Mitt Romney Repeats Call for Overturning Roe v. Wade

[CausingPAIN]

“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.

 

[kwc57]

Don't tell me, let me guess.......you're a statist, not a states rights person?

 

[Papageorgio]

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.

 

[CausingPAIN]

Don't tell me, let me guess.......you're a statist, not a states rights person?

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. State /Fed

 

[Katzndogz]

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.

 

[CausingPAIN]

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.

Fed Vs state

 

[jillian]

Don't tell me, let me guess.......you're a statist, not a states rights person?

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.

 

[jillian]

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.

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.

 

[California Girl]

Don't tell me, let me guess.......you're a statist, not a states rights person?

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. State /Fed

I see you prefer hyperbolic bullshit to substance and reason.. Good to know.

 

[Navy1960]

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.

 

[CausingPAIN]

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.

So whatever we do at a state level is ok?
So outlaw all abortions in a state by that state. Great! Let do that, was this even an 80% vote to do just that? So the other 20% who want have an abortion will just have to go to California or /New York to kill a life? So what has changed? Btw.. Women must live under a man’s rule over what they are allowed to do in the first place. As I pull-out and masturbate my finish to kill life on a regular basis all over financial obligations all the time. And I can’t look at any more stretch marks on my bitch either.

 

[CausingPAIN]

Don't tell me, let me guess.......you're a statist, not a states rights person?

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. State /Fed

I see you prefer hyperbolic bullshit to substance and reason.. Good to know.

Some state's are so anti-abortion, they have affectively closed all access in a few states. With Roe v. Wade as a law of the land, so what they say, we have other ways to go around this law anyhow. These state's will go after the pill next, it a pattern and gods involved. So what are you saying? Btw. States can “choose” what to enforce and do! I want to see how many restriction can be placed on women for their own protection on making choices too.

 

[CausingPAIN]

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.

You are correct, So that state can outlaw it in there state. Great! So off to a state that will provide me the kill a life service. Great 68th the little shit! So what has been accomplished by overturning the law?

Gas money? Plan Ride?

Little shit dead, and I say mom can kill it anytime still it pop out the old fashion way. But if I was a women I would want a total stay the fuck out of my business law. Again this is too much power and women can’t handle it! And I am here to help in any way to get the job done!

 

[Papageorgio]

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.

So whatever we do at a state level is ok?
So outlaw all abortions in a state by that state. Great! Let do that, was this even an 80% vote to do just that? So the other 20% who want have an abortion will just have to go to California or /New York to kill a life? So what has changed? Btw.. Women must live under a man’s rule over what they are allowed to do in the first place. As I pull-out and masturbate my finish to kill life on a regular basis all over financial obligations all the time. And I can’t look at any more stretch marks on my bitch either.

That was the way the founders of this country meant it to be. Just as California allows marijuana and the outlets to sell, the federal government has stepped in and stopped the sales. Just as Arizona is not allowed to enforce their immigration reform. If you don't like the state laws, move to the next state. I don't agree with many states and their laws but it is their choice to make them. Now if you think nothing has changed then why would you even care?

The rest of your post was pure stupidity.

 

[Katzndogz]

Move to another state or elect representatives that will change the law in your state. This is the way it was supposed to be all along.

Roe would NOT be passed today. Roe is far too limiting, finding no right at all to an abortion in the last trimester mucn less partial birth abortion or post birth abortion.

 

[CausingPAIN]

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.

So whatever we do at a state level is ok?
So outlaw all abortions in a state by that state. Great! Let do that, was this even an 80% vote to do just that? So the other 20% who want have an abortion will just have to go to California or /New York to kill a life? So what has changed? Btw.. Women must live under a man’s rule over what they are allowed to do in the first place. As I pull-out and masturbate my finish to kill life on a regular basis all over financial obligations all the time. And I can’t look at any more stretch marks on my bitch either.

That was the way the founders of this country meant it to be. Just as California allows marijuana and the outlets to sell, the federal government has stepped in and stopped the sales. Just as Arizona is not allowed to enforce their immigration reform. If you don't like the state laws, move to the next state. I don't agree with many states and their laws but it is their choice to make them. Now if you think nothing has changed then why would you even care?

The rest of your post was pure stupidity.

Again what has changed? Fine I live in a state that tells me no! When I want a yes! I go next door to a yes state? Again what has changed? Service is still available next door.
I know of no states that are 100% No or Yes. Maybe on an issue you can get fixed poll showing 80% projections. But in most voting over the whole state, they turn out to be a 65/35 vote mostly. So what will change with the overturning? Lost some personal freedom of choice in that state ok!

 

[Greenbeard]

Don't tell me, let me guess.......you're a statist, not a states rights person?

Those certainly aren't mutually exclusive. If the "states' rights" position here is that the individual right to privacy should be subject to the whims and control of a state, that's pretty much the definition of statism.

 

[CausingPAIN]

Don't tell me, let me guess.......you're a statist, not a states rights person?

Those certainly aren't mutually exclusive. If the "states' rights" position here is that the individual right to privacy should be subject to the whims and control of a state, that's pretty much the definition of statism.

On this issue I say we need to support the sovereignty of each state.
I want to be free to live in four states 24/7. Utah to get my 5 wives, Two are real
young and are part of the family already. Gee got to fit in! South Dakota, so I can control women with fear of keeping them there with kids, Don’t need to make support payments too. Florida, You can sue till your blue, don’t need to pay! And Montana for TAXES! The four way “WIN” I say! Yes State know what’s best! Does someone have a better plan?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Don't tell me, let me guess.......you're a statist, not a states rights person?

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.

actually dear the states have any and all power not enumerated in the Constitution specificially for the Federal government.
Its called Federalism. Why not read the Constitution before you comment??

James Madison:
"The government of the United States [federal government] is a definite government confined to specified objects [powers]. It is not like state governments, whose powers are more general. CHARITY IS NO PART OF THE LEGISLATIVE DUTY OF THE GOVERNMENT."

Thomas Jefferson:

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."