CDZ Should Roe v. Wade be overturned?

[Monk-Eye]

" Congressional Thumpers Demand That Abortion Be Legal For Adultery "

* Self Ownership Is An Individual Responsibility Not A Dictate From States *

It was a bad law, with bad arguments. Even the woman who was 'Roe' in the case later changed her mind. The liberal view, that it should allow a woman to abort for medical reasons and rape should be allowed, whatever the reasoning for banning it otherwise, and it should be Federally enforced, just to avoid the faddism and pogroms that will sweep a given political election cycle at any time and place. The terms 'constitutional' and 'unconstitutional' don't have any real meaning any more outside of sloganeering and propaganda, judges decide law on personal whims and political biases these days, not legal precedent and constitutionality, so no need to keep the pretenses.

Below are quotations from Numbers 5 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers+5&version=KJV :
27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.
28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed.
29 This is the law of jealousies, when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled;

Clearly , inducing miscarriage when the wife was carrying a child that resulted from adultery is acceptable to gawd ; and , yet , is a raped woman not defiled ?

The meaning of an after life , of a chance for eternal life , for being born again , for reincarnated , etc . are all metaphors with a literal meaning of passing on ones genetic identity through ones offspring .

Thus , children of rape provide an opportunity for a degenerate to pass on their genetic identity , and from the perspective of those competing fairly , fuck them !

Also medical reasons include fetal abnormalities that do not become evident until the second or third trimester and what do they have to do with fitness for genetic continuance and what is the impetus of a state to dictate an undo burden onto individuals who may as well try again in another month ?

The principle striving against abortion by the religious reich is used to validate " delusions for grandeur " and " will to power " to somehow establish that they will be immortal and wake up from a dirt nap .

The religious reich are anti-nomian heretics ; and , few understand the depth of that statement .

 

[Old Man Grumbles]

Monk-Eye, I didn't explain the intent of Blackmum's statement for the simple reason we are on the same page. So, why preach to the choir?

lol, No you do not understand my position on abortion sir. You may be mocking others standing on that rock, but I'm not up there. I have spent all my adult years, and I'm near 60, wrestling with my feelings and beliefs on abortion. Once, in my 20's, I was strongly anti-abortion for any reason. Yet, that was then and this is now. Like many subjects as we age we become more mature and revisit our beliefs for re-examination based on our life experiences (or at least we should). I have done this re-examination on abortion more than once and have views that do not match my views in my 20's.

So, respectfully, you don't understand my position. I'd be glad to tell you and discuss it anytime you'd be interested. We can do it in a public thread or in a private conversation, whichever you choose.

 

[jwoodie]

" States Of Citizens For Citizens "

* Political Strain Of Logic *

Can you to show where the right to terminate a pregnancy is spelled out in the 14th Amendment? It's extremely unlikely that you can. And falling back the the SCOTUS decision in Roe v Wade doesn't apply since it was law made by the court. I'll wait over here while you try.

Blackmun wrote the supporting majority opinion for roe v wade , what do you believe he meant by the following statement ?
"Logically, of course, a legitimate state interest in this area need not stand or fall on acceptance of the belief that life begins at conception or at some other point prior to live birth."

Can you show where a fetus is a citizen , or that a fetus has been born that is a requirement for equal protection ?

Can you show where a fetus has any constitutional entitlements , period , without meeting a criteria of birth for equal protection as per us 14th amendment ?

The decision of roe v wade deduced that post viability the standard of parturition was relative and states may proscribe abortion in the third trimester .


* Seeking Self Validation of Literally Waking Up From A Dirt Nap By Bequeathing Affliction *

Flatulence on this issue from the anti-nomain hypocrites of the religious reich arises in the form of a delusion that an implementation of its histrionic demands will somehow validates its delusions that an after life , a chance for eternal life , being born again , reincarnation are all literal rather than metaphors with a literal meaning of passing on ones genetic identity through ones offspring .

The third trimester psychopathic villain is used as a histrionic excuse by the religious reich to outlaw third trimester and second trimester abortions that occur due to fitness , where individuals become challenged with fetal abnormalities , genetic survival and quality of life .

Individuals are responsible for their own genetic continuance , not a state ; a state is concerned with issuing a retort or reprise for a violation of rights entitled to citizens or to those entitled to equal protection for having met a minimum requirement that is birth .

Settled law, eh?

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Better Than Anything The Ant-Choice Will Ever Have Dream Up "

* Fair And Balanced Judicial Work *

Settled law, eh?

The decision of roe v wade is consistent with us constitution and wavers only in the technical element of natural post viability as a relative standard for parturition ( live birth ) rather than parturition itself as the determining factor for the onset of state interests .

It is not as though the anti-choice pundit has anything to gain by an emphasis on the correct interpretation ,

Simple facts are that during second and third trimesters is when health and fitness become relevant issues , and individual liberty to determine the providence of their own future trumps the arrogance of a fools espousing tyranny by majority through a despotic state .

Blackmun, Roe V. Wade, "Logically, of course, a legitimate state interest in this area need not stand or fall on acceptance of the belief that life begins at conception or at some other point prior to live birth."

 

[JoeB131]

Sorry, but moving power further away from me is not my idea of making government better.

Yeah, here's the funny thing. Here in Chicago, we have an alderman who we all knew was a crook since the 1980's, and he is FINALLY only going down now because that mean old Federal Government you hate got the goods on him. The thing about that "farther away" government is that it gets more national attention and has a higher level of professionalism.

Nice job ignoring my critique on studies with a worthless statement.

You mean pointing out the obvious that medical care is risky even with quality control, what would it be like if you had amateurs doing it?

So you really think women are going to get a higher level of care getting an abortion on someone's kitchen table?

The handmaidens tale exaggeration is one of the dumbest concepts out there. It just give progressives a made up boogeyman they can point to while avoiding any actual critical thinking on a topic.

Obviously, you've never read Margaret Atwood's novel, which kind of predicted the rise of the crazy religious right.

 

[martybegan]

Sorry, but moving power further away from me is not my idea of making government better.

Yeah, here's the funny thing. Here in Chicago, we have an alderman who we all knew was a crook since the 1980's, and he is FINALLY only going down now because that mean old Federal Government you hate got the goods on him. The thing about that "farther away" government is that it gets more national attention and has a higher level of professionalism.

Nice job ignoring my critique on studies with a worthless statement.

You mean pointing out the obvious that medical care is risky even with quality control, what would it be like if you had amateurs doing it?

So you really think women are going to get a higher level of care getting an abortion on someone's kitchen table?

The handmaidens tale exaggeration is one of the dumbest concepts out there. It just give progressives a made up boogeyman they can point to while avoiding any actual critical thinking on a topic.

Obviously, you've never read Margaret Atwood's novel, which kind of predicted the rise of the crazy religious right.

And less responsible to the people who voted for them. You are an authoritarian, so to you this is a feature, not a bug.

strawmen arguments.


I had to read it in high school. Interesting from a dystopian sci-fi perspective, but not anything we are seeing now.

 

[JoeB131]

And less responsible to the people who voted for them. You are an authoritarian, so to you this is a feature, not a bug.

Let's look at that. Let's compare my Congressman, who is regularly in the news, holds lots of events, and is very open because he has a spotlight on him all the time.

As opposed to my former state representative, the hideous woman with the wart on her face, who I only heard from once every two years when she was trying to get re-elected. Because my name still shows up on Republican Mailing Lists, my mail is stuffed with her shit every two years. But the rest of the time, I had no real idea what she was doing or what she was up to, other than she was supporting whatever awful thing Rauner wanted to do to working folks in this state.

Nope... if anything, my Congressman is MORE responsible, because he's under more scrutiny. And he's voting on more important stuff.

I had to read it in high school. Interesting from a dystopian sci-fi perspective, but not anything we are seeing now.

So you were in HS in the 1990's? Or the 2000s? Because the book wasn't published until 1985, and I doubt it made any school reading list until a lot later.

Sorry, man, the religious crazies have taken over the GOP, without a doubt. We are talking about throwing women IN JAIL for having abortions. This is something they didn't even do before Roe.

 

[martybegan]

And less responsible to the people who voted for them. You are an authoritarian, so to you this is a feature, not a bug.

Let's look at that. Let's compare my Congressman, who is regularly in the news, holds lots of events, and is very open because he has a spotlight on him all the time.

As opposed to my former state representative, the hideous woman with the wart on her face, who I only heard from once every two years when she was trying to get re-elected. Because my name still shows up on Republican Mailing Lists, my mail is stuffed with her shit every two years. But the rest of the time, I had no real idea what she was doing or what she was up to, other than she was supporting whatever awful thing Rauner wanted to do to working folks in this state.

Nope... if anything, my Congressman is MORE responsible, because he's under more scrutiny. And he's voting on more important stuff.

I had to read it in high school. Interesting from a dystopian sci-fi perspective, but not anything we are seeing now.

So you were in HS in the 1990's? Or the 2000s? Because the book wasn't published until 1985, and I doubt it made any school reading list until a lot later.

Sorry, man, the religious crazies have taken over the GOP, without a doubt. We are talking about throwing women IN JAIL for having abortions. This is something they didn't even do before Roe.

He should only be voting on stuff mandated to the feds in the Constitution. That is part of the problem.

Graduated high school in the early 90's, college in the late 90's.

If you are referring to the Alabama law, it specifically denies the ability to charge a women for having abortions, it goes after the doctors.

 

[JoeB131]

He should only be voting on stuff mandated to the feds in the Constitution. That is part of the problem.

It's only a problem for you. I kind of like civilization that expands beyond the limited thinking of barely literate slave owners.

If you are referring to the Alabama law, it specifically denies the ability to charge a women for having abortions, it goes after the doctors.

No, I was referring to the Missouri and Georgia laws, which prosecute women. Even with Roe in place, Indiana still prosecuted a woman named Purvi Patel for a self-induced abortion.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" General Conditioning From Hostility"

* Foundry From Opportunists *

Monk-Eye, I didn't explain the intent of Blackmum's statement for the simple reason we are on the same page. So, why preach to the choir?

Well , that is good to know , because it is rare for me to recall those willing to express agreement with that position , as silence does not equate with affirmation .

The wikipedia will not include the blackmun quotation , or the provided interpretation , even with a social science research network publication reference , based upon a " first to publish rule " ( not to be ) ; yet law reviews have not picked up on the implications of the subtle mention and choose to focus on the more contentious topic of " wright to privacy " - https://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep410/usrep410113/usrep410113.pdf .

After a number of years without finding corroboration , and as well many years ago , a us copyright was filed as a thesis and to document the perspective .

* Self Ownership *

lol, No you do not understand my position on abortion sir. You may be mocking others standing on that rock, but I'm not up there.

Most opposed to abortion promote that us 14th amendment does not provide a wright to privacy , therefore the conclusion of anti-choice was drawn and the counter argument provided .

* Recovery From Wear *

I have spent all my adult years, and I'm near 60, wrestling with my feelings and beliefs on abortion. Once, in my 20's, I was strongly anti-abortion for any reason. Yet, that was then and this is now. Like many subjects as we age we become more mature and revisit our beliefs for re-examination based on our life experiences (or at least we should). I have done this re-examination on abortion more than once and have views that do not match my views in my 20's.

Being in my mid 50s now , my opinions of many things have changed since youth .

* Not A Coward Censoring Others With Ignore Status *

So, respectfully, you don't understand my position. I'd be glad to tell you and discuss it anytime you'd be interested. We can do it in a public thread or in a private conversation, whichever you choose.

It is likely that i have reviewed most positions on the issue , though i am always open to novel ideas .

As mostly a pro-choice republican , another point of issue for me is that between 0% and 200% of the poverty line have 75% of abortions and yet the anti-choice agenda cannot fathom that elective abortion staves off trillions in social costs and cultural degradation .

 

[Old Man Grumbles]

Most opposed to abortion promote that us 14th amendment does not provide a wright to privacy , therefore the conclusion of anti-choice was drawn and the counter argument provided .

While everyone knows that the US Constitution does not specifically list a right to privacy, those using this argument should carefully consider the decision of the court. The court stated that there were "zones of privacy" that had been created in the Constitution. I will call the unwritten right to privacy as "inferred privacy" for this post.

The Constitution does not list a right to privacy. The Court has held, however, that Bill of Rights protections of free speech, assembly, and religious exercise (First Amendment), along with freedom from forced quartering of troops (Third), unreasonable searches and seizures (Fourth), and forced self-incrimination (Fifth) create “zones of privacy.” Further, the Ninth Amendment’s protection of unenumerated rights could be said to protect privacy. These “zones,” the Court held, are places into which the government cannot unreasonably intrude. Roe claimed that the law robbed her of her right to privacy as protected by the combination of Bill of Rights amendments, and of her liberty as protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Roe v. Wade (1973) - Bill of Rights Institute

Now, lets carefully consider this. Should a future case get the court to conclude that the 14th Amendment does not provide an inferred right to privacy, where would this lead to when it comes to the other "zones of privacy"? Could, and would, government then attempt to remove other inferred rights to privacy to further it's own interests? It is certainly possible. In these tumultuous political and social times it would not be unreasonable to think so.

Remove any one zone of privacy and we open the door to eroding further zones, stripping us of our individual rights. Not something anyone would ever want to see happen.

It is likely that i have reviewed most positions on the issue , though i am always open to novel ideas .

I don't know that my position could be called novel. Over the years I have come to understand the impact being staunchly anti-abortion can have on the family dynamic. One of my sisters, at only 14 was impregnated by eldest sister's husband (now dead and gone) and the struggle my youngest sister went through in what action she should take in the matter. In the end after much soul searching she decided she could not go against her own beliefs so she had the child, but gave the child up for adoption (a closed adoption for everyone's sake) because she knew she could not properly raise a child being a child herself. Had she chosen abortion I don't know what I would have said to her.

After marrying my wife, I went through another time where I was brought to a point wherein I needed to evaluate my position. My step-daughter ("step" is an ugly word not used in our home - she is my daughter), who has only ever know me as her dad, was brutally sexually abused, raped, and tortured by my wife's live-in boyfriend at the time before we met (luckily for him he is safely sitting in the state prison doing 12 to life). What we went through emotionally during the justice system process (the police investigation, one mistrial with retrial, and now the still continuing appellate process) damn near destroyed us as a family. I came to somewhat understand what difficulty it must be for a victim of rape or incest, who became pregnant as a result for them to consider being compelled to carry to term. What right does anyone have to inflict even more emotional damage on a woman by outlawing abortion choice?

I am a Christian and I know what the Bible says, but after much prayer over the issue of abortion I've come to understand that on my judgment day I am prepared to be condemned by God for my stance. I do, however, believe that a woman be given ALL the information of alternatives that exist by whomever is counseling abortion (i.e. Planned Parenthood) and it be done with equal weight and NO pressure. I'm of the opinion this isn't done in this manner presently (and I would want the same standard applied with those counseling against abortion).

I consider it a decision I'm not qualified to make for any woman.

As mostly a pro-choice republican , another point of issue for me is that between 0% and 200% of the poverty line have 75% of abortions and yet the anti-choice agenda cannot fathom that elective abortion staves off trillions in social costs and cultural degradation .

I am ambivalent when it comes to this argument. Society must shoulder many burdens in maintaining the society. Putting, what seems to me, a monetary cost on the need for legal abortion is very unsettling. I'll be forthright and say that my biggest issue has been, and still is, is that I see a child created at the moment of conception. Yet, in my re-evaluations over my life I've come to know this choice is between the woman and God. It is the strongest privacy right that does exist.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Intimating Adversity "

* Guarded Future *

While everyone knows that the US Constitution does not specifically list a right to privacy, those using this argument should carefully consider the decision of the court. The court stated that there were "zones of privacy" that had been created in the Constitution. I will call the unwritten right to privacy as "inferred privacy" for this post.
Roe v. Wade (1973) - Bill of Rights Institute
Now, lets carefully consider this. Should a future case get the court to conclude that the 14th Amendment does not provide an inferred right to privacy, where would this lead to when it comes to the other "zones of privacy"? Could, and would, government then attempt to remove other inferred rights to privacy to further it's own interests? It is certainly possible. In these tumultuous political and social times it would not be unreasonable to think so.
Remove any one zone of privacy and we open the door to eroding further zones, stripping us of our individual rights. Not something anyone would ever want to see happen.

With certainty , a concern remains that though the judicial branch is more intellectual about civil liberties , it is only slightly more insulated from public whim than are the legislative and executive branches .

Nonetheless , should a state seek to outlaw abortion as a " zone of privacy " , it does so without a contingency that a fetus has constitutional protections until birth ( post viability considered ) , as a fetus is the private property of the mother until it is born upon which time the state is remanded to protect its civil liberties .

One ethical contention is that a law is valid where offenses against non violence principles occurs ; it is my position that abortion does not violate non violence principles , save after the onset of sentience when a physical capacity for cognitive objection exists , also noting that due process is required to remove a wright to life after one is born should a physical capacity for cognitive objection no longer exists .

Another note is that fetal protection laws are actually offenses against the mother , where elevated penalties can be levied for special circumstance as occurs with other offenses .


* Empathetic Sympathetic Qualities *

I don't know that my position could be called novel. Over the years I have come to understand the impact being staunchly anti-abortion can have on the family dynamic.
. . .
What we went through emotionally during the justice system process (the police investigation, one mistrial with retrial, and now the still continuing appellate process) damn near destroyed us as a family. I came to somewhat understand what difficulty it must be for a victim of rape or incest, who became pregnant as a result for them to consider being compelled to carry to term. What right does anyone have to inflict even more emotional damage on a woman by outlawing abortion choice?

Thank you for sharing those very difficult experiences , as they are certainly more relevant to many than ravings about legal technicalities .


* Passing Beyond Judgment

I am a Christian and I know what the Bible says, but after much prayer over the issue of abortion I've come to understand that on my judgment day I am prepared to be condemned by God for my stance.

Antinomianism - Wikipedia

Dominion theology - Wikipedia believes that demanding compliance with its ideology validates it ; however , they are in fact heretics to Sermon on the Mount - Wikipedia .

Two kingdoms doctrine - Wikipedia
Therefore, where temporal power presumes to prescribe laws for the soul, it encroaches upon God's government and only misleads and destroys souls. We desire to make this so clear that every one shall grasp it, and that the princes and bishops may see what fools they are when they seek to coerce the people with their laws and commandments into believing one thing or another.

Martin Luther - Wikipedia
He consistently rejected the idea of a Holy War, "as though our people were an army of Christians against the Turks, who were enemies of Christ. This is absolutely contrary to Christ's doctrine and name".[184] On the other hand, in keeping with his doctrine of the two kingdoms, Luther did support non-religious war against the Turks.[185] In 1526, he argued in Whether Soldiers can be in a State of Grace that national defence is reason for a just war.[186]


* Valid Support Methods *

I do, however, believe that a woman be given ALL the information of alternatives that exist by whomever is counseling abortion (i.e. Planned Parenthood) and it be done with equal weight and NO pressure. I'm of the opinion this isn't done in this manner presently (and I would want the same standard applied with those counseling against abortion).
I consider it a decision I'm not qualified to make for any woman.

Informed consent should be highly valued ; and , it is sufficient for documentation that a patient agree that an offer to purview prerequisite information did occur .


* Civic Consequence *

I am ambivalent when it comes to this argument. Society must shoulder many burdens in maintaining the society. Putting, what seems to me, a monetary cost on the need for legal abortion is very unsettling. I'll be forthright and say that my biggest issue has been, and still is, is that I see a child created at the moment of conception. Yet, in my re-evaluations over my life I've come to know this choice is between the woman and God. It is the strongest privacy right that does exist.

There should be a balance between necessary burden of a state and individual accountability .

Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act - Wikipedia
The bill's primary requirements and effects included the following:

• Ending welfare as an entitlement program;
• Requiring recipients to begin working after two years of receiving benefits;
• Placing a lifetime limit of five years on benefits paid by federal funds;
• Aiming to encourage two-parent families and discouraging out-of-wedlock births;
• Enhancing enforcement of child support; and
• Requiring state professional and occupational licenses to be withheld from undocumented immigrants.[24]

 

[Lesh]

Roe happened because women were dying...from back alley coat hanger abortions. Not wealthy women of course, They always had safe alternatives and used them judiciously.

end Roe and that's what we go back to.

Just a fact of life

 

[martybegan]

He should only be voting on stuff mandated to the feds in the Constitution. That is part of the problem.

It's only a problem for you. I kind of like civilization that expands beyond the limited thinking of barely literate slave owners.

If you are referring to the Alabama law, it specifically denies the ability to charge a women for having abortions, it goes after the doctors.

No, I was referring to the Missouri and Georgia laws, which prosecute women. Even with Roe in place, Indiana still prosecuted a woman named Purvi Patel for a self-induced abortion.

Then make a new Constitution, or amend the current one. Until then stop advocating end runs that suit your own political views.

That's up to Missouri and Georgia.

 

[jwoodie]

I kind of like civilization that expands beyond the limited thinking of barely literate slave owners.

Then you must be a monarchist.

P.S. Those "barely literate" slave owners gave us the greatest nation the world has ever seen. Why do you think everyone else wants to live here?

 

[martybegan]

Roe happened because women were dying...from back alley coat hanger abortions. Not wealthy women of course, They always had safe alternatives and used them judiciously.

end Roe and that's what we go back to.

Just a fact of life

Roe happened because the justices thought they would get a Clauswitzian resolution to the question via their made up judicial reasoning.

They were wrong, we are still fighting over the issue to this day.

 

[sartre play]

NO.

 

[MAGAman]

Yes...Even a lot of lefty lawyers agree that the decision is really bad law.

No serious lawyer supports it on a Constitutional basis.

If the implied right to privacy was taken seriously by leftists, Obamacare and Soviet Single Payer healthcare would not be considered as possibilities.

 

[M14 Shooter]

 

[Picaro]

" Congressional Thumpers Demand That Abortion Be Legal For Adultery "

* Self Ownership Is An Individual Responsibility Not A Dictate From States *

It was a bad law, with bad arguments. Even the woman who was 'Roe' in the case later changed her mind. The liberal view, that it should allow a woman to abort for medical reasons and rape should be allowed, whatever the reasoning for banning it otherwise, and it should be Federally enforced, just to avoid the faddism and pogroms that will sweep a given political election cycle at any time and place. The terms 'constitutional' and 'unconstitutional' don't have any real meaning any more outside of sloganeering and propaganda, judges decide law on personal whims and political biases these days, not legal precedent and constitutionality, so no need to keep the pretenses.

Below are quotations from Numbers 5 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers+5&version=KJV :
27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.
28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed.
29 This is the law of jealousies, when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled;

Clearly , inducing miscarriage when the wife was carrying a child that resulted from adultery is acceptable to gawd ; and , yet , is a raped woman not defiled ?

The meaning of an after life , of a chance for eternal life , for being born again , for reincarnated , etc . are all metaphors with a literal meaning of passing on ones genetic identity through ones offspring .

Thus , children of rape provide an opportunity for a degenerate to pass on their genetic identity , and from the perspective of those competing fairly , fuck them !

Also medical reasons include fetal abnormalities that do not become evident until the second or third trimester and what do they have to do with fitness for genetic continuance and what is the impetus of a state to dictate an undo burden onto individuals who may as well try again in another month ?

The principle striving against abortion by the religious reich is used to validate " delusions for grandeur " and " will to power " to somehow establish that they will be immortal and wake up from a dirt nap .

The religious reich are anti-nomian heretics ; and , few understand the depth of that statement .

I'm not a 'religious person', and I don't care about obtuse ravings. Other than rape and medical reasons, there is no reason for a state to allow women to end a life because of mere inconvenience; they know how pregnancy occurs, and they make the choice to indulge in sexual relations and risk getting pregnant. We all know the method that works 100% of the time at preventing pregnancies, even if it has been kept a secret from you personally.