Supreme Court Agenda Dominated By Abortion, Gun Rights, Religion Issues

The U.S. Supreme Court begins a new term, one that will be dominated by issues such as abortion, gun rights and religion. NBC News’ Pete Williams breaks down what’s on the docket and how the rulings could impact the country. 

» Subscribe to NBC News: http://nbcnews.to/SubscribeToNBC
» Watch more NBC video: http://bit.ly/MoreNBCNews

NBC News Digital is a collection of innovative and powerful news brands that deliver compelling, diverse and engaging news stories. NBC News Digital features NBCNews.com, MSNBC.com, TODAY.com, Nightly News, Meet the Press, Dateline, and the existing apps and digital extensions of these respective properties. We deliver the best in breaking news, live video coverage, original journalism and segments from your favorite NBC News Shows.

Connect with NBC News Online!
NBC News App: https://smart.link/5d0cd9df61b80
Breaking News Alerts: https://link.nbcnews.com/join/5cj/breaking-news-signup?cid=sm_npd_nn_yt_bn-clip_190621
Visit NBCNews.Com: http://nbcnews.to/ReadNBC
Find NBC News on Facebook: http://nbcnews.to/LikeNBC
Follow NBC News on Twitter: http://nbcnews.to/FollowNBC

#SupremeCourt #SCOTUS #Abortion

source

Author: avnblogfeed

ANGELHOUSE © 2009 - 2022 | HOSTING BY PHILLYFINEST369 SERVER STATS| & THE IDIOTS ROBOT AND CONTROL INC. |(RSS FEED MODULE)| ALL YOUTUBE VIDEOS IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF GOOGLE INC. THE YOUTUBE CHANNELS AND BLOG FEEDS IS MANAGED BY THERE RIGHTFUL OWNERS (AVNBLOGFEED.COM)

35 thoughts on “Supreme Court Agenda Dominated By Abortion, Gun Rights, Religion Issues

  1. SHE SAYS ITS NO BODYS BISSNESS WHAT SHE DOES WITH HER BODY WHY DOES THE BABY NOT HAVE A SAY ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

  2. Never again do I want these pro abortion government officials and media say "Think about the children". Total hypocricy. Jen Psaki is is a great example.

  3. At risk of enraging many, let's put the morality of the matter aside. Let's focus on the health implications for a second.

    Consider this: people are going to get abortions, regardless how you feel about the matter. Abortions will be done in a unsafe manner/setting if it's criminalized. This puts an untold number of people at risk, that would otherwise likely be alright. The fetus/child (however you view it) is going to die anyway in that situation.

    Drugs are bad mmk, but we'll never stop illicit drug use. The majority of the world views it as immoral or are indifferent. Needle exchange programs help prevent the spread of disease. I don't mean just the drug users, but to unsuspecting people as well.

    There's a saying, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Health, education, and safety should be the priorities.

  4. Religious laws of those who create in the holy spirit not aborting the spirit they create in. As they lead the masses to create in the holy spirit or abortion. Eden is the spirit in Woman The Tree of Life.

  5. Joe Biden just authorized federally funded medical clinics, to be able to refer women to get their fetuses ripped out with some taco tongs.
    That must mean he is a racist that practices eugenics. The Democratic party has became the party of George Soros.

  6. Literally the most defenseless victim possible, an unborn child, being executed by those obliged to protect them most: the mother and a doctor. That doesn't mean it should necessarily be banned ( lots of evil speech is protected by the first amendment and for good reason) but it IS evil.

  7. So sad to witness the cult of ignorant haters infiltrate society's governing organizations and swindled into SCOTUS. Our noble motto of "E Pluribus Unum" has been degraded into "Guns, God, Gays, and Gynies".

  8. Oh, how convenient. The freshly installed partisan, right-wing dominated court salivating over the docket of softball-sized conservative wedge issues ready for a reversal. The court of activists was chosen by politicians for partisan-driven mandates. The right-wing court can spend the rest of their lives explaining how that they would never consider a ruling based on experience, personal bias, politics, or fraternity. If it's all law, how can you come to different opinions that run along political boundaries or have dissent amongst them?

Comments are closed.