Roe v Wade struck down

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven’t read beyond the first several pages so apologies if this has been brought up.

Health clinics on federal land. Privately funded abortions. Possible? Feasible?

Health Clinics in Native American Reservations has been brought up, possible and doable. Employers are stepping up to offer travel reimbursement to employees who can travel to a state that offers abortions, along with covering the medical procedure as part of their health plan.

That’s nice and all, but no one should have to inform their employer that they need to have an abortion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: This is not something I thought I would ever actually see.

Kudos to the SCOTUS on this. Always should have been up to the states.

But why exactly? I'm just looking for the rationale why it should be a state decision and not a federal one. I can't have children anymore so just curious for the next generation.

There is no Constitutional right to an abortion. The Constitution enshrines a very small number of fundamental enumerated and unenumerated rights. It doesn’t protect everything that’s good.

In the midst of a massive social and political fight over abortion, Roe and Casey created an obvious fiction: a Constitutional right to “privacy” that included a right to abortion. This removed the issue from the usual political process, and did irreparable damage to the Court and the country. Suddenly the Court was a 100% political institution.

Today’s decision delivers the issue back to the political process, where it always should have been. I am basically pro choice. I also recognize that someone isn’t crazy, or a bigot or a woman hater, if they really feel like aborting a fetus (particularly one that is viable, can feel pain, etc.) is murder or something close to it. It’s a complicated issue. There is going to have to be a compromise that leaves both sides unhappy. And the debate will continue, people will make arguments, mobilize votes. That’s what’s supposed to happen on hotly contested policy questions in a democracy.

So basically the constitution didn't and still doesn't consider having an abortion ending a life? The constitution enshrines life as far as I know. Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness.

No idea what your post is even trying to articulate. But the Constitution is different from the Declaration of Independence.

This kind of demonstrates the point though. This illiterate PP is free to have an opinion about abortion rights. But trying to support that opinion in the context of Constitutional law is a joke. You people have no clue what you’re talking about.

True I don't know but I started my request asking why this was a state's rights verses federal decision so I pretty much said I was ignorant from the beginning and never gave an opinion. I'm not a supreme court judge nor do I really have an opinion on abortion either way. I think more children and women should be cared for, but I don't know the law what should be allowed. Pro lifers seem to think it's murder so they would want a federal ruling I'd think that it was taking away a life and not a state's rights. I don't really understand why it was federal for roe-v wade and now why states have the right to decide. I don't really understand the new or old law on this. I'm mainly curious why it was determined that this be a state decision rather than a federal one.

Roe held that there was a constitutional right to an abortion. Applied to the whole country/federal.

This SCOTUS is now saying there is no constitutional right to an abortion. This means that the states can legislate any way they want. So it’s now a state by state issue.

Thank you. And originally it was a constitutional right because?

Because all people are guaranteed liberty under the constitution, which can only be abridged by the state given compelling interests. The states now need no reason to infringe upon your rights. Great job conservatives.

The right to reproduce is the most basic right of all, next to the right to live. Everything else is meaningless. Abortion is baked into the human experience. It’s not surprising to me the Founders took it for granted. In fact, until very recently this obsession with fetuses was a fringe Catholic belief only.

And not even really a Catholic belief. When my grandmother had a miscarriage in 1931, did anyone act like it was a death of a child? No. When my mom had one in 1966, did anyone? No. It's only very recently that Catholics have gone in for those "angel in heaven" and prayer services for miscarried fetuses. All that stuff came *after* the massive anti-abortion movement, which was thoroughly astrotufed by Republicans who needed a rallying cry post-Nixon to rebuild the party.

^^^This. It's all manufactured.

Way more embryos are miscarried than ever get gestated and born. If embryos and fetuses were sacred human life created by a supreme being, then that supreme being sure is a sick monster. And don't come back with the "god has a plan" nonsense. It makes absolutely no sense to create billions of embryos and fetuses, say they have souls and call them sacred life, and then have them wash down the toilet from natural circumstances, often before a woman even knows there was a conception. You anti-abortionists have no rejoinder to this philosophical conundrum, which is why you always conveniently ignore it.

I have an issue with abortion not from a philosophical perspective but because the fetus can feel pain during the procedure.

No, it can’t. Where do you get this crap from?

There is some evidence that fetuses may feel pain, but it is entirely unknowable. If this is an honest objection, it can be addressed with fetal analgesics during the procedure, but I sense it isn't a good faith objection.

Of course it’s not. How do you experience pain if you don’t have a fully developed brain??

Because there have been pain studies of preterm infants before 25 weeks who do seem to indicate pain responses. But again, we can't know and while I think it is wrong to dismiss the possibility because it makes you [general] look rigid and unwilling to accept new info, it is not a strong argument because of how the procedure is performed AND the use of analgesics to dull pain.

Who cares? I don't and it should not even be a consideration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Corporations need to speak up and leave states that have banned abortions. Offering to pay for women to travel out of state doesn’t cut it. No reason for women’s privacy to be violated to uphold an extreme religious doctrine.

Agree. This is a major human rights issue. Out of these states. I’m ready to boycott the companies that don’t leave.

Dick’s Sporting goods just announced a $4,000 travel benefit to help employees and one support person seek the healthcare they choose.

Pp here. No. Providing funds (and having the woman fill out the paperwork for hr totally violates her privacy) is not going to make corporate responsibility go away on this one. They need to leave the states that have banned abortion. Money talks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finally, after the suctioning of 63 million growing babies

STFU you total POS!!

those were fetuses, not "babies"

grow a brain and learn the difference

Your cursing and vile language changes nothing. They ARE growing babies.

They are potential babies, especially before 12 weeks when the vast majority of pregnancies are terminated. Does all potential life need to be consecrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro life and highly educated here. I had two unplanned pregnancies. Two sons, both are now adults, and their leftist father and family tried to get me to abort.

Highly educated but can’t figure out that you got to make your own choice here, the same choice you want to take away from women. Since forced birthers like you have trouble with this, imagine that the “leftist father” with whom you had intercourse with (outside the bonds of marriage) had been allowed to force you to abort.

(And you twice conceived with a man who didn’t want children? Odd that you, according to the forced birth dogma I’ve been subjected to, didn’t take any kind of precautions or personal responsibility.)

Abortion isn’t banned. It’s now up to the states to decide what they want to make law, and what they don’t. If the leftist father was able to make me abort, the same people screaming now would be supporting him and not my right to choose to keep the kids. And I was married at the time.

Do you not understand what “leaving it to the states” means?

It means it will be banned in certain states. It means a federal ban is possible. No one advocates for forced abortion in this forum. Maybe you’re thinking about China.

It means we live in a representative democracy. It means the people in each of the states, through their representatives, will be able to decide what sort of public policy they want. It means Manhattan preferences aren't imposed on Oklahoma, and vice versa.

No we live in a Constitutional Republic. FFS!!! Your ignorance knows no bounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro life and highly educated here. I had two unplanned pregnancies. Two sons, both are now adults, and their leftist father and family tried to get me to abort.

Highly educated but can’t figure out that you got to make your own choice here, the same choice you want to take away from women. Since forced birthers like you have trouble with this, imagine that the “leftist father” with whom you had intercourse with (outside the bonds of marriage) had been allowed to force you to abort.

(And you twice conceived with a man who didn’t want children? Odd that you, according to the forced birth dogma I’ve been subjected to, didn’t take any kind of precautions or personal responsibility.)

Abortion isn’t banned. It’s now up to the states to decide what they want to make law, and what they don’t. If the leftist father was able to make me abort, the same people screaming now would be supporting him and not my right to choose to keep the kids. And I was married at the time.

Half of the states have already banned abortion, because they have trigger laws that went into place as soon as Roe v. Wade was overturned. I don’t know why you people keep needing this to be explained to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven’t read beyond the first several pages so apologies if this has been brought up.

Health clinics on federal land. Privately funded abortions. Possible? Feasible?

Biden would never do this. He’s too worried what Mitch might think.
A Biden supporter who is grateful Trump is out but disappointed Biden can’t rise to the occasion

A 50-50 Senate and Manchin cannot always be counted on. What do you think Biden can do? You are an idiot!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: This is not something I thought I would ever actually see.

Kudos to the SCOTUS on this. Always should have been up to the states.

But why exactly? I'm just looking for the rationale why it should be a state decision and not a federal one. I can't have children anymore so just curious for the next generation.

There is no Constitutional right to an abortion. The Constitution enshrines a very small number of fundamental enumerated and unenumerated rights. It doesn’t protect everything that’s good.

In the midst of a massive social and political fight over abortion, Roe and Casey created an obvious fiction: a Constitutional right to “privacy” that included a right to abortion. This removed the issue from the usual political process, and did irreparable damage to the Court and the country. Suddenly the Court was a 100% political institution.

Today’s decision delivers the issue back to the political process, where it always should have been. I am basically pro choice. I also recognize that someone isn’t crazy, or a bigot or a woman hater, if they really feel like aborting a fetus (particularly one that is viable, can feel pain, etc.) is murder or something close to it. It’s a complicated issue. There is going to have to be a compromise that leaves both sides unhappy. And the debate will continue, people will make arguments, mobilize votes. That’s what’s supposed to happen on hotly contested policy questions in a democracy.

So basically the constitution didn't and still doesn't consider having an abortion ending a life? The constitution enshrines life as far as I know. Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness.

No idea what your post is even trying to articulate. But the Constitution is different from the Declaration of Independence.

This kind of demonstrates the point though. This illiterate PP is free to have an opinion about abortion rights. But trying to support that opinion in the context of Constitutional law is a joke. You people have no clue what you’re talking about.

True I don't know but I started my request asking why this was a state's rights verses federal decision so I pretty much said I was ignorant from the beginning and never gave an opinion. I'm not a supreme court judge nor do I really have an opinion on abortion either way. I think more children and women should be cared for, but I don't know the law what should be allowed. Pro lifers seem to think it's murder so they would want a federal ruling I'd think that it was taking away a life and not a state's rights. I don't really understand why it was federal for roe-v wade and now why states have the right to decide. I don't really understand the new or old law on this. I'm mainly curious why it was determined that this be a state decision rather than a federal one.

Roe held that there was a constitutional right to an abortion. Applied to the whole country/federal.

This SCOTUS is now saying there is no constitutional right to an abortion. This means that the states can legislate any way they want. So it’s now a state by state issue.

Thank you. And originally it was a constitutional right because?

Because all people are guaranteed liberty under the constitution, which can only be abridged by the state given compelling interests. The states now need no reason to infringe upon your rights. Great job conservatives.

The right to reproduce is the most basic right of all, next to the right to live. Everything else is meaningless. Abortion is baked into the human experience. It’s not surprising to me the Founders took it for granted. In fact, until very recently this obsession with fetuses was a fringe Catholic belief only.

And not even really a Catholic belief. When my grandmother had a miscarriage in 1931, did anyone act like it was a death of a child? No. When my mom had one in 1966, did anyone? No. It's only very recently that Catholics have gone in for those "angel in heaven" and prayer services for miscarried fetuses. All that stuff came *after* the massive anti-abortion movement, which was thoroughly astrotufed by Republicans who needed a rallying cry post-Nixon to rebuild the party.

^^^This. It's all manufactured.

Way more embryos are miscarried than ever get gestated and born. If embryos and fetuses were sacred human life created by a supreme being, then that supreme being sure is a sick monster. And don't come back with the "god has a plan" nonsense. It makes absolutely no sense to create billions of embryos and fetuses, say they have souls and call them sacred life, and then have them wash down the toilet from natural circumstances, often before a woman even knows there was a conception. You anti-abortionists have no rejoinder to this philosophical conundrum, which is why you always conveniently ignore it.

I have an issue with abortion not from a philosophical perspective but because the fetus can feel pain during the procedure.

No, it can’t. Where do you get this crap from?

There is some evidence that fetuses may feel pain, but it is entirely unknowable. If this is an honest objection, it can be addressed with fetal analgesics during the procedure, but I sense it isn't a good faith objection.

Of course it’s not. How do you experience pain if you don’t have a fully developed brain??

Because there have been pain studies of preterm infants before 25 weeks who do seem to indicate pain responses. But again, we can't know and while I think it is wrong to dismiss the possibility because it makes you [general] look rigid and unwilling to accept new info, it is not a strong argument because of how the procedure is performed AND the use of analgesics to dull pain.

Who cares? I don't and it should not even be a consideration.

Oh dear lord, are you even reading what I am saying? I said explicitly it is a bad argument, but if you want to convince someone that it is bad, you will get further without a blanket dismissal and ignoring potential contradictory arguments. If this is something someone brings up, mention that analgesics solve the so-called problem. It's not a consideration to your or to me, but to others...the question is do you want to be right, or do you want to change minds? because with this new ruling, changing minds is all we have left.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven’t read beyond the first several pages so apologies if this has been brought up.

Health clinics on federal land. Privately funded abortions. Possible? Feasible?

Biden would never do this. He’s too worried what Mitch might think.
A Biden supporter who is grateful Trump is out but disappointed Biden can’t rise to the occasion

A 50-50 Senate and Manchin cannot always be counted on. What do you think Biden can do? You are an idiot!!!!!

I would skip the name calling but yeah. Biden can do very little here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro life and highly educated here. I had two unplanned pregnancies. Two sons, both are now adults, and their leftist father and family tried to get me to abort.

Highly educated but can’t figure out that you got to make your own choice here, the same choice you want to take away from women. Since forced birthers like you have trouble with this, imagine that the “leftist father” with whom you had intercourse with (outside the bonds of marriage) had been allowed to force you to abort.

(And you twice conceived with a man who didn’t want children? Odd that you, according to the forced birth dogma I’ve been subjected to, didn’t take any kind of precautions or personal responsibility.)

Abortion isn’t banned. It’s now up to the states to decide what they want to make law, and what they don’t. If the leftist father was able to make me abort, the same people screaming now would be supporting him and not my right to choose to keep the kids. And I was married at the time.

Do you not understand what “leaving it to the states” means?

It means it will be banned in certain states. It means a federal ban is possible. No one advocates for forced abortion in this forum. Maybe you’re thinking about China.

It means we live in a representative democracy. It means the people in each of the states, through their representatives, will be able to decide what sort of public policy they want. It means Manhattan preferences aren't imposed on Oklahoma, and vice versa.

Funny how this principle only applies when conservatives want it to. Yesterday they were happy to throw out public policy decided by elected representatives by ignoring explicit constitutional text.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro life and highly educated here. I had two unplanned pregnancies. Two sons, both are now adults, and their leftist father and family tried to get me to abort.

Highly educated but can’t figure out that you got to make your own choice here, the same choice you want to take away from women. Since forced birthers like you have trouble with this, imagine that the “leftist father” with whom you had intercourse with (outside the bonds of marriage) had been allowed to force you to abort.

(And you twice conceived with a man who didn’t want children? Odd that you, according to the forced birth dogma I’ve been subjected to, didn’t take any kind of precautions or personal responsibility.)

Abortion isn’t banned. It’s now up to the states to decide what they want to make law, and what they don’t. If the leftist father was able to make me abort, the same people screaming now would be supporting him and not my right to choose to keep the kids. And I was married at the time.

Do you not understand what “leaving it to the states” means?

It means it will be banned in certain states. It means a federal ban is possible. No one advocates for forced abortion in this forum. Maybe you’re thinking about China.

It means we live in a representative democracy. It means the people in each of the states, through their representatives, will be able to decide what sort of public policy they want. It means Manhattan preferences aren't imposed on Oklahoma, and vice versa.

No we live in a Constitutional Republic. FFS!!! Your ignorance knows no bounds.

I think you missed the point.

To me, the point is it should not matter where you live and people should not get a vote at all on what medical procedures any other person has, full stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. This will mobilize the masses.

No it won’t. People are apathetic about anything that won’t affect them personally.

Oh hell no, even Republican women are fired up. All republican women were not anti abortion. But I don't know what to do personally. Write congress? March? I never see any of those effect change.

No.

Start a legal campaign using solid reasoning.

Civil rights.

Equal protection.

These will prevail.

Roe was a weak case, which made it vulnerable.

Unfortunately, too many of us took it for granted. And we believed Bratty Would-Be-Rapist Kavanaugh and Amy Boob Job when they said it was settled law.

Get a decision that won't fail. It's possible if you want it. The law is on our side.

Demand Congress end the filibuster and codify Roe v Wade into law now. Dems control the House and the Senate and the President. Demand they do this now. Do not let Congress abrogate their responsibility to the people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finally, after the suctioning of 63 million growing babies

STFU you total POS!!

those were fetuses, not "babies"

grow a brain and learn the difference

Your cursing and vile language changes nothing. They ARE growing babies.

A fetus is not a baby. Just as a toddler is not an adult. Or are you arguing that an infant is a growing adult?

We know that nuance is hard for cons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moderate, apolitical soccer mom here- where can I protest? I seriously didn't believe this would happen. How could it?!?

I aborted a baby that had Potter Syndrome (no kidneys) after 20 weeks. The baby would have died on arrival. I'm 100% positive I would have had to carry that baby to term and cry every time I felt it kicking knowing it would die. My health was not in danger, but the baby would die no matter what I did. I went on to have 3 more extremely wanted and loved babies.

Sorry, honey, but you will have to carry that baby to term, crying all the way. That's what these "pro-life" folks want, so you'll have to suck it up, OK?

For someone who is on the same side as this mom, you sure expressed that in a terrible and heartless way. I'm sorry for your loss, PP. I also lost a baby and went on to have children, but I still think of that one with sadness.

So what?! I had two abortions and have never given them a second thought. I ready had three children and wanted no more. This is the choice every female in the world should have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finally, after the suctioning of 63 million growing babies

STFU you total POS!!

those were fetuses, not "babies"

grow a brain and learn the difference

I've been pregnant 3 times. Not once did any of my doctors (male or female) refer to my pregnancy with the word fetus.