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.
Sure, but the other poster Corrie22 said that the latest SCOTUS ruling only stated "the court had no power to dictate a medical procedure". But SCOTUS leaves to state courts power to allow, or limit, or ban this particular medical procedure, ie, state courts have complete power to dictate anything they choose about this medical procedure. So, state courts do very much have power to dictate rules about this particular medical procedure.
and?......what is your point?
that is what the supremes ruled....and they are right
the libs won....they got their way on this one
libs have been saying a fetus is not viable...a abortion is no different than any other surgery
...and the supremes ruled in their favor....the supremes have no jurisdiction over a surgery
Yes. I live in the UNITED States. I care about other women. Especially the ones stuck in backward states who don't have the money or support systems to leave permanently or to take a trip to get an abortion. Yes, I care. Do you?
I do care. I am curious - If a woman lives in a red/conservative state, shouldn’t she already know that the majority of people in her state are against abortion and there are probably few if any abortions being performed in her state anyway?
I would think that women who live in red states are mostly already anti-abortion themselves.
Any scholar knows Roe was passed on shaky ground and is questionable whether the constitution supports tha right to abortion. Why do you think every time there is a SCOTUS nominee hearing the liberal senators always question about Roe v Wade being upheld is because they know it isn’t a sound decision based on constitutional text. We finally have a court that bases it’s ruling on the constitution, not what the flavor of the month is in current society.
Any scholar knows Roe was passed on shaky ground and is questionable whether the constitution supports tha right to abortion. Why do you think every time there is a SCOTUS nominee hearing the liberal senators always question about Roe v Wade being upheld is because they know it isn’t a sound decision based on constitutional text. We finally have a court that bases it’s ruling on the constitution, not what the flavor of the month is in current society.
of course the constitution does not support any right to any medical treatment
On average, women are fertile for about two days per month for about 30 solid years.
However, men are fertile 365 days a year. In fact, if you’re a man who ejaculates multiple times a day, you could cause multiple pregnancies daily. In theory, a man could cause hundreds of unwanted pregnancies every year for about 70 years.
. . . let’s look at birth control for men — i.e., condoms. They’re readily available at all hours, inexpensive, convenient, and don’t require a prescription. They’re effective and work on demand, instantly. They don’t cause aneurysms, mood swings, or debilitating cramps. Men can keep them stocked up just in case, so they’re always prepared. They can be easily used at the last minute. So much easier than birth control options for women.
So why would there ever be unwanted pregnancies? Why don’t men just use condoms every time they have sex? Seems so simple, right?
In fact, it’s very, very common for men to pressure women to have sex without a condom. It’s also not unheard of for men to remove the condom during sex without the women’s permission or knowledge.
I do care. I am curious - If a woman lives in a red/conservative state, shouldn’t she already know that the majority of people in her state are against abortion and there are probably few if any abortions being performed in her state anyway?
I would think that women who live in red states are mostly already anti-abortion themselves.
I believe that a lot of women are just finding out about their state's abortion restrictions because it is all over the news right now. In most working people's busy lives, they don't spend a lot of time watching/reading news and politics. But this is such a big issue, and with the trigger laws taking effect, I think a lot of women are just learning what has been done in their names.
We shall see how it all shakes out. It is good to know that you care.
What will this mean to conservative states in the future? There has already been some indication of businesses/company's moving its people out of states promoting conservative oppression. Long term, will this mean loss of population in some states? Will states loose seats in congress because of decreased population? Will the political landscape change when people realize their rights are being compressed into those put forth by religious institutions? Will the radical right continue to suppress freedom in America? Will increased birth rates of people of color, due to lack of abortion clinics, increase the blending of America?
that is what the supremes ruled....and they are right
the libs won....they got their way on this one
libs have been saying a fetus is not viable...a abortion is no different than any other surgery
...and the supremes ruled in their favor....the supremes have no jurisdiction over a surgery
Sure, I agree the Supreme Court is right in saying the Supreme Court has no legal basis to legislate a medical procedure. But if the Supreme Court has no such basis, how does ANY court in the country have such basis? That is my point. What is different about state courts that gives them a legal basis to legislate this matter which the Supreme Court decided it was not legally qualified to legislate?
Sure, I agree the Supreme Court is right in saying the Supreme Court has no legal basis to legislate a medical procedure. But if the Supreme Court has no such basis, how does ANY court in the country has such basis?
I believe that a lot of women are just finding out about their state's abortion restrictions because it is all over the news right now. In most working people's busy lives, they don't spend a lot of time watching/reading news and politics. But this is such a big issue, and with the trigger laws taking effect, I think a lot of women are just learning what has been done in their names.
We shall see how it all shakes out. It is good to know that you care.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer
I do care. I am curious - If a woman lives in a red/conservative state, shouldn’t she already know that the majority of people in her state are against abortion and there are probably few if any abortions being performed in her state anyway?
I would think that women who live in red states are mostly already anti-abortion themselves.
Can we be a little more PC here. The term is “birthing people”.
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.
Men* are the problem (*not ALL men)
