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.
A recent poll found support for Roe V Wade at an all time high of 71%. Of those respondents who identified as Democrats, 88 percent said they support the ruling. Seventy-six percent of those that identified as independents said Roe v. Wade shouldn’t be overturned and 52 percent of Republicans also said the same. The SC is not going to overturn anything this divisive with that kind of public support.
Everyone knows one of the consequences of having sex is pregnancy. Everyone knows birth control is not 100% effective. If you're unwilling to accept the possible KNOWN consequences of your own choice to have sex, you have no business making such a choice.
So I gather you would tell married couples to abstain from indulging in sex unless they want to have a baby.
What we need is PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY , not foisting off your problems and bad behavior on others...that's not the American way. Thats something some these socialist mooches would love though.
Then banning the hows of birth control in high school should be banned. Personal responsibility when it comes to wanting to have sex but not a baby must be taught. That knowledge could come in handy later on when high school students marry. Who knows how many married women get abortions?
One of my close friends during college had an abortion that she did not want. Her bf was the president of the university's Young Republicans. He was staunchly opposed to abortion, he marched in front of clinincs and supported every law restricting access to abortion. When she found out she was pregnant, she was scared but figured they would ultimately be okay. She had 1.5 years left but he was about to graduate and had a job lined up.
When she told him, he flipped out! He started harrassing her endlessly and demanded she terminate the pregnancy or he would leave her. He would be sweet one minute, angry the next, it was horrible and unrelenting. She finally just did it, she loved him way more than he ever deserved and couldn't face losing him. He dumped her shortly after he graduated. He ended up getting involved in local politics. His never even missed a beat with his anti abortion activities.
How sick and disgusting. The above is why I take more seriously the viewpoints women have on abortion. Men can also just walk away and disappear over an unwanted pregnancy.
Anyone who wants to make divorce harder is an idiot. It's nobody's damn business who divorces who except for the couple doing the divorcing.
If people are getting divorced more often because it's easier...clearly their marriage didn't matter much to them anyway, so it wouldn't matter if they get divorced or not.
Clintone, do you know why marriage exists in the first place? Was marriage established for the benefit of individuals? Or was marriage established for the benefit of society? Was marriage established only for the benefit of the husband and wife? Or was marriage established for the benefit of families, and especially children?
If you can break any contract, at any time, without any justification or obligation, how does that affect the nature and perception of contracts?
You seriously lack an understanding of human psychology, society, and cause and effect.
You have a rather simplistic way of looking at the world, and you are incapable of understanding the outcomes of a policy beyond the immediate. Or you don't care.
Status:
"Let's replace the puppet show with actual leadership."
(set 11 hours ago)
Location: Suburban Dallas
52,700 posts, read 47,981,010 times
Reputation: 33875
Yes, I am in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade, and I think that will happen in due course as the Supreme Court gets more conservative. Regarding gay marriage (which, personally and theologically, I am against), it's not an official national law because it hadn't gone through Congress just because the Supreme Court said that such a ruling would be okay. That decision needs to just be turned over to individual states and not be nationalized.
Roe v Wade is not the point here. This is just about banning it in general, which is the goal of many, not just overturning Roe to make it a states issue.
Really? It is part of the question the OP asked in his original post. The title of this thread says roe v wade not making abortions illegal.
I hove posted the same thing 2-3 times in this same thread for a reason. It was ignored before and thank you and the poster a few posts above you to finally answer it. See the left wants to skip over the states rights issue here and go right to the bogey man argument “abortions will be banned and back alley abortions will be the norm” if roe v wade was overturned. The truth is most if not all states already have laws on their books when it comes to abortion. Some states might change that based on their voters current views changing over the years.
The fact is abortion is not in the constitution so it is a state issue. Roe v wade was a unconstitutional decision and should be overturned. That does not mean i am pro choice or pro life. This is just a fact based on our constitution. There has never been a constitutional amendment for pro choice or pro life. It is a states rights issue. This case was never about a womens right to choose, it was about judicial fiat.
Yes, I am in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade, and I think that will happen in due course as the Supreme Court gets more conservative. Regarding gay marriage (which, personally and theologically, I am against), it's not an official national law because it hadn't gone through Congress just because the Supreme Court said that such a ruling would be okay. That decision needs to just be turned over to individual states and not be nationalized.
Correct.. both these decisions were unconstitutional. I actually think the marriage license laws need to be abolished. Any 2 consentual adults of legal age should be able to make a union for whatever personal reasons they want as long as its only one at a time and both are of age and consent.
And if Republicans remove Roe v Wade, giving states the right to deny women body autonomy, it will prove that they view women as lesser than and not worthy of having the same rights as men.
In today's climate that could effectively deal a fatal blow to the Republican Party.
Have you any evidence whatsoever to support the canard that the fetus is "part of the mother"? Neither science or medicine agrees with you.
Point in fact, while the fetus is INSIDE the mother, it is its own entity only loosly attached via the placenta.
You logic applied elsewhere would assert that a person invited into your home is, therefore, part of your home and can, therefore, be destroyed like an unwanted wall, light fixture etc.
It is nothing but a canard.
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.
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.
