Roe overturned

[MAGA Macho Man]

Then his opinion on this issue is not relevant.

But his opinion is right.

 

[Unkotare]

The truth hurts, doesn't it!

I don't know, does it?

 

[Flopper]

Legally, its an interesting opinion, but I won't discuss law with someone interested in the social issues.

But the real impact of this will be social. Poor women in Red States will suffer medical injuries from abortions that are not performed by doctors or licensed providers. We will return to the situation as it was when Roe was decided.

I was in my late 20 twenties in the South when Roe v Wade struck down abortion laws. Prior to that abortions were widely available in Louisiana and Mississippi even though the penalties were severe. Yet there were very few convictions for abortion except when the abortionists killed their patients. In determining if an abortion is needed many doctors used the heart beat rule or they fell back to quickening rule; that is movement by the fetus. If the doctor says I don't hear a heartbeat or the fetus has not moved and it should have occurred, an abortion was in order and no one questioned the decision. If the doctor believed another child would be detrimental to health of the mother an abortion was performed. In short, abortions have always been a personal decision between a women and her doctor. It will be interesting to see what happens when the courts gets involved and are faced with HIPPA laws and other laws proving patient privacy.

Before Row, Whites typically sent their pregnant daughters off to live with relatives till the child was born. However, many sent them to rest homes for their nerves where an abortion was recommended and done. Suicide was also an alternative although the police never reported that. It was just and accident being investigated.

In black communities, abortions were common but rarely investigate. A lot of whites view of black abortions was expressed well by a local sheriff when he said, "I certain don't favor abortions, black or white but a black abortion is one less name on the welfare rolls.

The state fighting to dismantle abortion rights has a long history of permissive abortion laws

For most of its history prior to Roe, Mississippi abortion laws were not restrictive. Now, the state may become the reason Roe is overturned.

mississippitoday.org

 

[Flopper]

Hardly

An estimated 10 billion dollars in child support never gets collected.

 

[Man of Ethics]

Conservatives do not oppose helping people in need. They do it in their churches, their synagogues, their neighborhoods, etc. They do it because they care and oppose the government using guns to take their money and give to the lazy and irresponsible.

Government has a duty to provide help to people in need -- first to their own citizens.

 

[Man of Ethics]

Welfare is not charity; it's robbery. Charity is when I choose on my own to donate to others.

Sadly, most people would not obey Biblical Laws on charity without government help.

 

[Who_Me?]

What percent of the US population actually lost their right to an abortion? They're protesting in Chicago like crazy and yet Illinois law still allows abortions to take place.

 

[progressive hunter]

Government has a duty to provide help to people in need -- first to their own citizens.

I am sure you can show where that exists??

 

[Flopper]

A slightly worthwhile thought ^ buried in unthinking, shallow, cheese-dick rhetoric.

If Leftwhiner wasn’t such a tool, he might have instead asked whether or not the Constitutionally recognized “right to life” can properly be subject to the varied whims of the States.

Dobbs recognizes that the US Constitution in no way, shape, manner or form provided for ANY “right” to abortion. So, it overruled Roe v. Wade. So far, so good. But

It leaves unanswered a more full question. Does the US Constitution say (or suggest or imply) that denying a right to life to the preborn is ok if determined by the States? Or, is the notion of “life” and the right to life itself validly subject to different State laws?

Despite all the liberal angst, this decision won’t end abortions in America. It will almost certainly lead to the criminalization of abortions under specified circumstances in many of the States. That’s not so Earth shaking. NY is already planning to invite women from other States to “come to NY for your abortion; stick around to visit our many tourist destinations!”

Let me remind you the supreme court has said abortion is a state issue. The court is no longer concerned about the fetus right to life or a woman's right to privacy, or when a fetus becomes a child, and hundreds of other questions surrounding abortion. I'm sure this was part of the motivation behind the High Court's decision to make abortion a state issue. They will probably never again have to hear a case about abortion being constitutional.

 

[Flopper]

What percent of the US population actually lost their right to an abortion? They're protesting in Chicago like crazy and yet Illinois law still allows abortions to take place.

As it stands now maybe as much as 20% of the women in the country will lose their right to an abortion within their state. However, many states that ban abortion allow it during the first 6 weeks, 12 weeks, or 15 weeks which happens to be the time when most women seek abortions. Even thou they may not be able to get and abortion at a clinic in the state there is always the abortion pill and out of state abortions. I don't expect the court ruling to have the result pro-lifers are looking for.

 

[BackAgain]

Let me remind you the supreme court has said abortion is a state issue. The court is no longer concerned about the fetus right to life or a woman's right to privacy, or when a fetus becomes a child, and hundreds of other questions surrounding abortion. I'm sure this was part of the motivation behind the High Court's decision to make abortion a state issue. They will probably never again have to hear a case about abortion being constitutional.

I don’t need the reminder. I already have noted as much. They returned the issue to the States, as they clearly stated. It isn’t exactly an obscure point. And nothing I said suggests otherwise.

 

[Flopper]

Pretty sure Paxton said he's gonna do it.

Yar!

SCOTUS is done with abortion. It's a state issue.

 

[Flopper]

False!
Allow me to quote the great one, judge Robert Bork:


"That in turn led to Roe v. Wade and the right to abortion. Whatever one’s feelings about abortion, the decision has no constitutional foundation, and the Court offered no constitutional reasoning. Roe is nothing more than the decision of a Court majority to enlist on one side of the culture war."

Yet, overturning Row may prove to be a huge problem for pro-lifers because it will prevent the federal government from being involved in any right to abortion issue. It is all up to each individual state. That may sound good now but when the time comes when republicans have a strong control of congress and the presidency, a federal ban on abortion will be impossible because the SCOTUS ruling made abortion a state issue. What pro-lifers want is a total abolishment of abortion and overturning Roe has made that all but impossible.

 

[Flopper]

Then you should take the time to read what Thomas wrote in conjunction to this ruling.

Thomas wants to overturn Griswold vs Connecticut which would allow states to dictate what type of contraception if any their citizens could use. Thomas is a firm believer in a strict interpretation of the enumerated powers in the constitution . All power that are not specifically declared a power of the federal government is a state power. No matter what the consequence would be he wants to bring America into a non-interpreted adherence to the constitution. So if Thomas had his way, he would restore state control of contraceptives', reverse the gay marriage ruling, eliminate Medicaid as a federal program as well as Medicare, Social Security, Financial assistance to Education, etc. However most of his fellow justices are not willing to destroy the nation and rebuild it in a strict accordance with the constitution.

 

[buckeye45_73]

New scince can be the basis for overturning precedent, but "new science" was not presented for justifying this decision.

No, new science is why people dont like later abortions. It's why many states are going to 15 weeks. Roe was overturned becasue it was an awful decision with horrible reasoning, even people who want abortion know that.

 

[Kosh]

"Roe isn't really about the woman's choice, is it?" Ginsburg told the University of Chicago Law School in May 2013. "It's about the doctor's freedom to practice...it wasn't woman-centered, it was physician-centered."

 

[Flopper]

A family member once didn't know she was pregnant until she started giving birth and had a bunch of pain. She was extremely overweight and so the baby never showed. But, what this decision does is give the people back their power to decide. If the people vote to change the law, they can do it. I thought Democrats loved democracy? Guess not.

Actually it gives the state legislature, not the voters the power to change, delete, or let stand state abortion laws. I vote democrat and after thinking thru the court ruling, I agree. It's not that I want to see the poor suffer and be force to bear children they can't afford in red states but because the ruling makes it impossible for a federal law to ban abortion. I'll rest easy knowing states my kids and grandkids live in will likely never lose their right to an abortion due to a federal law.

 

[Lesh]

An estimated 10 billion dollars in child support never gets collected.

And that's where decrees have been made.

 

[Flopper]

They should be demonstrating against the D Party and Obama.

Weird to blame Bernie for #RoeVsWade being overturned instead of Barack Obama who actually had the power to codify, but instead used his majorities in Congress to pass Mitt Romney’s healthcare plan, made the bush tax cuts permanent, and bailed out his Wall Street donors

We can only wish, right?

If Obama got a law passed that protected abortion rights, SCOTUS could have overturned it with Roe based on the same reasoning Thomas used in the majority opinion; the federal government does not have power to regulate abortion and there it must be left to the states.

 

[Lesh]

Actually it gives the state legislature, not the voters the power to change, delete, or let stand state abortion laws. I vote democrat and after thinking thru the court ruling, I agree. It's not that I want to see the poor suffer and be force to bear children they can't afford in red states but because the ruling makes it impossible for a federal law to ban abortion. I'll rest easy knowing states my kids and grandkids live in will likely never lose their right to an abortion due to a federal law.

Until this court rules on "fetal personhood".