Roe vs Wade Overturned by US Supreme Court!

by Simon 173 Replies latest social current

• 

  Sea Breeze

  The USA Constitution has a bias against majority popular vote rule at the federal level

  And that is because we are and have always been a REPUBLIC. A pure democracy results in tyranny of the masses. Greek history 101.

  By contrast, the ancient Romans formed one of the most famous republics in history, which the Founding Fathers of the United States, such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, took a great deal of inspiration from.

  The Roman republic was considered a major upgrade to what had existed earlier: monarchy or kings’ rule.

  Roman citizens, rich and poor alike, were involved in how their government worked by voting for representatives, who would rule on their behalf.

  But this abortion issue has nothing to do with our form of government. The Supreme court simply returned power to the states and over turned a morally repugnant position that made murdering babies a constitutional right. Essentially they said that if you want to do it, then go through the legislatures..... the normal way of deciding if something is legal or not. The federal judicial branch is not going to make this a "constitutional right" since there is nothing about this issue in the US Constitution.
  
  And that is the right decision.
• 

  Simon

  So why don't we feel the same compassion about the pain of chimps? Or Gorillas? Why isn't the killing of them deemed murder? It should be - if you're going to make laws around the 'personhood' of a fetus, capacity to suffer being the deciding factor.

  Murder is a distinctly human crime. But I think most people are against the needless killing and avoidable suffering of animals. Sadly, not enough pay attention to cruel factory farming methods or the products they buy (such as those containing palm oil)
  
• 

  Fisherman

  The argument I’ve heard is the words “liberty and pursuit of happiness” in the constitution which is the grounds for gay marriage and everything else under the sun including abortion. Based on this premise, if applied to abortion, a human growing inside its mother has zero legal right to life and its mother has life and death power over it because it is attached to her body. The government can legislate that an embryo has rights and proscribe doctors from performing abortions( except to save the mother) because a doctor is not inside the woman’s body, he is standing on US soil when doing an abortion. —To circumvent the law, a woman could take an abortion pill then go to a doctor to save her life. Sadly though, if a woman wants her child inside her to die, there doesn’t seem to be anything than can be done. Uncle Sam washes his hands and wants nothing to do with abortion because people are not at liberty to take a human life according to the now interpretation of the Constitution, it is up to the State to legislate when killing is legal. —Ultimately, you can’t force a woman to have a baby grow inside her body. Or maybe the government can force her somehow? I wonder how this is going to play out.
• 

  LoveUniHateExams

  Do you think this is revenge from the patriarchy for #metoo movement and so on? The Depp/Heard judgement now this, things seems to be swinging the other way - er, no, I don't think so.

  Heard was shown in court to be a lying, manipulative bitch who was abusive to Depp herself.

  This current decision (scrapping Roe v Wade) gives each individual state a chance to decide what it wants to do re abortions. And that's called democracy, pal.

  If a woman in, say, Texas, wants an abortion then she'll need to travel to another state. I can't see a major problem here.

  Maybe all those rich celebrities crying over this decision can start an abortion charity - there's nothing stopping them doing this ...
  
  
• 

  nicolaou

  LUHE: This current decision (scrapping Roe v Wade) gives each individual state a chance to decide what it wants to do re abortions.

  It should be up to each individual woman to decide what she wants to do re abortions.
• 

  Sea Breeze

  It should be up to each individual woman to decide what she wants to do re abortions, with her own body.

  
  
• 

  TonusOH

  The argument I’ve heard is the words “liberty and pursuit of happiness” in the constitution which is the grounds for gay marriage and everything else under the sun including abortion.

  The freedom to live your life as you choose is an important protection that the Constitution was meant to protect, with the understanding that your decisions did not impact others in a way that was unfair or unjust. Many of our civil rights, including those which protect gays, are codified into law (or added as amendments) because they were not clearly delineated in the Constitution. Gay marriage has been left to the states to decide, in the same way that abortion will be now. That is how it works, ideally.

  To me, the issue around abortion is the fact that you are ending a life, and that should never be done lightly. If there is a question of the life/safety of the mother, that strikes me as the one thing that would be a clear priority. The issues of body autonomy and circumstances of the pregnancy should be secondary to that. We should first consider that to kill a baby that is viable is effectively murder, or I'd want to hear a good reason that it would not be. We can work our way back from there, but that should be the start point: do we value human life, or don't we?
  
• 

  Simon

  Ultimately, you can’t force a woman to have a baby grow inside her body. Or maybe the government can force her somehow? I wonder how this is going to play out.

  No one is advocating for forced insemination. This is a straw-man.

  As you say, there are morning-after pills. Why not take one of those?

  A significant number of abortions appear to be dumb people who need better education, so the fault can again be put at the feet of the democrats as it's their teachers unions once again failing kids and causing major issues in society. Most problems have an arrow pointing directly back to them.
  
  
• 

  Simon

  It should be up to each individual woman to decide what she wants to do re abortions.

  Why? And for how long?

  There has to be limits, unless you are OK with a 9 month old human being executed.

  Two people make a baby. Two people should have a say in what happens if it was consensual.
  
• 

  road to nowhere

  "Liberty and pursuit of happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

  The Constitution is the basic framework of governance. The Bill of Rights is the first 10 amendments.

  There is an overreaction on both sides right now. The court decision is that it is not the federal governments job to make said law, it is each states.

  The way polls are worded affect the outcome. The opinion (IMO) in the country is saving the life of mothers is important, but partial birth procedures are wrong.