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.
Only the poor will be affected by this. And blue states will be forced to pay even more of Mississppi's bills with all the additional unwanted children (54% of children in MS are already born out of wedlock even with abortion being legal). Mississippi's moral values are closer to the Middle East than the rest of the first world regarding women, gay rights, and social issues. Maybe it's time they stand on their own two feet and stop leaching off blue state welfare if they insist on these extreme backward values?
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie
If Mississippi has a law intended to make it less likely for a woman to get rid of her newborn by throwing it in a dumpster, then there can be hope Mississippi Republicans will care about less fortunate babies. A number of Republicans oppose such laws, because it lets the woman get by with child abandonment by making it legal to hand over her newborn to an adult with no questions asked.
This will only affect poor women, they need to make life as difficult as possible and who cares they don't have a voice. Mississippi is looking very 3rd worldly doesn't their legislature have better things to do rather than punish women barely getting by. Using Amy Barrett's solution they can just carry to full term and leave it at the fire station.
They already have multiple restrictions on abortion clinics that pretty much close just about every clinic in the state this will just one more step in that direction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesjuke
The standard used to be first trimester, nothing was said about viability.
Point is that there is nothing in the Constitution about abortion and is not a power granted to the Federal government.
Should have never been more than a State issue.
The Viability standard was established under Casey, the 3rd trimester was under Roe.
So the constitution has to spell out each right, we need a paragraph that allows us to drive a car. You want the federal government out of voting rights, education, food inspection, all should be done by the states.
Yeah, seems like the biggest Welfare Queens are the republican states.
Wrong! Percentage wise to their population numbers blacks are the biggest recipients of welfare and they overwhelming vote Democrat. It doesn't matter where they live either.
I can respect someone who is against abortion and cares about the child after birth. However, a lot of the anti-abortion people only care about the fetus and not the living child. They won't increase social services due to increased usage due to more unwanted being born. When crime increases in 18 years, they will be shocked. Middle class and wealthy women will still be able to get their abortions. It's the ones who have the least ability to care for an unwanted child who will give birth and this will lead to problems.
Why should the taxpayer have to take care of these kids? It's their parent's responsibility. Being opposed to abortion has nothing to do with it either. Why should we pay for their carelessness by them having unprotected sex? There is plenty of birth control out there and abortion is not birth control.
Interesting that Roe v Wade and end of the draft happened at about the same time.
A lot of social changes happened in the early 1970s, which followed all the marches and riots of the late 1960s. Seems the people must get very "vocal" before Congress listens and makes changes.
Mississippi asks Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade; says 1973 decision was 'egregiously wrong'
by: Sam Cohen
Posted at 4:16 PM, Jul 22, 2021 and last updated 3:20 PM, Jul 22, 2021
JACKSON, Miss. -- Mississippi's attorney general told the U.S. Supreme Court Thursday its 1973 landmark decision in Roe v. Wade was "egregiously wrong" and should be overturned.
"The conclusion that abortion is a constitutional right has no basis in text, structure, history, or tradition," Fitch said in a newly filed brief.
The challenge before the Supreme Court involves Mississippi's Gestational Age Act, originally passed in 2018, which allows abortion after 15 weeks only in medical emergencies or severe fetal abnormality. There is no exception for rape or incest.
After months of debate, the Supreme Court announced in May they would take up the challenge to Mississippi's law. Arguments before the court will be heard later this year and a decision is expected next June.
I hope like hell that the SCOTUS has the gumption to overturn Roe. That’s my dream scenario. Been hoping for this for decades.
Greatest possible gift the Democratic Party could ever receive. PUH-LEEZE do it SCOTUS Conservatives. Not to mention that GOP fundraising based on anti abortion efforts; tens of millions of dollars, will be dead and buried. They’ll have nothing else inflammatory enough to rile up the base to get those millions from small evangelical donors without abortion being on the platform.
My fear is that the SCOTUS simply isn’t stupid enough to pull the trigger. They know what’ll happen.
"My fear is that the SCOTUS simply isn’t stupid enough", is a stupid fear.
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.
Where in the Constitution does it say it's ok to kill the unborn?