Supreme Court To Hear Mississippi Challenge To Abortion Law(Roe v Wade)

[Viktor]

I have read much of the literature and rulings on the subject. I am not a lawyer but the consensus among opponents of abortion is that The Roe case has several weaknesses:

1.It was based on Perjured testimony. The woman who was pregnant claimed in court that she had been raped. She later admitted her boyfriend was the father of the child. She told this lie under oath and Perjury is a Felony.

2.It is based on a legal fiction. The US Constitution does not give anyone a "right of privacy" as the court had claimed. The Sup Ct has made some bad rulings over the years and this was one of them. The rights of citizens are specified in the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Nowhere in the BOR does it mention privacy.

Most of the states regulate abortion and even if this challenge fails, there will be others in the future.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

While I am pro-choice, I agree that Roe v Wade was a horrible decision and should be reversed. It is a textbook case of judicial activism.

 

[theHawk]

I have zero faith in the SCOTUS. Roberts is a globo-homo, and Kavanaugh is a little shit-weasel.

 

[Viktor]

While I am pro-choice, I agree that Roe v Wade was a horrible decision and should be reversed. It is a textbook case of judicial activism.

I am influenced also by my religious views. Traditional Judaism allows abortion only to save the life of the Mother.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I have read much of the literature and rulings on the subject. I am not a lawyer but the consensus among opponents of abortion is that The Roe case has several weaknesses:

1.It was based on Perjured testimony. The woman who was pregnant claimed in court that she had been raped. She later admitted her boyfriend was the father of the child. She told this lie under oath and Perjury is a Felony.

2.It is based on a legal fiction. The US Constitution does not give anyone a "right of privacy" as the court had claimed. The Sup Ct has made some bad rulings over the years and this was one of them. The rights of citizens are specified in the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Nowhere in the BOR does it mention privacy.

Most of the states regulate abortion and even if this challenge fails, there will be others in the future.

NO, we dont want to stop stupid progressive women from murdering their born and unborn babies, because each one that dies on the table, is one less stupid future Democrat voter....

 

[jillian]

While I am pro-choice, I agree that Roe v Wade was a horrible decision and should be reversed. It is a textbook case of judicial activism.

It shouldn’t be reversed. Maybe other reasoning should be outlined. Angry old men have no business telling women what to do with their bodies.

Anti choicers have no problem invading women’s bodies while shrieking about THEIR freedom to give everyone covid

 

[Moonglow]

Abortion was never outlawed in the USA after the quickening until the AMA got together and decided they could make more money without it.

 

[Auld Phart]

It shouldn’t be reversed. Maybe other reasoning should be outlined. Angry old men have no business telling women what to do with their bodies.

Anti choicers have no problem invading women’s bodies while shrieking about THEIR freedom to give everyone covid

Angry old men have no business telling women what to do with their bodies.

Wrong for a fetus, but ok for a vaccine?

 

[pknopp]

I'm not sure many really think of the ramifications of overturning RvW.

First it would not outlaw abortion. It would simply send it back to the states. Some states would ban it (which wouldn't stop women from going to another state) and others could once again allow late term abortions which RvW allowed us to ban.

 

[BlindBoo]

It would be a wake up call for the women in the Red States to help send the Neo-GOP in their states packing.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I am influenced also by my religious views. Traditional Judaism allows abortion only to save the life of the Mother.

People's religious views shouldn't be shaping government policy.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It shouldn’t be reversed. Maybe other reasoning should be outlined. Angry old men have no business telling women what to do with their bodies.

Anti choicers have no problem invading women’s bodies while shrieking about THEIR freedom to give everyone covid

You realize that goes both ways, right? You people have no problem invading everyone's bodies by demanding they inject themselves with a vaccine that has been approved only for emergency use and not given full approval or traditional time for testing, but you shriek about YOUR freedom to abort a child.

 

[Viktor]

People's religious views shouldn't be shaping government policy.

They aren't, but they certainly do influence my opinion. I would never vote for anything that violates Jewish law.

 

[Viktor]

You realize that goes both ways, right? You people have no problem invading everyone's bodies by demanding they inject themselves with a vaccine that has been approved only for emergency use and not given full approval or traditional time for testing, but you shriek about YOUR freedom to abort a child.

Let me clear something up. The people who say abortion should be permitted because a woman can do as she likes with her own body are full of crap. First, the fetus is a separate organism and not part of her body. If she leaves it grow, it will be a complete person in 9 months. How do I know this? Because killing an unborn fetus is a crime in most jurisdictions, as Scott Peterson found out. Second, the law already tells her what she can do with her own body when it forbids her to be a prostitute and forbids her to take heroin and Cocaine.

 

[BlindBoo]

First, the fetus is a separate organism and not part of her body.

But the baby factory is part of her body.

killing an unborn fetus is a crime in most jurisdictions, as Scott Peterson found out.

During the commission of a crime against the mother. Even if she was on her way to an abortion clinic to have an abortion.

the law already tells her what she can do with her own body

Correct. States can apply limitations when the fetus becomes viable, but are not required to do so.

 

[pknopp]

People's religious views shouldn't be shaping government policy.

Is "thou shall not kill" a religious view?