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 05-08-2022, 12:16 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,981 posts, read 22,176,971 times
Reputation: 13811

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC View Post
Plan B IS this topic. Once Roe is gone, in some states, Plan B is gone too.

So. You're participating in this opinion thread. Are you also in favor of states banning Plan B when Roe is out of the way?

You're not alone, though, in not realizing how incredibly impactful removing Roe protections will be.

Few women realize that in several states, their prescription birth control pill will no longer be offered at their pharmacy, and their rape crisis centers won't be allowed to dispense Plan B to victims.
Just like all the illegal drugs people take, plan B will cross any state's border

 
Old 05-08-2022, 12:18 PM
Status: "I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out." (set 12 days ago)
 
35,640 posts, read 17,994,810 times
Reputation: 50681
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
Just like all the illegal drugs people take, plan B will cross any state's border
But it will be a crime to possess and use.
 
Old 05-08-2022, 12:21 PM
 
Location: *
13,240 posts, read 4,931,574 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC View Post
But it will be a crime to possess and use.
Correct, encouraging folks to commit a crime?

Much less it additionally would impose an “undue burden” by the state on a woman.

Various Explanations of the Undue Burden Test

1) The undue burden test transforms the nature of the right from an unqualified fundamental right to a qualified fundamental right. Instead of a woman’s right to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy (the right in Roe), there is now a woman’s right to be free of undue burdens imposed by the state in choosing whether or not to terminate a pregnancy (the right in Casey); or

2) The undue burden test reduces the level of scrutiny from strict scrutiny to intermediate scrutiny so the state has more state interests that meet the test and more available means to accomplish its interests; or

3) The undue burden test operates as a sorting mechanism that divides abortion regulations into two categories: those that impose less than an undue burden and those that impose an undue burden. If the abortion restriction imposes less than an undue burden, it will be upheld as long as it has a rational basis (minimum scrutiny); if it imposes an undue burden, it will only be upheld if it is a least restrictive means to achieve a compelling end (strict scrutiny).

https://www.wneclaw.com/conlaw/expla...dueburden.html
 
Old 05-08-2022, 12:22 PM
 
3,288 posts, read 1,423,067 times
Reputation: 3713
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
When it comes to abortion for convenience, that breakdown is:

48% keep it legal
45% make it illegal

That's pretty evenly split and why big corporations aren't saying a word. They're all learning from Disney's mistake.
I have no idea where your figures come from…but all I can do is show you stuff like this, which is typical of polls addressing Roe:

Sixty-six percent say Roe v. Wade should not be completely struck down, and 59% would support Congress passing legislation to establish a nationwide right to abortion, including 81% of Democrats, 65% of independents and 30% of Republicans, the survey finds.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/06/polit...ade/index.html

At worst your numbers show a worse case, and still more Americans support Roe than oppose it. You may not like it, but that is the state of public opinion.
 
Old 05-08-2022, 12:24 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,060 posts, read 44,888,566 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by WVNomad View Post
This is silly. Just because someone voluntarily participates in unprotected sex does not imply that any abortion thereafter is for convenience.
Well, we know they fall into none of the other categories: physical health threat to mother and/or baby, rape, or incest. Are you somehow unaware that an extremely large percentage of abortions are performed as a form of after-the-fact birth control because 95% of unintended pregnancies are due to women VOLUNTARILY participating in unprotected sex?

Quote:
Medical issues concerning the mother, medical issue concerning the unborn child are just two obvious factors that having nothing to do with convenience.
Combined, they account for only 1.4% of all abortions.

Reason for abortion:

Risk to maternal life: 0.1%
Risk to maternal health: 0.8%
Fetal health issue: 0.5%

And rounding out the valid reasons for abortion...

Rape: 0.3%
Incest: 0.03%

Source: CDC

The other 98.3% of abortions are not medically necessary and are performed solely for the sake of the mother's (and/or sometimes the father's) convenience.
 
Old 05-08-2022, 12:27 PM
 
Location: In a George Strait Song
9,546 posts, read 7,079,576 times
Reputation: 14047
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpgypsy View Post

Decisions about whether to choose adoption, end a pregnancy, or continue a pregnancy should be made by a pregnant person with the counsel of their family, their faith, and their health care provider.
“Decisions…should be made by a pregnant woman with the counsel of her family, her faith, and her health care provider.”


Quote:
Politicians should not be involved in anyone’s personal medical decisions about their reproductive health or pregnancy.
Then eliminate required vaccines for schools and the military and so forth.

Either we can have laws regulating our bodies or we cannot.

Quote:
Nor should the anti-abortion crusaders and religious zealots who arrogantly attempt to dictate their--- "in the minority"--- beliefs to make abortion inaccessible or illegal and subjugate women.
Motherhood doesn’t “subjugate women.”
 
Old 05-08-2022, 12:28 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,060 posts, read 44,888,566 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by WVNomad View Post
See post 3004.
It doesn't disprove what I said.
 
Old 05-08-2022, 12:29 PM
 
Location: *
13,240 posts, read 4,931,574 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
No. Both the 4473 and NICS are Federal.
The ruling in Roe v. Wade was federal, so what are you attempting to say?

No one, except for libertaryans claim there should be unlimited rights.
 
Old 05-08-2022, 12:33 PM
 
Location: *
13,240 posts, read 4,931,574 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by WVNomad View Post
I have no idea where your figures come from…but all I can do is show you stuff like this, which is typical of polls addressing Roe:

Sixty-six percent say Roe v. Wade should not be completely struck down, and 59% would support Congress passing legislation to establish a nationwide right to abortion, including 81% of Democrats, 65% of independents and 30% of Republicans, the survey finds.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/06/polit...ade/index.html

At worst your numbers show a worse case, and still more Americans support Roe than oppose it. You may not like it, but that is the state of public opinion.
Apparently she is all in for judicial activism on the Supreme Court if it goes along with her idiosyncratic interpretations.
 
Old 05-08-2022, 12:33 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,060 posts, read 44,888,566 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
Your libertaryan ‘slip is showing’

The legal questions in Knick v. Township of Scott were:
  • Should the Court affirm or abrogate its holding in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank, which requires property owners to exhaust state court remedies before bringing federal Takings Clause claims?
  • Does the ripeness doctrine established in Williamson County apply to takings claims that assert that a law is unconstitutional on its face?
A valid case was made that a Constitutional Right was violated. That's why SCOTUS took up the Knick case.

In the cases of women convicted of harming their babies in utero, the women's Constitutional Rights weren't violated so SCOTUS declined to hear the cases.
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.


Closed Thread


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