti-abortion folks would be that in the future, it'll be exceedingly hard for a doctor to be qualified in Louisiana to legally perform abortions, thereby lessening the potential of abortions in the future after these four doctors go. If the three of them can't get the qualification even though the justices who voted for it probably think they can, supposedly, all the better because there'd only be one abortion doctor in the state. Force them out of practice with laws making it too hard or tedious to work.
edit on 2/8/2019 by r0xor because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 12:40 AM
link   
a reply to: r0xor

Can you imagine being a doctor who dedicates your entire life and practice to murdering babies? What kind of person does something like that instead of using their skills as a healer to help others? It is just unfathomable to me.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 12:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: r0xor

Can you imagine being a doctor who dedicates your entire life and practice to murdering babies? What kind of person does something like that instead of using their skills as a healer to help others? It is just unfathomable to me.


True, and I'm not into the abortion debate. My opinion is that there should be a limited window of time for an abortion to be legal. Going with your argument though, wouldn't it be weird to be a male who devotes your life to women's health anyways? That's like, your entire career, what you do every day. Some think it'd be novel or cool but consider that you'd have old, obese, bad smelling, and otherwise horribly unattractive patients too. You'd also have to perform procedures on girls under 18, some fairly young, all up in their reproductive system. There's countless jobs, especially ones that certain doctors do, that I cannot and will not understand or relate to. We can make judgements and think they're twisted or demented but, they save lives and improve them too.

What about male Urologists? I wonder what made the male genitalia their passion in life. For the record, the gynecologists who perform abortions aren't only performing abortions and I'd imagine that even a fair amount of the more liberal ones try to advise the patient against doing it.

Male Gynecologists/Female Urologists are pedophiles and/or perverts
Female Gynecologists/Male Urologists are homosexual pedophiles and/or perverts
Gynecologists who perform abortions are pedophile murderers
Anesthesiologists are fascinated with drugging people near death
Executioners are career Anesthesiologists who want excitement/Psychopaths
Psychiatrists like doing chemistry experiments on your brain/use drugs
Addiction Counselors are either addicts or jealous/miss it
Veterinarians that lethal inject animals like the rush from "humanely" killing pets
edit on 2/8/2019 by r0xor because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 12:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: r0xor

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: r0xor

Can you imagine being a doctor who dedicates your entire life and practice to murdering babies? What kind of person does something like that instead of using their skills as a healer to help others? It is just unfathomable to me.


For the record, the gynecologists who perform abortions aren't only performing abortions and I'd imagine that even a fair amount of the more liberal ones try to advise the patient against doing it.


What makes you imagine that? That more liberal ones try to advise their patients against having an abortion?



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 01:10 AM
link   
I am sorely confused... perhaps one of our more enlightened members can explain something about this case to me?

The sole reason I can side with abortion legality is because of the health of the mother. That's it. I simply don't want to see back-alley, coat-hangar abortion attempts that leave young, confused, desperate women waking up under the dirt. I get that; I am sympathetic to that. But it seems that restrictions to ensure that qualified doctors are the ones performing the abortions are a no-no. That I don't get. If I go to a doctor, I expect them to be affiliated with a nearby hospital. Why does that not hold for this medical procedure?

The optics say that abortion advocates are unconcerned about women's health. Those optics say that it is more important to kill a developing child than to ensure a medically competent doctor is performing the procedure. If that is the case, I have to switch my support to outlawing abortion completely... I can see no benefit socially to allowing abortion beyond the woman's health.

TheRedneck



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 01:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: KansasGirl
What makes you imagine that? That more liberal ones try to advise their patients against having an abortion?


I didn't say try hard, and it was exaggerated the way that I said it, but I think it's their job to have to offer some resistance to doing it, even if it's token resistance, because they must know from working with women's health their entire careers that it's not something to put your nose in. You don't suggest or offer it, you definitely don't try to talk them into it. I think to the wrong patient with their phone set to record audio, this could cost them their jobs. But if they're dead set on it or insist upon it for any myriad of reasons that they have, you perform the operation.

From a perspective of someone who's experienced a ridiculously disproportionate amount of pain and suffering at times throughout my life, from witnessing firsthand how horrible life can be for some people, so meaningless, I can see how a Gynecologist can sleep at night and live with themselves that it's not of their doing, but I'll bet they're not all thrilled about doing it. I don't know, we don't hear from them very often do we?!

Edit: I'm sure some Gynecologists who perform them are also reinforced by an educated belief, to them a fact (because they wanted to believe it and sought material to convince themselves -- you know how that works) that the "fetus" isn't concious yet, aware yet, has a soul yet if they believe in souls which is doubtful, or for intents and purposes, is alive or a person yet.

edit on 2/8/2019 by r0xor because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 01:22 AM
link   
a reply to: r0xor

Most of the time, they neither suggest having or not having an abortion. They are supposed to tell the risks with either decision and answer any questions the patient has. They don't try to convince the patient for either option.

But you didn't really answer why you think they are supposed to offer some token resistance at least. Where did you learn that? A class? an article?



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 01:28 AM
link   
a reply to: r0xor

r0xor, thankyou for sharing your insight! I had no clue how the Louisiana system was designed.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 01:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: KansasGirl
a reply to: r0xor

Most of the time, they neither suggest having or not having an abortion. They are supposed to tell the risks with either decision and answer any questions the patient has. They don't try to convince the patient for either option.

But you didn't really answer why you think they are supposed to offer some token resistance at least. Where did you learn that? A class? an article?


I learned it from.. um.. Hippocrates 👀

I interpreted his writings (correctly) that Gynecologists are supposed to act like it's a serious, possibly future life changing, and borderline unethical/taboo thing to do (depending on if you drink blue raspberry or cherry punch). Even if deep inside they're excited about the potential of getting to murder another baby, they can't act like it or else they could lose their jobs considering how provocative it is.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 01:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: r0xor

Can you imagine being a doctor who dedicates your entire life and practice to murdering babies? What kind of person does something like that instead of using their skills as a healer to help others? It is just unfathomable to me.


I couldn't watch for long, but last night there was a Planned Parenthood video posted, showing a doctor washing aborted baby parts, to prepare for shipping...someplace. God it made me sad. To him it was nothing..just part of his daily routine.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 01:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: r0xor

Can you imagine being a doctor who dedicates your entire life and practice to murdering babies? What kind of person does something like that instead of using their skills as a healer to help others? It is just unfathomable to me.


I couldn't watch for long, but last night there was a Planned Parenthood video posted, showing a doctor washing aborted baby parts, to prepare for shipping...someplace. God it made me sad. To him it was nothing..just part of his daily routine.


It sounds disgusting, but did anyone in the video like the doctor or a nurse say anything verbally to indicate that the baby parts were going to be kept and prepared for shipping, or was that the context of the video as it was presented on a website or in the description of it?



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 01:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: r0xor

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: r0xor

Can you imagine being a doctor who dedicates your entire life and practice to murdering babies? What kind of person does something like that instead of using their skills as a healer to help others? It is just unfathomable to me.

True, and I'm not into the abortion debate. My opinion is that there should be a limited window of time for an abortion to be legal.


Planned Parenthood is taking advantage of the increasing trend of legalizing late term abortions, to make murdering children legal, up to FORTY WEEKS after they are conceived, in all 50 states.

SOURCE: bigleaguepolitics.com...

There should be a companion bill that requires all women who kill their unborn child who was conceived due to voluntary sex, to have their fallopian-tubes tied. If they take the easy way out one time, that will also be the last time.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 02:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: r0xor

Can you imagine being a doctor who dedicates your entire life and practice to murdering babies? What kind of person does something like that instead of using their skills as a healer to help others? It is just unfathomable to me.



If you lived in Asian countries long enough, people don't get into other peoples personal desire to do what they want to do with their bodies. Kind of like a woman making money off her body and a man pays for such pleasure. No one really gives a flying fk.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 03:15 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

He lost my respect when he ruled obamacare a legal tax.

This doesn't surprise me.

Hopefully RGB gets replaced before Trump leaves office in 2024.




top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join