Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-18-2019, 09:56 AM
 
17,696 posts, read 15,410,768 times
Reputation: 26495

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader -
Progressive eugenicists got forced sterilization laws passed in the 20th century, in fact.
So "making America great again" means going back to 1920 to force a medical procedure and sterilize people? Nothing progressive about that. But sure, let's force vasectomies and castration on men. That would be fun for a change.

It's so ironic that the right wants to *force* women to do or not do something. It galls them that privacy rights exist and that people can make decisions about what medical things happen or don't happen to themselves and inside their own bodies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-18-2019, 09:59 AM
 
51,585 posts, read 25,589,248 times
Reputation: 37787
Civil War could be the result of some insisting government should be able to tell women what they can do with their own bodies?

Sweet Jesus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2019, 10:03 AM
 
Location: The Woods
18,337 posts, read 26,404,089 times
Reputation: 11335
Quote:
Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould View Post
Civil War could be the result of some insisting government should be able to tell women what they can do with their own bodies?

Sweet Jesus.
The country is almost evenly divided and one side of that divide considers abortion to be murder. Don't underestimate what strongly held beliefs on morality can lead to. It also exposes the underlying issue of states like AL don't want to be governed by the ideology of states like NY (and the reverse is of course true as well).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2019, 10:08 AM
 
17,696 posts, read 15,410,768 times
Reputation: 26495
"Don't want to be governed by ideology of states like..."

Read the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

THAT'S the "ideology" upon which this country exists. Those are the rights given to every person whether you like it or not.

Don't like it? Move to another country (Yemen might be perfect) or create your own country somewhere else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2019, 10:10 AM
 
27,625 posts, read 21,056,057 times
Reputation: 11092
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
The country is almost evenly divided and one side of that divide considers abortion to be murder. Don't underestimate what strongly held beliefs on morality can lead to. It also exposes the underlying issue of states like AL don't want to be governed by the ideology of states like NY (and the reverse is of course true as well).
That half needs to stay out of the lives of the others. Morality my backside...Save the Fetus/Screw The Child proves otherwise. Screw them when they get shot in school by offering those useless "thoughts and prayers" and demonize them when they speak out against it and plead for sensible gun laws. Make education almost impossible to afford and kick them off their parents health insurance while you are at it. Make healthcare unaffordable by keeping it for profit with the USA's distorted form of vulture Capitalism and to hell with school lunches and pre-school and after school programs because that might affect tax cuts for the rich...and the list goes on. Don't the so called moral and religious beliefs of the right stretch as far as not separating children from their parents at the border? Oh please! Spare us the phony self-righteous holier-than-thou garbage.

Last edited by sickofnyc; 05-18-2019 at 11:10 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2019, 11:11 AM
 
11,523 posts, read 14,596,323 times
Reputation: 16820
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNC4Me View Post
One of the biggest anti choice people I know is all over Facebook celebrating the Alabama bill. If she only knew her own daughter had an abortion at 19. I know because my daughter took her to the appointment, helped her pay for it and took care of her for a couple days after. My daughter didn’t tell me any of this, but her very grateful friend did. She thought I should know what my daughter did for her and how much it meant to her.

Sad that during one of the most difficult times in this young woman’s life she couldn’t trust her own mother to have her back.
It is sad and I can say that the daughter will always remember what your daughter and you did for her. And, she will always remember what her mother didn't do for her. Many parents have no clue about what their kids are doing or have done, including birth control and abortions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2019, 11:13 AM
 
Location: Ohio
24,623 posts, read 19,077,671 times
Reputation: 21738
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte View Post
I think it IS possible a 5-4 vote could overturn Roe v Wade.
It's impossible.

Obviously, you're not familiar with US Supreme Court rulings.

The US Supreme Court defines death as the absence of brainwaves.

The Court is never going to adopt a purely religious non-scientific view that life begins at conception.

Because both of those are true, the Court will never ban abortion, although the Court could place limitations on abortion.

The fetus does not exhibit brainwaves during the first trimester, thus according to the Court, it is dead and one may terminate life support, which in the case of abortion, life support is the mother and not machines.

Not only would that be both the only and best possible outcome of a Supreme Court decision, it is also the most logical.

The issue here is science, not philosophy or theology.

Once the fetus exhibits brainwaves, it is a sentient being aware of its own existence and abortion at that point would be murder, if it would be alive.

But, it isn't alive, because the fetus isn't viable and cannot live on its own.

Again, the issue here is science, not philosophy or theology, but for those wishing to wax theologic, then let's start here:

Genesis 2:7 Yahweh elohim formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

You become alive when you can breathe on your own, and a fetus prior to a certain point cannot breathe on its own.

That's why 90% of premature births before a certain point die, and the other 10% have no life at all, because they're in a wheel-chair tied to Oxygen machines their entire lives.

Show of hands....who among you is willing to fork over your own money to bear the costs of the medical care for such persons?

Anyway, the lungs are not developed, and once outside the uterus, the lungs do not develop normally, which results in death, early death or a miserable life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2019, 11:17 AM
 
11,523 posts, read 14,596,323 times
Reputation: 16820
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Why should states have the right to tell a person what medical procedures they can have, or what legal medications they can take?

The majority does not get to vote on rights, like the right to privacy, or liberty without due process. If I do not have liberty of making basic decisions about my body for myself what liberty do I have? If the state can control a womans medical decisions, what's to stop them from requiring vasectomies, or forced organ donation to save a life?
Right. Slippery slope. And, poor women in these states will have the babies, while the rich kids get their conservative parents to arrange for "secret" abortions. Who will pay for all of these babies, while Medicaid in these states is being cut left and right? And, after, w/ welfare programs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2019, 12:06 PM
 
14,349 posts, read 14,165,853 times
Reputation: 45641
Quote:
Originally Posted by elan View Post
Different states, different beliefs. I still don't see why one should control the other. If the people of Alabama want a strict law, so be it. If California wants a liberal law, so be it. Why are we telling each other what to do. Majority rule, we can always move. I think Alabama's law is way too harsh, but it's their call.

No its not their call. The problem is a little something that we call "The Bill of Rights". Its first ten amendments to the Constitution. By operation of the Fourteenth Amendment, these rights have to be observed by state governments as well as by the federal government. Its not a question of "state's rights". States aren't living breathing people and as such have no rights. However, the citizens who live in each state are entitled to have their constitutional rights honored by that state government.

Roe v. Wade has been upheld in a string of precedents over the last forty-six years. Roe says that state governments cannot ban abortion during the first trimester of a pregnancy because that infringes on the due process rights of women under the Fourteenth Amendment.

There are all kinds of things states cannot do because of the Bill of Rights. States cannot outlaw a particular religion because they don't like it (1st Amendment). States cannot ban private ownership of hand guns because they don't like firearms. (2nd Amendment). States cannot pass laws allowing the police to break into your home on a random basis because they might finding you smoking marijuana. (4th amendment). States cannot torture you into giving a confession to the police when they believe you have committed a crime. (5th amendment) States cannot deny you the right to legal counsel if you are charged with a crime that might put you in prison for a year or more. (6th Amendment) States cannot impose burning at the stake as punishment for a crime if you are convicted of one. (8th Amendment) Finally, states cannot deny a women the right to an abortion during her first trimester of pregnancy. (14th Amendment)

I bet you had no idea allowing states to "do their own thing" could have so many potential repercussions did you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
I think returning the decision to the states on abortion would really be the best outcome long term. This a deeply divisive issue and it's not cut and dry who opposes it or supports it. https://news.gallup.com/poll/244709/...ic-tables.aspx

This issue, along with gun control, could quite literally tear this country apart if there isn't some sort of compromise between the two extremes. Returning it a state decision could be the right compromise. Alabama's law has about the same purpose as the laws passed by states like NY protecting abortion. It's about legislative warfare against the other side. It's a dangerous game for this country, it's essentially the same as what happened in response to slavery in the 1850's. Abortion is a similar argument over morality. Biologically, the unborn are human. Personhood is a legal concept related to rights and science will never settle questions of morality or ethics or law. At what point a human is a person is the debate. In the 1850's the question was are people of all races persons with rights. That question brought this country to civil war and this present one could as well.
Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land for forty-six years now and guess what? The country hasn't been torn apart. That ought to be your first clue that your idea about "the country being torn apart" is a mistake don't you think?

What you don't seem to grasp is that the Supreme Court is called upon to interpret the Constitution. The court has interpreted the Constitution. Finally, their interpretation of that Constitution states that personhood doesn't begin until a fetus is viable. In other words, until it could survive on its own outside its mother's womb. At what point a fetus becomes a human is open to debate. However, the Supreme Court has debated it and made a decision. Under our system, that decision is the law of the land.

I personally don't think the court will overturn Roe V. Wade.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2019, 02:16 PM
 
Location: The Woods
18,337 posts, read 26,404,089 times
Reputation: 11335
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
No its not their call. The problem is a little something that we call "The Bill of Rights". Its first ten amendments to the Constitution. By operation of the Fourteenth Amendment, these rights have to be observed by state governments as well as by the federal government. Its not a question of "state's rights". States aren't living breathing people and as such have no rights. However, the citizens who live in each state are entitled to have their constitutional rights honored by that state government.

Roe v. Wade has been upheld in a string of precedents over the last forty-six years. Roe says that state governments cannot ban abortion during the first trimester of a pregnancy because that infringes on the due process rights of women under the Fourteenth Amendment.

There are all kinds of things states cannot do because of the Bill of Rights. States cannot outlaw a particular religion because they don't like it (1st Amendment). States cannot ban private ownership of hand guns because they don't like firearms. (2nd Amendment). States cannot pass laws allowing the police to break into your home on a random basis because they might finding you smoking marijuana. (4th amendment). States cannot torture you into giving a confession to the police when they believe you have committed a crime. (5th amendment) States cannot deny you the right to legal counsel if you are charged with a crime that might put you in prison for a year or more. (6th Amendment) States cannot impose burning at the stake as punishment for a crime if you are convicted of one. (8th Amendment) Finally, states cannot deny a women the right to an abortion during her first trimester of pregnancy. (14th Amendment)

I bet you had no idea allowing states to "do their own thing" could have so many potential repercussions did you?



Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land for forty-six years now and guess what? The country hasn't been torn apart. That ought to be your first clue that your idea about "the country being torn apart" is a mistake don't you think?

What you don't seem to grasp is that the Supreme Court is called upon to interpret the Constitution. The court has interpreted the Constitution. Finally, their interpretation of that Constitution states that personhood doesn't begin until a fetus is viable. In other words, until it could survive on its own outside its mother's womb. At what point a fetus becomes a human is open to debate. However, the Supreme Court has debated it and made a decision. Under our system, that decision is the law of the land.

I personally don't think the court will overturn Roe V. Wade.
You're asleep if you don't see what's happening to this country the past several years. 46 years ago this was a different country and, for all the events of the 60's, less divided than it is today. Americans basically hate each other today and it's readily apparent even on this thread.

There's nothing in the 14th amendment specifically providing for a right to abortion and in fact for most of this country's history abortion was largely outlawed or heavily restricted and courts upheld that for nearly 200 years. What was done 46 years ago can be easily reversed. The first amendment is quite plain in language about what's protected, as is the second (which many of the abortion supporters are okay with attacking), third, etc. The SCOTUS interpreted the Constitution in the Dred Scott case, but did that actually settle the issue for the country? The SCOTUS upheld segregation, then reversed course later. If Roe v Wade rejected abortion you'd be typing here that you want it reversed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top