Supreme Court overturning Roe v Wade?

If Roe vs. Wade is overturned, there will be a substantial increase in "back alley" abortions which put the Mothers lives at a great risk, and a large number of children born who will not receive the "upbringing" they deserve.
The people who support this "overturn" need to look back a few decades. and review the conditions which created this ruling
 

Last edited:
helenbacque said:
I just hope that when voters enter the booth, they remember which political party pushed this.
Click to expand...
Don't bet the farm! We wouldn't be in this spot if some potential voters were not downright lazy thereby not voting at all in 2016. Plus a good percentage employed tunnel vision when voting instead of looking at the Big Picture.
 

Alligatorob said:
This Roe v Wade debate confuses me a bit. Maybe I am naive but it seems to me a Supreme Court decision, or any court decision should be based on the law. In this case was the original decision constitutionally based or not. That is the Supreme Court's job. Seems to me it should not have anything to do with their opinions on the rightful or wrongfulness of abortion...

I absolutely support a woman's right to choose, it only seems right to me. It is clear that we do not have a consensus in the US as to the rightful or wrongfulness of abortion, which makes it the perfect issue for the government not to be involved with. Don't force anyone to abort, and don't restrict anyone who does...
Click to expand...
From what I have heard and read, the decision to overturn R v W is due to an opinion that it was erroneous from the start. Somewhere in the opinion is the argument that the Constitution does not mention abortion and therefore it is a matter for legislation. Each state would be free to pass their own laws to protect or disallow terminations. Roughly half of the states have already passed legislation that would be triggered by the overthrow of R v W. They would become effective immediately.

The Federal government could also pass laws protecting the rights of women but would presumably need to remove the filibuster in the Senate. Laws, state and federal could be reversed with a change of government after elections and presumably could be blocked by president or state governors.

It will get very messy and reaction will be fierce.

The final vote of SCOTUS has not yet been formally taken and if one justice changes his/her vote the 5/4 against R v W could become 5/4 for it. It's not over yet.
 
Lavinia said:
I think the majority of men hate women...hence their diabolical treatment of them (there are exceptions, of course).
Click to expand...
I don't think men actually hate women but many want to control us. The slogan of the German empire - Kinder, Kuche, Kirche - reflects what a lot of men still think is the true role of women.

Kinder, Küche, Kirche or the 3 Ks, is a German slogan translated as "children, kitchen, church" used under the German Empire to describe a woman's role in society. It now has a mostly derogatory connotation, describing what is seen as an antiquated female role model in contemporary Western society. The phrase is vaguely equivalent to the American "barefoot and pregnant", the British Victorian era "A woman's place is in the home" or the phrase "Good Wife, Wise Mother" from Meiji Japan.
Click to expand...


​

 
SCOTUS Chief Justice confirms leaked document is genuine.

US Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts confirms leaked draft of abortion decision is authentic, orders investigation
On Tuesday, Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed the authenticity of a leaked draft document written by Justice Samuel Alito suggesting that the US Supreme Court will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark case that made abortion legal nationwide. Roberts added that, while it is legitimate, it is not yet a final decision and directed the Marshal of the Court to launch an investigation into the leak. POLITICO was the first to report the leaked document on Monday, which is dated February 10.

What you need to know
- Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed the authenticity of the leaked document on Tuesday
- In the document, Justice Alito says “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start”
- The decision is not final until it’s published, likely in the next two months, and justices can and sometimes do change their votes, according to POLITICO
- President Joe Biden said the "stability of our law" requires that the Supreme Court doesn't overrule Roe v. Wade and that he'll work to codify the right to abortion
 
I think that just because there was a leak from within the court is an atrocity within itself. I have often read that the SC has taken great care to protect against leaks since ever. Who would do such a thing, but more importantly why would they do it? The SC being as secretive as it has been over the many, many years is what is most important and is one of the reasons why the Judges that sit on the high court have life terms.

The person that leaked this information needs to be outed and penalized.
 
I'm glad my question prompted such an interesting discussion. But can I please ask everyone to leave the politics out of it, due to the rules of this forum?

I don't think this is really a political issue; it's more of a religious and "right of choice/right to life" issue. So I think it can be discussed without brnging voting or individual politicins into it.
 
Sunny said:
I'm glad my question prompted such an interesting discussion. But can I please ask everyone to leave the politics out of it, due to the rules of this forum?

I don't think this is really a political issue; it's more of a religious and "right of choice/right to life" issue. So I think it can be discussed without brnging voting or individual politicins into it.
Click to expand...

Candidates and politicians have fought about it for years. They're all over the news today. It's about as political as you can get.

.
 
Sunny said:
I'm glad my question prompted such an interesting discussion. But can I please ask everyone to leave the politics out of it, due to the rules of this forum?

I don't think this is really a political issue; it's more of a religious and "right of choice/right to life" issue. So I think it can be discussed without brnging voting or individual politicins into it.
Click to expand...
I agree with the religious statement, but moreso, evangelical christian ideology which is. " Control the women ! " .
 
Yet, @Sachet, I know of quite a few businesswomen who are also evangelical xians. Most live in FL! Very successful in fund-raising careers.
 
Paco Dennis said:
The freedom of religion should be the freedom FROM religion. There are atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, Catholics, and whole bunch of other religious beliefs and they all are different. Why should a religious belief about the inception of life become a law?
Click to expand...
The First Amendment specifies both the freedom of and from religion. It states specifically:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
 
Lavinia said:
I think the majority of men hate women...hence their diabolical treatment of them (there are exceptions, of course).
Click to expand...
I don't think this is true. However, I do think a majority of politically powerful people think they know best on all manner of subjects, and that they therefore should have the right to impose their will on others.

IMHO, men should have a 10% vote on the abortion issue. It might be their sperm but since possession is 9/10 of the law, women should have 9/10 of the control on this issue.
 
Last edited:
oldaunt said:
Maybe some of those who don't want to be pregnant will actually take responsibility for themselves and actually start using birth control. Not like there aren't a great many to choose from. Beats the heck out of just being lazy, then doing murder. Worked for me.
Click to expand...
Not all unplanned pregnancies or pregnancies that women choose to terminate are due to laziness or a lack of birth control.
 
oldaunt said:
Maybe some of those who don't want to be pregnant will actually take responsibility for themselves and actually start using birth control. Not like there aren't a great many to choose from. Beats the heck out of just being lazy, then doing murder. Worked for me.
Click to expand...
Here's your mistake. The very same folks who bring suit against abortion are likely to bring suit against contraceptives, bringing us back to pre Margaret Sanger days. If the Supreme Court is the same, guess what? They are not fans of gay marriage either. Buckle up, it's a wild ride!
 
oldaunt said:
Maybe some of those who don't want to be pregnant will actually take responsibility for themselves and actually start using birth control. Not like there aren't a great many to choose from. Beats the heck out of just being lazy, then doing murder. Worked for me.
Click to expand...
Now you are touching on the crux. You used the word -responsibility.
 
""I absolutely support a woman's right to choose""

WHAT in the name of ALL is wrong with simply choosing to use one or more of the MANY forms of birth control available, much of it for free, and AVOIDING the majority of the abortion issue? That's what we USED to do if we didn't want to get pregnant. Is it THAT difficult to be a responsible human being?
 
Pepper said:
Here's your mistake. The very same folks who bring suit against abortion are likely to bring suit against contraceptives, bringing us back to pre Margaret Sanger days. If the Supreme Court is the same, guess what? They are not fans of gay marriage either. Buckle up, it's a wild ride!
Click to expand...
Too generalized statements and assumptions. Let’s not bundle different issues together.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top