Should abortion be illegal? AKA Roe vs Wade

Should abortion be made illegal?

  • Yes

    Votes: 13 7.1%
  • No

    Votes: 169 92.9%

  • Total voters
    182
No idea, I was 2. I would have agreed with whichever of them gave me a sweet.

The fact is that the only reason that this has become an issue again after 50 years is because of the personal, radical, politics of the judges in question who have been appointed by an extreme right wing President. I absolutely fkng despair of where conservative politics are right now, it is utterly backward and driven by puritan religious doctrine. Frankly doesn't seem to be much separation of church and state either right now.
Or the reason is the Judges have corrected a legal wrong.
Where the **** have the politicians been for the last 50 years?
Roe vs Wade has been under attack for nearly 5 decades, this isn't a new thing.
 
As I have mentioned before, much of the blame lies with Congress for being complacent and not codifying it into law decades ago and then we could have avoided this. What has happened now though is purely politically driven by the agenda of religious nutjobs.
Every ****** has an agenda, religious or otherwise,
Complacent my hoop, they just didnt want the aggravation, there are a fair amount (a minority) of Democrats who agree with pro life and a fair amount of Republicans who are pro choice, far easier to let the supreme Court take the blame.
 
No idea, I was 2. I would have agreed with whichever of them gave me a sweet.

The fact is that the only reason that this has become an issue again after 50 years is because of the personal, radical, politics of the judges in question who have been appointed by an extreme right wing President. I absolutely fkng despair of where conservative politics are right now, it is utterly backward and driven by puritan religious doctrine. Frankly doesn't seem to be much separation of church and state either right now.
The Orange one was extreme right wing?
I think anybody to the right of JC would be XRW in your book.
 
As a taxpayer, I might end up paying for these procedures
As a taxpayer, you already end up paying for procedures to treat carelessly handled firearms, poor diets and a great many other consequences of personal choice.
 
The Orange one was extreme right wing?
I think anybody to the right of JC would be XRW in your book.
You seem to have trouble with the fact that one can be a conservative (certainly of the UK variety) without thinking that Marjorie Taylor Green has her finger on the pulse
 
You seem to have trouble with the fact that one can be a conservative (certainly of the UK variety) without thinking that Marjorie Taylor Green has her finger on the pulse
The UK variety of conservative is not the American variety that lives in the Red States. Which is why you fail to grasp the difference in beliefs, and the actions ongoing seem so radical.
 
The UK variety of conservative is not the American variety that lives in the Red States. Which is why you fail to grasp the difference in beliefs, and the actions ongoing seem so radical.
Oh I understand the beliefs OK, the US religious right are utterly mental. It is utterly shocking to see and so, so, damaging to your country. It doesn't help that you think that anyone more moderate than Ron de Santis is a socialist.
 

WhiteCrane

War Hero
The decision to overturn Roe Vs Wade does not make abortion illegal in the USA - it just returns the decision to the individual State Legislators. Abortion is not and was never in the American Constitution and the Supreme Court had no legal justification to make their decision in the 70s - it was an 'activist' decision rather than legal- even the much vaunted left wing Supreme Court Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated many times that it was 'problematic'.

I have zero skin in this game and am not against abortion - as long as the cut off time for it is sensible like most modern western democracy's. Last week, Chucky Schumer, Far Left Democrat Senate Leader, put forward a bill to create a Federal Law to allow abortion with no time limits - ie up to the point of birth for the mothers health - but very carefully did not explain what is meant by 'health' - some Democrat activists are actually calling for abortion AFTER the baby has been birthed! if the mother decides she wants it for her mental 'health' - unsurprisingly, the bill got soundly defeated as it was batshit crazy

Some States, like Florida, have a 15 week limit and limited exceptions after that point regarding saving the mothers life and others such as far Left California and New York will no doubt become Abortion Tourist destinations where women all over America will get fully funded travel and other costs - and that is not a joke, it is already being planned and funded

- the point is, it will now depend upon the State Representatives to make their State laws and if the people in their State don't like it, they can get voted out - the Supreme Court Judges are unelected, political appointees and life appointees who have no business judging on anything not in the constitution or bypassing congress to create their own new Federal Laws. Biden has the White house, Senate and Congress -all he has to do is to get Chucky Schumer to put forward a sensible Federal Abortion law that most people, including Republicans in the USA can support - opinion polls say that 60-70ish percent of yanks support abortion so it is not beyond the wit of man to create a law if lawmakers compromise
I thought that in some states that it was specifically illegal to go to NY to get an abortion?
 

WhiteCrane

War Hero
I would love to know how devout the religious zealots are who want to overturn the act. Are they perfect Christians , or do they cherry pick the commandments they like.
1 of the things I did not like was so-called Christians not practicing, yet refuse to use contraception! That pissed me off no end!
 
Couple of interesting things have come out on my US knitting forum overnight:

The governors of the states of Washington, Oregon and California have signed a Western State Pact about reproductive freedom.

https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/u...ommitment-to-Reproductive-Freedom_Final-1.pdf

Multi-State Commitment to Reproductive Freedom

For fifty years, the United States has recognized the right to reproductive freedom as critical to guaranteeing every person has control over their own bodies, and privacy regarding their most intimate reproductive choices.

Reproductive freedom –including the choice of when and whether to have children –is foundational to a person’s autonomy, dignity, and ability to participate fully in economic, social, and civic life.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn half a century of settled precedent and rescind the U.S. Constitution’s protection of reproductive freedom jeopardizes safe access to reproductive healthcare across the United States.

Today, over half the states in this country outright ban or severely restrict access to abortion. In many states, patients, doctors, and other health care providers now face criminal prosecution for receiving or providing abortion health care. Health care providers also face civil liability or loss of their medical licenses.

Emboldened by the U.S. Supreme Court’s leaked and now final decision, anti-choice states are considering legislation to extend the effect of their laws outside their own territorial borders. They seek to criminalize patients who travel to other states where abortion healthcare is legal, as well as the health care providers offering services and anyone else who helps patients access that care. Other states are considering bans on contraception, including IUDs and morning-after pills. Even more crackdowns on reproductive freedom are certain to follow.

We will not stand on the sidelines as these attacks mount.

Through this Multi-State Commitment to Reproductive Freedom, the undersigned states will defend access to reproductive healthcare, including abortion and contraceptives. Together, we commit to work to:

•Protect against efforts by states hostile to abortion rights to target patients who receive legal reproductive healthcare services in our states, those who support patients in accessing reproductive healthcare services in our states, and licensed medical professionals who provide legal reproductive healthcare services in our states; and

•Protect against judicial and local law enforcement cooperation with out-of-state investigations, inquiries, and arrests regarding the provision of, receipt of, inquiry about, or assistance with obtaining abortion and other reproductive healthcare services that are legal in our states; and

•Refuse non-fugitive extradition of individuals for criminal prosecution for receiving legal reproductive healthcare services in our states, supporting patients in accessing reproductive healthcare services in our states, or providing legal reproductive healthcare services in our states, and charge our state judiciaries with not issuing subpoenas or summons in cases where prosecution is pending, or where a grand jury investigation has commenced or is about to commence, for a civil or criminal violation of a law of another state involving the provision or receipt of or assistance with lawful reproductive healthcare services accessed in one of our states; and

•Protect against the misuse of medical records and other personal and sensitive health information to target patients who receive legal reproductive healthcare services in our states, those who support patients in accessing legal reproductive healthcare services in our states, and licensed medical professionals who provide legal reproductive healthcare services in our states; and

•Protect against adverse actions by personal or professional liability insurers against those who assisted an individual from out-of-state in receiving an abortion or other reproductive healthcare services in our states, solely on that basis; and

•Defend and protect licensed medical professionals in continuing to provide reproductive healthcare, in compliance with state and federal law, including by supporting legislative and executive actions to protect licensed medical professionals from adverse actions by licensing boards and liability insurers solely because the professionals provided reproductive healthcare services in our states consistent with state and federal law and standards of care, when the claims are based on laws in other states that are hostile to abortion rights and are contrary to the public policy of our states; and

•Promote greater access to abortion care services, including by expanding access to medication abortion, removing barriers to telehealth for reproductive healthcare services, and growing the pool of qualified practitioners who may provide abortion and other reproductive healthcare services; and

•Defend against false and misleading reproductive healthcare information.

This commitment was made and issued jointly by the undersigned on this 24th day of June 2022.

And then there's this (which also occurred to me yesterday, as well as the potential impact on universities and colleges in anti-abortion states).

 
Show what paragraph and article or clause specifically mentions the word Abortion


The Tinkering was in 1973
Maybe you should ask the judges who decided that there was one and, all subsequent judgements based on the 'opinion' ? Maybe something to do with womens rights ?

I might also ask, where in the 2nd Amendment does it say, citizens have the right to buy and use automatic weapons "for personal protection" ?

Any such document is meant for guidance, not slavish adherance...it is now used by all and sundry,as a club to forward their specific agenda...what originally was drafted as a protection of democracy, is now being used as a weapon AGAINST democracy !
 
Last edited:
Maybe something to do with womens rights ?
I seem to recall that the entire document was written to promote individual liberty and the rationale behind it was the 'self-evident truth' that governments which trod on personal freedom were tyrannies.

Obviously there are different levels of inalienability.
 
Maybe you should ask the judges who decided that there was one and, all subsequent judgements based on the 'opinion' ? Maybe something to do with womens rights ?

I might also ask, where in the 2nd Amendment does it say, citizens have the right to buy and use automatic weapons "for personal protection" ?

Any such document is meant for guidance, not slavish adherance...it is now used by all and sundry,as a club to forward their specific agenda...what originally was drafted as a protection of democracy, is now being used as a weapon AGAINST democracy !
So it doesn't specifically mention abortion?
You do know what the 1973 decision was based on don't you?

As for women's right a sizeable amount of women want to ban abortion, do they not have the right to say so?
 
So it doesn't specifically mention abortion?
You do know what the 1973 decision was based on don't you?

As for women's right a sizeable amount of women want to ban abortion, do they not have the right to say so?
But not a majority of women...
 
But not a majority of women...

So? Do the minority not get a say? Democracy doesnt mean you have to agree with the result.
 
Top