Should abortion be illegal? AKA Roe vs Wade

Should abortion be made illegal?

  • Yes

    Votes: 13 7.1%
  • No

    Votes: 170 92.9%

  • Total voters
    183
I'm not saying that Mann, as it stands, could be used to prevent trans-state travel for purposes of abortion. However, it showed that judiciaries in the US have been able to criminalise such travel in certain circumstances, and a principle has been set which could be used to enable new legislation prohibiting other circumstances, including travelling to a pro-choice state for the purpose of abortion.

News today is that some commercial organisations have undertaken to financially assist abortion-seeking employees to travel for purposes of abortion. You can see where this is going to lead.
You used a example of a person being trafficked by others to equivacate it to someone of their own free will traveling to another state.
 
Religions have effectively created all our cultural norms that led into laws in order to build societies. In the UK the 10 Commandments and christian beliefs are the core of our system, and similar in Middle East and Asia.

Thats bollocks, there were similar laws before Christianity.
 
I agree that our society is based largely on Christian ideals but there is some suspicion that Moses might have picked God's words from the book of Maat. The ancient Egyptians were a very intelligent and cultured people by all accounts.

 
When I see mongs like this get this upset over the Roe overturning, I'm far more inclined to believe it was the right decision.
 
1656377084798.jpeg
 
Non of which bears any relevance on my point - that its the electorate who get to decide at the ballot box how their state will view abortion.

Whether you or I think certain states are going backwards is of no matter, if that is what the Majority want - What gives us the right to overide their democratic choices in favour of a minority position just because we prefer the minority position.
I appreciate that is how the US works, for better or for worse and I do find it sad that so many states seem to have such regressive views on this.

As I have said before it is the fault of Congress, to some degree, for not codifying the right to abortion into Federal law (even in very conservative states such as Texas, the majority of those polled believe in the right to abortion during the first trimester - the numbers drop sharply after that point).

Secondly, the SCOTUS ruling is based upon religion and I don't think that anyone should be able to force their religious doctrine onto anyone else. We are roundly critical of other, supposedly less developed, nations that do that.
 
Last edited:
I'm not religious. I don't believe a woman didn't have sex and got pregnant. I do believe that killing babies that would survive outside the womb is wrong. It's also a fact that no sex equals no pregnancy. It's also a fact that the use of contraception usually results in no pregnancy.
Do you have an actual point?
 
I'm not religious. I don't believe a woman didn't have sex and got pregnant. I do believe that killing babies that would survive outside the womb is wrong. It's also a fact that no sex equals no pregnancy. It's also a fact that the use of contraception usually results in no pregnancy.
Do you have an actual point?
1. I thought it was amusing.
2. It is, just another, way of highlighting the hypocrisy of the religious far right.
3. I don't believe that others should force their own religious views on other people

What about babies that won't survive outside of the womb? They are not exempted from most states' rulings

No sex does equal no pregnancy, I assume that you were a virgin until you married and then have abstained since you finished having children?

It's also a fact that the use of contraception usually results in no pregnancy.
 
Secondly, the SCOTUS ruling is based upon religion and I don't think that anyone should be able to force their religious doctrine onto anyone else. We are round critical of other, supposedly less developed, nations that do that.
Or its based on a point of law that the SCOTUS don't have the authority to pass judgment as people have said for the last 50 years, including Sleepy Joe at one point.
 
Or its based on a point of law that the SCOTUS don't have the authority to pass judgment as people have said for the last 50 years, including Sleepy Joe at one point.
It is my understanding that Congress could, if it had he will and the right balance. However, as is true in so many democracies, politicians are loathe to be proactive about anything controversial enough to cost them their saet at the next election, whether that be abortion or energy independence (the UK is notorious for kicking that particular can as far down the road as possible - it will come back to bite them in the arse)
 
I agree that our society is based largely on Christian ideals but there is some suspicion that Moses might have picked God's words from the book of Maat. The ancient Egyptians were a very intelligent and cultured people by all accounts.


Laws of Hammurabi from ancient Babylon/Persia too. And we name our days of the week after the Norse gods. Our culture takes its influence from many roots and Christianity itself synthesises from the same places but it is reasonable to assume that when the American founding fathers wrote their constitution etc they would have been referring specifically to the Christian interpretation of God.

Some things are subjective of course but once any civilisation reaches a certain level of complexity some things work and some things don't and the legal systems of those civilisations converge to a certain extent out of practical necessity. Most civilisations that develop agree that murder is bad and nuclear families are good and contracts are binding and money is better than barter and a heap of other things.
 
Or its based on a point of law that the SCOTUS don't have the authority to pass judgment as people have said for the last 50 years, including Sleepy Joe at one point.

Yup. Now it is up to the individual States to ask those difficult questions on:

When does life begin?
At conception or at point of birth, if the later what stage of giving birth? Or is it some where in-between?

If they decide that a human life form growing inside a woman is "alive" does it have human rights, does it have legal rights?

Religion does not really come into it.

I think once a State has answered those to questions then they have the frame work to decide on what laws they should have around abortion.

It's going to be hard for the States, and all of this could have been avoided.
 
Interesting comments from the Vatican:

Pro-life is not just opposing abortion, Vatican says after U.S. ruling

Pro-life is not just opposing abortion, Vatican says after U.S. ruling

June 25 (Reuters) - Anti-abortion activists should be concerned with other issues that can threaten life, such as easy access to guns, poverty and rising maternity mortality rates, the Vatican's editorial director said on Saturday.

In a media editorial on the United States Supreme Court's ruling to end the constitutional right to abortion, Andrea Tornielli said those who oppose abortion could not pick and choose pro-life issues. read more

"Being for life, always, for example, means being concerned if the mortality rates of women due to motherhood increase," he wrote.

He cited statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showing a rise in maternity mortality rates overall and that the rate was nearly three times higher for black women.

"Being for life, always, means asking how to help women welcome new life," he wrote, citing an unsourced statistic that 75% of women who have abortions live in poverty or are low-wage earners.

He also cited statistics from the Harvard Review of Psychiatry showing that the United States has much lower rates of paid parental leave compared with other rich nations.

"Being for life, always, also means defending it against the threat of firearms, which unfortunately have become a leading cause of death of children and adolescents in the U.S." he wrote.

The Roman Catholic church teaches that abortion is murder because life begins at the moment of conception and ends with natural death.

Pope Francis has compared having an abortion to "hiring a hit man" to eliminate a problematic person.

But he has tried to steer the U.S. Catholic Church away from seeing abortion as the single, overarching life issue in the country's so-called culture wars.

The death penalty, gun control, support for families, and immigration are also life issues, he has said.

The Vatican's Academy for Life praised Friday's U.S. Supreme Court ruling, saying it challenged the world to reflect on life issues, but also called for social changes to help women keep their children. read more

U.S. President Joe Biden, a lifelong Catholic, condemned the ruling, calling it a "sad day" for America and labelling the court's conservatives as "extreme".
 
I worked at Barts before the UK Legislation was thought of. My overwhelming memory is of the damage to the girl by either self-induced miscarriage or the shoddy old back street abortionists. The decision of the US Supreme Court will ensure that more potential mothers die. The history of the pregnancy is irrelevant, it is for the present and the future that the woman should be free to choose.

I don't believe it will - whilst some States have banned it, others have similar limitations as the rest of the western world (14/15 weeks) and the most extreme, California and New York, will soon allow it upto the moment of birth.

Many far left organisations such as Disney have already announced that they will pay the expenses of any of their staff wanting an abortion and the likers of Governor Newson in California and the NY Governor are well on their way to making their states abortion 'sanctuary's' and offering full expense paid abortion holidays to any woman wanting to go there for a free abortion.

The consensus public opinion in the the USA is to allow abortion with similar limits to the UK etc and that could have been passed in Congress a few weeks ago to become federal law but Chucky Schumer stupidly stipulated upto the moment of birth on his bill and unsurprisingly, it was not passed.

Once the immediate panic and rage is over and the dust settles, people will work the system and available options to meet their needs - I would suggest that politicians who support abortion on both sides do their job and compromise
 
Most states do adhere to the 2nd. A few progressive outliers attempt to undermine the Amendment. The SC ruled that states can’t go out of their way to undermine their residents rights. Like the case of NY with their draconian conceal carry permitting process.






But yet again where is the right to abortion in the Constitution?

Why does the 10th Amendment cause you so much angst?
So if it is not in the Constitution, it cannot be practised? This could make the Koran seem up-to-date or should when visiting the US do I need to put my watch back 246 years?
 
I don't really believe there are legions of such women in existence tbh.

For context I'll set viable foetuses arguably able to survive outside the womb should said women without health complications refuse to continue the pregnancy as my goal post.
I think that is a good and sensible place where to start with setting your goal posts but.......then add the question to what degree of viability of the new born to survive outside of the womb into the mix, along with the 'without health complications for the mother' stipulation.

Are we talking complete autonomy of the new born to survive unsupported? Limited medical intervention? Complete life support? The slippery slope beckons........If a line is drawn that viability means no life support then the same argument can be made for people at the other end of their lives, or injured in an accident etc. etc.

Beyond mathematics, there is very little in life that is binary, it is all just shades of grey. The answer for me is that the reasonable majority should try to arrive at a reasonable consensus based upon the best evidence of medical science twinned with consideration for the moral (most certainly not religious) dimension which usually results in a compromise that does the least harm to as many as possible. Add to this the maturity and courage to be able to change that decision as new evidence is uncovered or if society (democracy) decides to move in another direction...and yes, I do live in cloud cuckoo land!!
 
Last edited:

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top