Skip to main content

Home/ Government Diigo/ Group items tagged abortion

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Mallory Huggins

Let's get real about abortions - 1 views

  •  
    "OK, Mr. Mourdock, you say your principles require a raped woman to carry the rapist's child to term. That's a heavy burden to impose on someone. What would you do for her in return? Would you pay her medical expenses? Compensate her for time lost to work? Would you pay for the child's upbringing? College education?" A look at the economy and its impact and abortion rates.
egessert

Hillary Clinton slams Donald Trump's abortion comments - 1 views

shared by egessert on 31 Mar 16 - No Cached
  •  
    Hours later, Trump reversed his initial position -- criticized as extreme by both supporters and opponents of abortion rights -- saying only the doctors should be held liable. "The Republicans all line up together," Clinton said in an interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper.
Bryan Pregon

New year brings altered landscape for abortion battle - CNN - 0 views

  •  
    "a more conservative US Supreme Court, 85 confirmed judges appointed by President Donald Trump who are reshaping the courts, and legislative bodies -- both state and federal -- transformed by a contentious midterm election."
Bryan Pregon

Petition for Texas to secede from US reaches threshold for White House response - U.S. ... - 5 views

  •  
    We should all know this is not going to happen. This is more of a state tantrum about wanting their state rights back. Personally I agree completely with the states that are doing this because the federal government is way past the boundary. The federal government is in place to protect us from others not are self's.
  • ...15 more comments...
  •  
    it says clearly that andrew johnson made it so no state for any reason could secede from the union,their will be another election in 4 years o if everybody would just relax and chill everything will be fine
  •  
    I think this is just a way of Texans and those other states to show their frustration with the government
  •  
    There are now three other states; Florida, Georgia, and Louisiana, that have reached the required 25,000 signatures on We the People to prompt a response from the White House. I am just waiting to see how the White House will respond to any of the four petitions.
  •  
    they must think that they can do it better then the normal government. so if they think they can and if the fail they fail if not then good for them.
  •  
    i think the white house will respond with a no
  •  
    i think there only trying to do this because there mad that Obama won , and that he will lead the state in to bigger dept.
  •  
    If the proclamation says the states can't separate they would need to rewrite it and make a new set of laws, also what would happen if they fail at a new government? would they just want the US of america to take them back?
  •  
    I think that this will never happen. Although they might not believe that being apart of the U.S. benefits them, It truly does.
  •  
    it would never happen but it will be interesting to see if any changes happen in response to this
  •  
    I don't think this is going to happen but it is still pretty scary that people are that mad at the government. I think that people always blame the government when they are not happy. If we didn't have the government we would be in more trouble than we are in now. Yes our economy is getting hard and we need more jobs. But some people are lazy and should not make the government pay for everything.
  •  
    I believe that Texas would do well in its own government, but it would be better to keep the 50 states.
  •  
    Texas is probably just upset with the turn out of the election therefore just trying to create their own government to get what they think deserve.
  •  
    I'm not sure if the point of the article is, "Why Texas wants to Secede." I'm moreover focused as to, if it will happen, and if it is a right of the state to leave the Union. Personally, I would say it is the right of a state to decide if they want to secede. Let us look at the tenth amendment. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. The state has over 80k people who signed a petition asking for a secession. If this is the majority, our 10Th amendment would likely give the state the right to secede, as long as 50.1% of the population wished to secede. (Doubt that they actually have a majority that wishes to secede.) In English: The 10Th amendment grants the states the right to secede if the majority of its population sees fit. This is caused by the lack of detail in the constitution. The lacking detail being whether or not the states have the right to secede. (Founding father: Let's put state secession here next to gay marriage and abortion!) Anyways, as long as the majority of Texans wish to secede, I doubt there is any way that the United States could actually tell them they could not, at least not without some sort of conflict.
  •  
    I have to be . . . not serious here. Just a word of advice to the states who want to secede, based on what happened in the Civil War: If you secede, you won't succeed.
  •  
    Payton I think the Supreme Court has already decided in Texas v White that States can't unilaterally secede from the government. They have the right to secede through revolution or by asking the other States and getting their permission. At least that's how I read the ruling. Unless there is a newer ruling on secession then Texas v. White. "When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States. Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law."
  •  
    Jeremy, what am I trying to state, is that states do have a right to secede, because we are not in a perpetual agreement to join the union. It was perpetual during the Articles of Confederation, the supreme court ruled that they have do not know if the constitution. "It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words." English: The Articles of Confederation declared it to be a perpetual union. The Articles of Confederation no longer exist. The supreme court literally state that they are going by ground of the Articles of Confederation, a.k.a. not a valid ground to take a stance upon. Now, if we look in history. plessy v. ferguson was a supreme court case that was overturned. This case can be overturned. Also, Jeremy, your understanding is correct on most of it. But from what the case as a whole states, under the Articles of Confederation, what you states is Valid. The Court ruled this with the usage of the Articles of Confederation. (Personally, do not think you should be able to do that, and that the courts ruling is a mistake.) Finally, I am simply stating the states have a right to secede if they want to, this is because the constitution, and not the articles of confederation, is vague about the idea of secession, applying the 10th amendment, the states should have a right to secede if they have a majority of people, unless we plan to be a hypocritical society that has already forced others to use the policy in which most people want to deny.
  •  
    I think this in an interesting topic. The idea of states attempting to secede from the union is mind blowing. We know our government is faulty and far from flawless... but in comparison to others, we find it to be the strongest. We defend such a government, yet there are states that want to withdraw from it! I would actually like to look into this topic a little more, so I can understand all factors in the state's decisions!
Bryan Pregon

Children Exposed to Nicotine in Utero Have Lower Reading Scores | SciTech Daily - 1 views

  •  
    Interesting that they assume nicotene does this. 20% lower scores is pretty concrete results though.
  • ...4 more comments...
  •  
    I would like to see this put to test in AL or Council Bluffs and see if it is still accurate.
  •  
    Interesting
  •  
    It was not as surprising to me that these tests have happened. To me being exposed to nicotine while they are still in the developing process is very harmful. I don't think mothers should ever expose babies to that, if they want them to have a brighter future.
  •  
    if they were exposed to marijuana the would have had better reading scores
  •  
    I don't find this surprising. Nicotine is a known mutagen, so I think it's actually foolish to assume that it won't affect fetuses which are exposed to it. It will be interesting to see if this study actually gets any media attention, though. Unfortunately, I doubt it will. People, especially Americans, are usually content to overlook any negative consequences to their actions.
  •  
    A quick google search for the effects of nicotine on fetuses came up with a number of medical journals on the subject. Research into this subject has been done at last as far back as 1996, and smoking cigarettes during pregnancy is documented to have a large number of possible adverse outcomes even worse than poor reading skills, including spontaneous abortion, stillbirth, and sudden infant death syndrome. Here's a link to an article from the Oxford Journal on the subject. http://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/content/116/2/364.full
melissamartinez

Nazi essay assignment teacher placed on leave by New York school district - 1 views

  •  
    Wrong.
  • ...6 more comments...
  •  
    If my teacher asked me to write that essay I would refuse too. That is not something they should have to be writing about. She could have at least given them the option to choose either that Jews are bad or Nazis are bad so it didn't look as bad for her.
  •  
    This is wrong for the teacher to assign something that may offend someones religion.
  •  
    Couldn't she just be trying to open the children's mind to a different point of view? Giving them a life lesson, that there's always two sides to every story. Not necessarily trying to offend anyone.
  •  
    Teachers have kids write essays from different aspects and point of views all the time to try to get them to open their mind about new things. The teacher just should have anticipated that people may get offended with a topic like that.
  •  
    Maybe she shouldn't have picked a topic that pushes the envelope so much. I don't know, it just seems like it could be really touchy, like it kind of crosses the line.
  •  
    She should have been aware that some people may reject the assignment when she asked them to write about it! For some people it's a sore subject so I don't think they should necessarily have to write about it if they don't want too.
  •  
    That is a serious topic for students.. It would personally be uncomfortable for me to write an essay for that.
  •  
    I feel that the idea behind the assignment wasn't to necessarily portray that the teacher thought, and wanted the class to think, Jewish people as being evil but I feel that it is what ended up happening. The teacher could have picked hundreds of different essay topics ranging from abortion to zero tolerance polices that would have allowed students to write persuasively and not specify any one group in particular.
xolson974

Obama to huddle with Democrats on protecting his signature health care law - 13 views

  •  
    President Obama will meet behind closed doors Wednesday morning with congressional Democrats to map out a strategy to defend the Affordable Care Act and other health care policies - the very day Republicans will begin debate on getting rid of the sweeping 2010 health-care law.
  • ...7 more comments...
  •  
    Obamacare has been sometimes helpful but it has also crashed our country.
  •  
    What exactly did it do to "crash" our country, and how did it do so?
  •  
    I agree with Landon, in many ways, Obamacare has crashed our country, but it is always to look at the solutions to our problems, our options, and most importantly, look optimistically at the ways Obamacare has helped us. I think a big one is children can now stay on their parents' insurance until age 26. It has helped 5.7 million young adults over the past five years!
  •  
    they meet on how to defend the act and how to help it protect other forms of people.
  •  
    "Other executive actions, including those providing new safeguards for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans and curbing greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change, could also come under fire" this in addition to obamacare being repealed does not make much sense to me. Along with the anti abortion deal. It seems like this is less of a "whats best for america" situation and more of a " erase obama and his administration" kind of deal. not a fan
  •  
    I agree with Landon, and Jamie. In many ways obamOcare has helped us, but it hasn't in others.
  •  
    Obamacare has done nothing but ruin the country by raising the price of healthcare, Obamacare should be removed and let healthcare actually be affordable.
  •  
    Obamacare has done nothing for us. Prices are through the roof. its not affordable at all. You cant keep your health insurance company. They tell you who you have. Drugs are more expensive. We need a full repeal and replace!
  •  
    Maybe Obamacare has ruined things in our country but there is also a lot of positive things it has done.
Emmalee Adams

Twins found dead in trunk - 9 views

  •  
    There are plenty of other ways to deal with an unexpected/unwanted pregnancy. Several things in this case just don't add up; did she really think no one would notice that her "baby bump" just went away, and there were no babies? How could she kill not one, but two of her own newborn children? She just carried them around for nine months...and she couldn't think of a better option such as adoption, giving birth at a hospital and then deciding she should drop them off at a safe haven, or if she really didn't want children, she could have had an abortion, though it is pretty much the same as what she did now, she wouldn't have given her children nine months to develop and live...it's a tricky situation.
Bryan Pregon

Fact check: 1964 law does not create religious exemption from masks - 17 views

  •  
    People shouldn't be using religion as an excuse not to wear a mask unless they prove that their religion does, in fact, say no masks.
  • ...18 more comments...
  •  
    I think it should be up to yourself to decide whether or not you want to wear a mask.
  •  
    Though I respect the foundation and practice of religion I don't think that it should be used to put lives as risk by not wearing your mask in public and potentially exposing tons of people to the virus.
  •  
    I think religion could be a factor, but they shouldn't use it when it comes to risking other people's health in public and exposing others and yourself; If they are going off of religion itself and not having anything to prove that masks are against their religion. It is important to be respectful and polite to others in public by wearing a mask.
  •  
    i think everybody should wear mask.
  •  
    I think that everyone should have to wear a mask not just to protect yourself but other people as well. Religion should not be a factor in wearing a mask and keeping people safe in the long run. Not wearing a mask is selfish and could harm other people when around other people it should be a polite common courtesy.
  •  
    I think everyone should wear a mask. You could spread covid and harm others because of your decision not to wear one.
  •  
    I think it should be up to you if you want to wear a mask or not.
  •  
    Wearing a mask should be an option, no one is forced, but people should consider other's health.
  •  
    I agree with oli; people should not be using religion as an excuse to not wear a mask unless they can prove their religion does not allow masks. That is disrespectful and selfish to use religion as an excuse if you cannot prove your religion does not allow it. Honestly, everybody should wear a mask it's not that hard, we're all going through the pandemic together just because you think it's too uncomfortable shows your unwillingness to consider others well beings.
  •  
    Everyone should wear a mask, not only to protect themselves but others too. Not wearing a mask is incredibly selfish. Unless they can actually prove it is against their Religion to wear a mask, then they should be wearing one.
  •  
    everybody should wear a mask. if you wear mask, it's law risk to get corona.
  •  
    I think people shouldn't use religion to get out of wearing a mask. The mask itself is not to protect yourself, it's to protect the ones nearby. It's just common courtesy.
  •  
    Protecting your religious rights is important but you have to be considerate of everyone else as well especially in a time of panic global issue.
  •  
    I believe wearing masks should be one's choice if they want to or not because at the end of the day it's their body their choice and if you say people should have to wear one in the safety of others than many other laws should be revoked like the Rowe vs wade because abortion is killing another human being bc its an inconvenience to the mother so someone should not have to wear a mask because its an inconvenience to them
  •  
    I think that If we all are required to wear masks, then even if you are religious, you should too. You shouldn't use your religious views as an excuse to not wear it. We are all required, so we all are going to. I understand where you should be able to choose on if you want to wear one or not, and I'm all for that, but until they say it's your choice, then you should be following the rules and wearing a mask, for the safety of the people that could get really sick from catching the virus.
  •  
    I think religion should not be a reason to not wear a mask. How do religion and a mask relate?
  •  
    I think the fact that masks are required for our health shouldn't be an issue with a religion they are both used for a different reasons which both are important.
  •  
    I think it should be up to yourself to decide whether or not you want to wear a mask.
  •  
    Wearing masks not only helps you but others around you. It shouldn't be up to your religion to keep others safe. This is a world wide pandemic, why is wearing a mask that big of a deal. Including when it comes to the conversation of religion.
  •  
    I think people should just wear masks for the safety of them and others, I get it sucks, but it would suck more if someone was dying because you didn't wear your mask, or even worse if you were dying because you didn't wear it.
‹ Previous 21 - 35 of 35
Showing 20 items per page