Go Ahead, Remove Roe V. Wade

[AzogtheDefiler]

Because fundamental rights should not be decided by states.

But they are. Right now they actually are?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Possibly, until Democrats living in left leaning states realize nothing is going to change for them. I think many people are under the impression that overturning Roe outlaws abortion (hence , the OP) which is does not. Abortion will still be accessible.

It is the Dems living in the right leaning states that would make the difference. Look at what happened in Georgia after they were motivated and came out to vote in record numbers.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Because the courts have not ruled that vaccines fall under the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution.

And they may now rule that since states are deciding what someone puts in their body they may decide on abortion laws too. I am pro choice btw. I think this is a stupid hill for the GOP to die on.

 

[Fang]

It is the Dems living in the right leaning states that would make the difference. Look at what happened in Georgia after they were motivated and came out to vote in record numbers.

Look what happened in VA when Democrats start messing with parents and their kid's education. Considering Biden and Kamala's dismal track record I'm not so sure people will be quick to rush to the Dems side for something they will still have access to.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Look what happened in VA when Democrats start messing with parents and their kid's education. Considering Biden and Kamala's dismal track record I'm not so sure people will be quick to rush to the Dems side for something they will still have access to.

But will they have access in the red states?

 

[Coyote]

But they are. Right now they actually are?

Actually, no. The state can not arbitrarily remove fundamental Constitutional rights. It can not reimburse slavery for example.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Actually, no. The state can not arbitrarily remove fundamental Constitutional rights. It can not reimburse slavery for example.

It can stop me from going to restaurants if I am not vaccinated

 

[Coyote]

I believe our founding documents say "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".

Life being the first one. You do not have the "right" to take the life of another. That seems pretty fundamental to me.

All 3 are in one statement. You have no right to curtail a woman's liberty through forced gestation. You have no right to remove her rights in order to give them to another.

Other than just not killing your baby, I don't care what a "woman does with her body". I really do not. Contraceptives, sleep with 400 men, whatever. Her life is her life. Just don't take another's.

Rather than forced gestation, why not do everything possible to make abortion unnecessary? Free contraception, accurate sex education, free morning after pills, strong support for the mother if she opts for the child: pre natal care, post natal support, child care so she doesn't end up dropping out of school or losing her job, paid maternity leave.

I've heard a thousand excuses for not doing this, which seem to come down to punishing the woman for being a "slut" and a burden on the state yet the cost of a child on welfare is a lot more.

 

[Coyote]

Possibly, until Democrats living in left leaning states realize nothing is going to change for them. I think many people are under the impression that overturning Roe outlaws abortion (hence , the OP) which is does not. Abortion will still be accessible.

That is assuming you think overturning Roe is the endgame.

A significant number of American women, mostly poor, will be unable to access safe legal abortions.

 

[Coyote]

It can stop me from going to restaurants if I am not vaccinated

Is going to restaurants a right?

 

[bodecea]

We're sick of you babykillers.

You don't care about people's lives. Go buy another gun.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Is going to restaurants a right?

Of course. Freedom. When do you recall it not being a right?

 

[bodecea]

No, but I'll give her a slot for training in which she can learn to earn that much money.

Fucking red herring idiots like you.

If you cannot afford to support a child, then don't get fucking pregnant. Problem solved.

Now, if you want Me to ignore your ass forever, just post something along the lines of "But what about incest and rape!".

Time to pass laws con-trolling men's reproductive organs.......maybe mandatory vasectomies.

 

[bodecea]

There has never been a time in our nation that the majority wanted to outlaw abortion.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You misspoke, didn't you?

The fact of the matter is that whatever general acceptance of abortion there is today was socially engineered per Roe v Wade over time. That decision was extremely unpopular when it was handed down. Most Americans were appalled by it.

No they weren't. That's a far right wing fantasy....another one of their rewrites of history.

 

[bodecea]

You are going to have to give me some proof of that.

I looked for it myself but could only find info going back as far as 1989 by Gallup.

In 1989, 58% of people didn't support overturning Roe V. Wade.

I tried using keywords "majority people opposed roe v wade when it was decided."

Nothing came up.

I remember when it was decided. I don't remember a majority opposing the decision or abortion.

So please, provide some credible proof of that.

He's lying.

 

[bodecea]

American Prog women do not deserve to be protected by men. But a percentage still will pushing a date with destiny of brother versus brother with millions of deaths as the Prog women are the harbingers of Western Civilization destruction.

See, this is what it's really about...........a right wing war on women as equal citizens with equal rights.

 

[bodecea]

I find it interesting the OP is more concerned about the politics of abortion, than innocent life.

Buy more guns to show how much you care about innocent life.

 

[bodecea]

Why is she unable to provide that for her child?

Why isn't the sperm donor able to provide for HIS child?

 

[Coyote]

Of course. Freedom. When do you recall it not being a right?

Restaurants are private businesses.

 

[SweetSue92]

All 3 are in one statement. You have no right to curtail a woman's liberty through forced gestation. You have no right to remove her rights in order to give them to another.


Rather than forced gestation, why not do everything possible to make abortion unnecessary? Free contraception, accurate sex education, free morning after pills, strong support for the mother if she opts for the child: pre natal care, post natal support, child care so she doesn't end up dropping out of school or losing her job, paid maternity leave.

I've heard a thousand excuses for not doing this, which seem to come down to punishing the woman for being a "slut" and a burden on the state yet the cost of a child on welfare is a lot more.

The only time "forced gestation" is at play is when a woman is raped. Otherwise, you pay your money and you takes your chances.

That's it. We can start there.

Second, because a woman has sex, then gets pregnant and decides to raise the child is not an excuse or reason for instituting your Socialist Utopia.

It's just this simple. Do not kill. You do not have a right to kill. Especially not what YOU created.

See how simple that is?