Unexpected Results of Overturning Rowe V Wade

[Flopper]

Thanks for that information but how is that a reason for not providing supports to children and families- if that is what the implication is?

It's not

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Almost all are are done in the 1st trimester, mostly within 8 weeks.

I don't think this is getting through their skulls.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Your “compromise” is extortion. You demand to force unsustainable government-run scams on us as a condition of refraining from the murder of innocent human beings.

That's pretty much the definition of a terrorist, to target innocent third parties for murder, for a malevolent political cause.

Hypocrite! Selfish fucking hypocrite! You do not give a shit about the lives of children once born after you go to the matt for the fetus . There is something quite sick about you and your ilk

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Not just black but poor families, the more kids there are in poor family the less likely they are to get an education and more likely they are to turn to crime. Fortunately our biggest cities will continued to have abortion rights protected. However, there many large cities 500,000 to million that are republican will see poor neighbors explode.

Are you supporting a class/caste system or something?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Hypocrite! Selfish fucking hypocrite! You do not give a shit about the lives of children once born after you go to the matt for the fetus . There is something quite sick about you and your ilk

You have no clue what I have or have not done, what I do or do not support, by way of contributing to the care of less-unfortunate children.

But I do not advocate allowing them to be murdered, and I do not advocate allowing them to be sexually abused;. I certainly do not, as you have openly done, advocate the terroristic murder of children as a means of promoting a malevolent political agenda. This, in itself, puts me far above you, regardless of what else I may or may not do or support.

 

[Flopper]

Yes of course Russia wants a weak federal government. That is why Putin is in bed with the Red Square Republican who suck his balls every chance that they get. Let me remind you of a couple of things. This is a constitutional Republic, not a Federation. The reconstruction Amendments-particularly the 14th strengthened the Republic and ensures that states do not violates citizens rights under the bill of rights. Lastly, an extensive body of case law has established unenumerated rights that flow from the basic documents and the 14th Amendment

I agree. What I was trying to say in my post is that the draft of the Majority Opinion that would overturn Rowe makes it abundantly clear that the court holds that Rowe v Wade is not supported by the 14th amendment nor any part of the constitution and thus abortion is not a federal issue but a state issue. There are about 50 pages listing legal precedents supporting the courts opinion.

If Rowe is overturn with this majority opinion, the underpinnings for the federal rulings that struct down state gay marriage bans and bans on interracially marriage are gone so you can expect these ruling would also be overturned. Furthermore, federal court rulings and federal legislation effecting healthcare, voting rights, civil rights and a number of areas could well be under attack. This is exactly what the far right wants, destroying America as it exist today and rebuilding it in accordance to a literal interpretation of the constitution.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You have no clue what I have or have not done, what I do or do not support, by way of contributing to the care of less-unfortunate children.

But I do not advocate allowing them to be murdered, and I do not advocate allowing them to be sexually abused;. I certainly do not, as you have openly done, advocate the terroristic murder of children as a means of promoting a malevolent political agenda. This, in itself, puts me far above you, regardless of what else I may or may not do or support.

I have a pretty good idea of what you don't support. You just referred to the social programs that I mentioned as unsustainable government scams. You fucking people live to bitch about the cost of social safety net programs but never, ever want to talk about the cost of things like having a nation of sick people or malnourished children You are a damned fool!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I agree. What I was trying to say in my post is that the draft of the Majority Opinion that would overturn Rowe makes it abundantly clear that the court holds that Rowe v Wade is not supported by the 14th amendment nor any part of the constitution and thus abortion is not a federal issue but a state issue. There are about 50 pages listing legal precedents supporting the courts opinion.

If Rowe is overturn with this majority opinion, the underpinnings for the federal rulings that struct down state gay marriage bans and bans on interracially marriage are gone so you can expect these ruling would also be overturned. Furthermore, federal court rulings and federal legislation effecting healthcare, voting rights, civil rights and a number of areas could well be under attack. This is exactly what the far right wants, destroying America as it exist today and rebuilding it in accordance to a literal interpretation of the constitution.

Yup. We are in deep shit

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I have a pretty good idea of what you don't support. You just referred to the social programs that I mentioned as unsustainable government scams.

That is exactly what they are.

And if your cause was just, you would not be willing to have murder or the threat of murder against innocent third parties used as a means of promoting that cause.

 

[Flopper]

Are you supporting a class/caste system or something?

I see no connection with my post. What I said was, "the more kids there are in poor families the less likely they are to get a good education and the more likely they are to turn to crime." Since our larges cites will protect a woman's right to an abortion, poor families will be more able to control family size, and thus better able to provide for the family. That will not be the case in many republican cities that do not allow abortion.

 

[Flopper]

Yup. We are in deep shit

We will see.

The ban on abortion in 26 states is not going to band all abortions. In fact, most of these states will allow abortions in the first trimester which is when 90% of abortions occur. Since about 20 states will allow abortion with little or no regulations, women that can not get an abortion in their state can travel to get abortions, I doubt abortions will go down more 10%.

Republicans are far more supportive of gay marriage and interracial marriage than abortion. I would be suppressed if more than a couple of southern states banned it.

Claims of states right in federal voting rights legislation, civil rights, healthcare, etc is not as clear as it is with marriage.

 

[Flopper]

I don't think Alito's draft is any hindrance to a federal law codifying Roe or totally prohibiting abortion. (I think the latter would violate the equal protection clause, but that's another matter) But the Senate would have to get rid of any need to have more than 50 plus the VP voting.

I hope Alito's opinion politicizes the three generations of women who grew up believing they had a constitutional right to abortion more or less before "quickening" which was the status quo at the Founding.

And I don't think we'd have had an IraqII War of Afghanistan if we still had the draft and not a voluteer army, but that too is another matter.

And who do you think can override a supreme court decision?

 

[eagle1462010]

Almost all are are done in the 1st trimester, mostly within 8 weeks. I can't think of any reason a woman would want to go through more than 12 weeks of pregnancy then abort. Early abortions are easier, safer, and cheaper than late abortions.

This is why I don't think there is going to be a big drop in the number of abortions after Rowe v Wade. Most of the states that ban abortion will permit it in the first trimester and that's 90% of the abortions. Couple that with the number of states that have no restrictions and out of state abortions, I doubt if there will be more than a 10% to 15% decrease.

So it shouldnt be a problem to ban it natiinwide st 16 weeks then

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

I see no connection with my post. What I said was, "the more kids there are in poor families the less likely they are to get a good education and the more likely they are to turn to crime." Since our larges cites will protect a woman's right to an abortion, poor families will be more able to control family size, and thus better able to provide for the family. That will not be the case in many republican cities that do not allow abortion.

Hmm. Definitely sounds like you're supporting a class/caste system.

 

[Flopper]

I must grudgingly agree that some compromise might be unavoidable, but never lose sight of the hard fact that murdering an innocent human being at any stage of life is evil, and nobody who has any vestige of a soul or a conscience should ever be comfortable with defending it.

Any compromise that allows abortion to happen at any stage, is a compromise that gives way to evil.

90% of abortions occur in the 1st trimester. The fetus is not a child in the 1st or any trimester. The fetus is a child in the making. Only when it is born does it become a child.

Late term abortions should be reserved for special cases where the woman's life is in danger or the fetus is so badly malformed that it has no chance of surviving.

Having a late term abortion simply because the woman has changed her mind should not be done. Abortions at this stage are not near as safe as they are in 1st trimester and they can lead to serious complications.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The ban on abortion in 26 states is not going to band all abortions. In fact, most of these states will allow abortions in the first trimester which is when 90% of abortions occur

Right, but then they restrict access. Fewer places, more required (unnecessary) procedures, etc.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The fetus is not a child in the 1st or any trimester. The fetus is a child in the making. Only when it is born does it become a child.

A lie does not become truth, no matter how many times it is repeated.

A human being is a human being, at every stage of his life.

 

[Flopper]

So it shouldnt be a problem to ban it natiinwide st 16 weeks then

No, I think abortions should be allowed in the 2nd trimester where the pregnancy puts the mothers life in danger, rape or incest, or the fetus is so damaged it can not survive.

However, the best law is no law at all. The decision to abort should be that of the woman and her doctor, not the government.

 

[Flopper]

Right, but then they restrict access. Fewer places, more required (unnecessary) procedures, etc.

Good point.

 

[Seymour Flops]

As has been mentioned elsewhere, this ruling undermines a number of other federal rulings for example the states right to forbid interracial marriage as well as gay marriages. It also weakens the case for federal laws managing healthcare such as HIPPA and Obamacare, federal aid to education, etc. It is a huge victory for state rights with the potential to totally upend the America we know.

I get what you're saying. But, that is the problem with using the Supreme Court to "pass a law" that you can't get passed by elected officials. There never was any "right to abortion" in the Constitution. The court "found" one on the penumbra of the penumbra of an actual enumerated rights.

They invented it out of whole cloth, but justified it because the litigants, not they themselves wove the cloth and sewed it together.

If abortion is a crime, it is a violent crime against a person. States were long in charge of violent crime laws, that's nothing new. Same with health care, education, and a number of other issues that the federal government intrudes into. I doubt any supreme court, no matter how conservative, will ever rule that the federal government must follow the plain language of the constitution and stick to its enumerated powers. Too much government has been built on ignoring that part.

Before the court draft came out, I was reading articles about republicans getting full control of government in 2024 and passing anti-abortion legislation that would make abortion illegal in the US. It seems that the court deciding that abortion is a state issue has shot that down removing any hope of a united country on this issue.

Actually, the court decided that there is nothing in the Constitution that prevents states from banning abortion. But they did not say that the Federal government cannot ban abortion. See the above about the courts allowing federal intrusion into state issue.

All this is the result of losing a presidential election in 2016 to perhaps the most ridiculous individual ever to run on a major party ticket, then spending four years pursuing a false case for conspiracy based on fake evidence, now known to have been bought and paid for by one of the most power Democratic politicians in history who failed to beat him.

While the Dems were doing that Russia Collusion Hoax Investigation, Trump filled the court with people who believe in the Constitution. Not people who say they do to get nominated and confirmed, but who actually do.

So the left lost on abortion. Abortion is their signature issue. It has been the glue that held the disparate parts of their base together. Orange man beat the pants off of them. He may continue to beat the pants off them from the political and/or actual grave if his appointees keep going back to the constitution.

Perhaps they will lose on gay marriage, as you suggest. I hope not. I support gay marriage. We forget now, that Obama opposed gay marriage until the polls told him not to. Maybe if the court puts that issue back to the states, most will codify same-sex marriage. If they do, the "full faith and credit" clause should render same-sex marriage in that state valid in all states. But if they lose, that is Trump beating them again.