Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is one area where I disagree with the decision since it takes away our liberty to choose. This shouldn't be a government issue to decide what to do with an individual's life decision. It should be individual choice as long as the financial responsibility is taken by the individual.
The first thing I thougt was there is a choice but it has to be made before the 4th month. I think that was so there wouldn't be late term abortions.
The problem is what if there is a problem that is discovered after the 4th month? What about the fetus already being gone in the womb or almost gone. There could be circumstances that make terminating the pregnancy after the 4th month but before the 6 or 7th month. I don't know what circumstances there could be offhand but I'm sure there are a few that would require the termination of pregnancy. Sometimes the fetus is gone before birth so it would be cruel to force the woman to keep it inside for 9 months.
Well, this decision may energize the younger people into voting. It'll affect them the most and they are less religious than those who are trying to establish a theocracy in our country.
Another thing: there will be networks of women (and men) helping women. It'll mostly be for the low income women who can't afford to travel hundreds of miles to a safe state but the networks will be there for them. Sort of like the underground railroad that we had back in the 1800s.
We passed a Constitutional Amendment banning slavery. Why? Because the federal government probably didn't have the Constitutional powers to just write a law in Congress banning it. Want to enshrine the right to murder innocent babies into the Constitution of the United States? Then you'd need to amend the Constitution.
The Supreme Court of the 60's and 70's got drunk with power. They just pulled a whole lot of BS out of the air, granting themselves broad sweeping powers that they had no business giving to themselves, pretending that there is a huge swath of the Constitution written in invisible ink and they were uniquely empowered to read said invisible text. For some reason nobody stopped them. The overturning of Roe vs Wade and subsequent SCOTUS rulings is just a return to sanity.
There have been some terrible rulings in the past. Dred Scott was terrible. Plessy v. Ferguson was terrible. Brown v. Board of Education was the ruling where SCOTUS returned to sanity, striking down the long-standing court precedent.
The Dems have 50 chances to codify Roe v. Wade into law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
They need 60 votes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom
It is now, but Congress could codify it into law with 60 votes. But don't worry, that won't ever happen.
Sorry, I wasn't referring to Congress. I was referring to the 50 states, each one of which will have the option to codify abortion rights into law, if their legislators so choose.
For those who are relieved about Roe being overturned, I hope that you will push hard for safety net services, including childcare programs, affordable housing, healthcare/counseling/drug treatment, food for families, and general safety measures to protect kids who may be brought up in abusive homes.
Of course, such safety net services aren’t free and require tax revenue. And please don’t suggest that someone needs to pass a drug test or be an American citizen in order to qualify for them—because then it isn’t about the child or sanctity of life, is it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.