Are you prepared to allow the government to help the mothers that can't afford those babies? I doubt it. "Lol **** you. Shoulda kept your legs closed, slut."
Off the top of my head I would think women would have a problem with people telling them what to do with their own bodies.
What exactly would be so awful or terrible about overturning Roe v. Wade, allowing the states to resume control over the issue, and saving thousands or tens of thousands of unborn babies' lives?
Roe v. Wade was based on junk science, junk law, and on the myth of an epidemic of "back alley abortions." Legalized elective abortion is far more of a stain on our nation's history than slavery was. The number of babies killed by abortion dwarfs the number of slaves who were killed by abusive slaveholders.
If Roe v. Wade were overturned, state governments would retake control of the issue. Some states would legalize all abortion except partial-birth abortion (which is illegal under federal law). Other states would place significant restrictions on abortion. And some states would ban most or all abortions. Undoubtedly, thousands or tens of thousands of babies would be saved from abortion.
If women were really determined to kill their babies for their own convenience (i.e., elective abortion), they could always go to a state where elective abortion were legal.
Debunking the myth of ‘back-alley’ abortions
U.S. Abortion Statistics
Chilean Study Proves that Outlawing Abortion Does Not Lead to "Coat-hanger Deaths"
https://www.mccl.org/single-post/2017/01/20/The-three-fundamental-problems-with-Roe-v-Wade
Science Has Advanced Since Roe v. Wade But Abortion Laws Haven’t
It's a scientific fact: Human life begins at conception
Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo's Conception
When Does Life Begin | Just The Facts
Ice dream, but it wouldn’t matter a bit. Roe isn’t a law, it’s legislation from the bench. So all that really could be done is send it back to the states. It would be nothing but a snazzy bumper sticker for election 2020. Abortion ain’t going anywhere.
What exactly would be so awful or terrible about overturning Roe v. Wade, allowing the states to resume control over the issue, and saving thousands or tens of thousands of unborn babies' lives?
Roe v. Wade was based on junk science, junk law, and on the myth of an epidemic of "back alley abortions." Legalized elective abortion is far more of a stain on our nation's history than slavery was. The number of babies killed by abortion dwarfs the number of slaves who were killed by abusive slaveholders.
If Roe v. Wade were overturned, state governments would retake control of the issue. Some states would legalize all abortion except partial-birth abortion (which is illegal under federal law). Other states would place significant restrictions on abortion. And some states would ban most or all abortions. Undoubtedly, thousands or tens of thousands of babies would be saved from abortion.
If women were really determined to kill their babies for their own convenience (i.e., elective abortion), they could always go to a state where elective abortion were legal.
Debunking the myth of ‘back-alley’ abortions
U.S. Abortion Statistics
Chilean Study Proves that Outlawing Abortion Does Not Lead to "Coat-hanger Deaths"
https://www.mccl.org/single-post/2017/01/20/The-three-fundamental-problems-with-Roe-v-Wade
Science Has Advanced Since Roe v. Wade But Abortion Laws Haven’t
It's a scientific fact: Human life begins at conception
Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo's Conception
When Does Life Begin | Just The Facts
Mike, I'm currently in a thread with a mess of conservatives who feel ANY welfare programs are "robbing" them of their hard earned cash. What would be so awful with overturning Roe v. Wade is that no one is going to want to spend the $ to care for these unwanted children. Financial reasons are high on the list of why women choose to terminate a pregnancy--they can't afford another baby. So what happens when the baby is born to a parent who can't afford to raise it? Then some on the right will blame the parents for not caring for it or asking for benefits.
THAT is part of what is so wrong with overturning Roe v. Wade.
Why overturn Roe V Wade?
2 reasons--------->
1. It is bad law, period. Even most Liberal lawyers will tell you so.
2. Because it will return the power to the states. I have no doubt that if Roe V Wade was overturned, 40 to 45 states would still allow abortion, just with restrictions for partial birth.
Why would the Left have any kind of problem with that?
Lets see if I get this straight, and maybe some CONSERVATIVES could jump in here--------->
When the LEFT tries to put MORE regulations on gun owners, they tell everyone they are NOT trying to restrict guns in any manner.
When we say that 45 states will still offer abortion, they tell us we are trying to deny a womans right to choose!
So you see folks, as we ALL already knew, the far Left is all phony-e-baloney, mixed with a little mac and cheese. They need judges to help them do their thing, cause nobody in their right minds is going to vote for higher taxes, forced government education, open borders, and transfer of wealth.
The Left isn't fooling ANYBODY, and as time goes by towards the elections, it is going to be proven, and that will be the end of the far Left-) Not just here, but in the media-)
