Mitt Romney Repeats Call for Overturning Roe v. Wade

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by CausingPAIN, Apr 25, 2012.

  1. CausingPAIN
    Offline

    CausingPAIN BANNED

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,395
    Thanks Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    I'm not sure? Can you help?
    Ratings:
    +78
    “I would love the Supreme Court to say, ‘Let’s send this back to the states,’” he said. “Rather than having a federal mandate through Roe v. Wade, let the states again consider this issue state by state.”

    Mitt Romney Repeats Call for Overturning Roe v. Wade | LifeNews.com
    -----------------------------------------------------
    -----------------------------------------------------
    That’s great!, This will not stop or slow down abortions by a long shot! My understanding is to stop all abortions! How does this help in anyway?
    As a man, I can say restrictions on and over all women’s from making any choice over their own lives is a positive step forward and must be bannered as a best practice standard. As I feel the GOP can meet this goal with robust style.
    :confused:
     
  2. kwc57
    Offline

    kwc57 BOHICA Obama

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,154
    Thanks Received:
    2,301
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Oklahoma City, OK
    Ratings:
    +2,788
    Don't tell me, let me guess.......you're a statist, not a states rights person?
     
  3. Papageorgio
    Offline

    Papageorgio The Ultimate Winner

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    25,568
    Thanks Received:
    3,881
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Here
    Ratings:
    +9,445
    Whether you are pro abortion or anti abortion, sending the decision making back to the states is the best idea. States need to have their powers restored, just as with drug laws and illegal immigration and other such laws. Theses are state issues not federal.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. CausingPAIN
    Offline

    CausingPAIN BANNED

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,395
    Thanks Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    I'm not sure? Can you help?
    Ratings:
    +78
    :confused: Nothing on this issue will ever stop abortions ever. All you can do is make it harder to access a medical service. So let's outlaw the pill. Lets review this issue again after that new law is enacted.:lol::lol::lol::lol: :confused: State /Fed :confused::lol::lol:
     
  5. Katzndogz
    Offline

    Katzndogz Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    65,659
    Thanks Received:
    7,418
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +8,337
    The purpose of overturning Roe, which was terrible law to begin with, isn't to end abortions. Merely to give states the right and power to regulate abortions.
     
  6. CausingPAIN
    Offline

    CausingPAIN BANNED

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,395
    Thanks Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    I'm not sure? Can you help?
    Ratings:
    +78
    Fed :cuckoo: Vs state :cuckoo: :lame2: :rofl:
     
  7. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,551
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    the states rights issue was determined when we moved from the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution.

    And any question over it should have ended with the civil war.
     
  8. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,551
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    the Constitution takes precedence over State Law. The right of a woman to exercise dominion over her own body (at least until a certain point in pregnancy) was determined by Roe v Wade. The States are not allowed to give fewer constitutional protections than the Feds.

    So no... it shouldn't and can't go back to the States.

    The States were the ones who tried (and are trying) to abrogate women's rights in the first place.
     
  9. California Girl
    Offline

    California Girl BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    50,337
    Thanks Received:
    8,960
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +8,965
    I see you prefer hyperbolic bullshit to substance and reason.. Good to know.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    Planned Parenthood v. Casey

    Held:
    (Written by O’Connor, Kennedy, and Souter; joined in part by Stevens and Blackmun)
    Liberty finds no refuge in a jurisprudence of doubt. Yet, 19 years after our holding that the Constitution protects a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy in its early stages, Roe v. Wade (1973), that definition of liberty is still questioned.
    We are led to conclude this: the essential holding of Roe v. Wade should be retained and once again reaffirmed, in three parts:
    The right of the woman to choose to have an abortion before viability.
    The State may restrict abortions after fetal viability if the law contains exceptions for pregnancies which endanger the woman’s health.
    The State has legitimate interests from the outset of the pregnancy in protecting the health of the woman and the life of the fetus that may become a child.

    Sandra Day O`Connor on Abortion

    Seems to me the state part of this issue has already been settled.
     

Share This Page