Roe v Wade
- Thread starter 812scottj
- Start date
Yup. This is the left political party in 2022. Lolz.
Good God. This is half our voter base. YIKES.
No ****. Although, if the Feds make it legal(or quit regulating or whatever) and let the states decide, here in KY, we’re ******.
Also how come january 6th was an insurrection against the laws of the land and something obsessed over everyone since but the riots and taking hostages in arizona are not for not supporting the same laws of the land?
For the record both are wrong. The issue is all the dregs of society and uneducated masses actions this weekend will be swept under the rug by our borderline gestapo Nazi media.
the only reason I learned the Macarena was to stop the large hadron collider. It didn’t work
I’ll go 30 if the mods let it. It will likely merge with the political thread within 4 pages.
Or these woke company’s saying ahead that they will bond out their employees arrested for looting, I mean protesting.
Not to mention the SCOTUS judges homes being invaded by these lawless *****.
Also, anything out of AOC’s mouth and her ilk.
You could say that about a whole bunch of legislation, though. Just because it may not affect me personally doesn’t mean I shouldn't care about it. I'm not homeless nor do I know someone who is homeless but it’s an issue I care about and one I hope my state and federal government solves. Same with welfare, Ukraine relief, taxation of hedge funds, Medicaid, WIC program, etc.
Rights of privacy and personal liberty should not be left up to states.
The U.S. is already dead last in the industrialized world in maternal mortality rate. This decision will only lead to even more dead women.
The U.S. is already dead last in the industrialized world in maternal mortality rate. This decision will only lead to even more dead women.
Oh totally, I’m sure most people are like you, I’m just not. I’m amazed people care so much about stuff that doesn’t affect them. I think boredom plays a big part as well. It’s like once a guy hits 65 and has more free time he becomes a political activist, it’s amazing. But ya I would agree that 90% of what most people argue about doesn’t even effect them, and actually seems to put most in a bad mood, but whatever floats your boat I guess.
Not to go on a tangent, there are some interesting findings in the data on that one.
Mortality Rate
- Women who give birth after age 40 have a maternal mortality rate of 70.5 compared to the average of the total which is 20.1.
- Hispanic women have the lowest overall maternal mortality rate (12.6), whereas black women have the highest (44.0). For whites it' 17.9.
Those two things make me think it's not necessarily about access to care. And by the way, it was a total of 754 total deaths. If you cut that in half which would tie us with france you'd save around 375 lives.
I still like the heartbeat law, that's something everybody can understand, but doesn't totally block you early on. It's a moral issue, rather than a religious issue IMO. I was once asked why do you care about something that doesn't affect you? That seems like the same argument the South used regarding slavery.
There are multiple problems with heartbeat law. First is what constitutes a heartbeat. Some claim the electrical pulse heard in the first 4 or 5 weeks is a heartbeat. Second is there is a window of when the actual heartbeat can be heard. For some women it can be heard as early as 13 weeks but as late as 17 weeks for some women. Do certain women get to have abortions later than others? I think the only compromise is to set it limit at a specific time length whether it be 15 weeks or later. I think 15 weeks should be the shortest length considered.
Personally, I think the SCOTUS made the right call. IMO (and theirs), there isn't a constitutional right protecting abortion. However, I sincerely hope that ALL states come to some reasonable restriction (somewhere in the 2nd trimester is my preference). I'm totally against 100% ban and against allowing it up to 40 weeks, barring mother's life in danger, which Colorado (where I live) is one of only maybe 3 states that allows up to 40 weeks. I would think the vast majority of Americans are in the middle of the two extremes. Of course, the fear is that some states will ban it altogether (trigger laws have already done so). I'm very hopeful those laws are place-holders until the state's legislature could draft a better proposal for its citizens to vote on.
As to outlawing gay marriage, interracial marriage, et al - what a bunch of nonsense. Hysterical scare tactics. BTW, 14th amendment guarantees equal protection/treatment so there is no way anyone with any sense at all can argue disallowing two consenting adults getting married is not a violation of the Constitution. Whether some are morally outraged or not, the 14th amendment clearly states you can't exclude some citizens from some activities if that activity is irrelevant to government.
As to outlawing gay marriage, interracial marriage, et al - what a bunch of nonsense. Hysterical scare tactics. BTW, 14th amendment guarantees equal protection/treatment so there is no way anyone with any sense at all can argue disallowing two consenting adults getting married is not a violation of the Constitution. Whether some are morally outraged or not, the 14th amendment clearly states you can't exclude some citizens from some activities if that activity is irrelevant to government.
That ain't gonna happen. Many states already have draconian laws in effect for instance Arkansas has a total ban on abortion with only medical exceptions, not even exceptions for rape or incest. As you point out, I think the vast majority on both sides of this issue would have been ok with something like the Mississippi Law that the court ruled on, but that ship has sailed now.
I think the argument being made by many that it's OK for states to make the decision but not the individual is illogical. On the extreme, states could allow late term which to me and most others is barbaric. We would not want that either.
Last edited:
I hear ya. But, eventually, don't you think the middle ground will be incorporated into each state's laws? I mean, some states have draconian laws right now. But, it hasn't been an issue for 50 years. Now that it is an issue, don't you think cooler (and more moderate) heads will prevail? Maybe I just have too much faith in 'the people's' common sense. I fear you are closer to being correct than I am, though.
Not sure about the illogical part - maybe I'm misunderstanding. But, states set legal limits on drivers' age, what is considered legally drunk, the age of consent, speed limits, and a whole host of other things and the individual doesn't have the right to choose otherwise without potential legal consequences.
I don't think there is any chance whatsoever that southern states will enact legislation permitting abortions up to a certain stage of the pregnancy (15 weeks for example). It is MUCH more likely that these states will enact total bans or close to it.
Whoever (Chief) claimed that Congress would enact reasonable abortion legislation but for democrats seeking a wedge issue, come on. There is no chance that Congress will pass any type of abortion law absent a severe electoral swing giving one party a substantial majority in both chambers.
Whoever (Chief) claimed that Congress would enact reasonable abortion legislation but for democrats seeking a wedge issue, come on. There is no chance that Congress will pass any type of abortion law absent a severe electoral swing giving one party a substantial majority in both chambers.
Last edited:
Why is the question always on the side of the "conservatives" being unable to budge? Example - "no chance whatsoever that southern states will enact legislation permitting abortions up to a certain stage of the pregnancy (15 weeks for example). It is MUCH more likely that these states will enact total bans or close to it."
Is there any chance whatsoever the 6 states and DC that have no limits whatsoever on abortion budge and come back down to 20 weeks or so? What are the odds NY, CA, WA enact total bans on any limitations to abortion?
So silly - one side is always represented as unwilling to budge and the crazy, unreasonable ones.
Can't really claim to be reasonably middle of the road calling for minimum window of abortion, but not calling out a cut off maximum either.
Is there any chance whatsoever the 6 states and DC that have no limits whatsoever on abortion budge and come back down to 20 weeks or so? What are the odds NY, CA, WA enact total bans on any limitations to abortion?
So silly - one side is always represented as unwilling to budge and the crazy, unreasonable ones.
Can't really claim to be reasonably middle of the road calling for minimum window of abortion, but not calling out a cut off maximum either.
Man, reading what dems have to say, you’d think incest was happening all over the place. Talk about using extreme and crazy unusual circumstances to back your claim. Also pregnancy from rape is insanely rare as well. 99%+ have nothing to do with those screnarios.
This has nothing to do with a woman's body, you feckless moron.
Rare or not, these situations happen and should have exceptions available for them. You can't say that pregnancy from rape is insanely rare because the fact is that only 310 out of 1000 rapes (31%) are reported to authorities. Link below with numbers.
Also, most of these trigger laws are set up that a woman can't undergo chemo to battle cancer if she is pregnant. These laws would rather see a woman die from cancer and leave her other children motherless than allow her to make the choice to battle cancer so that she can see her 2 year old grow up or have the baby born and then the mother die. That isn't pro life. That is pro birth.
You can’t make that claim, as many rapes, especially those resulting in pregnancy were proven to be false claims. So that goes both ways.
For the life of me I can’t figure out why the FIRST thing a rape victim wouldn’t do is go and take a morning after pill. Not victim blaming, but damn, I wouldn’t want a rapists baby.
Either way, I’m not at all against early term abortions for a rape victim and most others aren’t as well. What I’m against is gov’t overreach to govern things they’re not allowed to govern. Abortion is a state issue, period. If you don’t like your state’s policy, fight to change it…or move. That’s how this is supposed to work.
You’re being disingenuous though if you think this is at all about rape victims. You’re just choosing to argue the most extreme examples. This is about the left wanting the freedoms to kill a baby whenever they please. The end.
As far as chemo, I was unaware that existed and I bet we’d agree on that. That is however, not the issue here with r v w.
Actually that's incorrect but even if it was true why not exempt it?
The national rape-related pregnancy rate is 5.0% per rape among victims of reproductive age (aged 12 to 45); among adult women an estimated 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year.
We probably agree quite closely on abortions to be honest as far as when they should be an option. As far as if you don't like your states laws then move, that certainly is a novel concept but impractical when you look at careers and other family situations. This is not about wanting "freedoms to kill a baby whenever they please". And it isn't being disingenuous to think that the trigger laws need to be modified with exceptions for things like rape. I don't care how rare they are because they happen. The chemo thing is an issue with roe v. wade because they were written into the trigger laws in many states that immediately went into effect the moment that ruling was released.
Personally, I thought the Mississippi law was a pretty reasonable limit, think 15 weeks is plenty of time to make up your mind, that is 3.5 months. Most of the women's rights people I talked to thought so as well. Just wish the S Ct had upheld that law and then stopped.
Both sets of stats are a bit outdated - but what was previously posted was not incorrect:
The estimated number of pregnancies dropped to 6,369,000 (4,131,000 live births, 1,152,000 induced abortions, and 1,087,000 fetal losses).
32,101/6,369,000 = 0.5% of all pregnancies...so earlier number should have actually been 99.5%
32,101/1,152,000 = 2.8% of all abortions from rape victims, if said rape victims aborted 100% of time
Most have no problem with exceptions for these victims. But let's not act like that is what this fight is for and that that is a large portion of abortion.
For many that is exactly what this fight is for. Many (even those on the pro-life side) want these exceptions which are excluded from the trigger laws. The Arkansas governor signed into law one that has no exceptions despite the fact he stated that he wanted those exceptions and doesn't expect his legislature to revisit the laws. Therefore, those victims in Arkansas are just SOL. Also, lets not forget that Texas wants to charge anyone who goes out of state for an abortion. That is a huge over step of their authority IMO.
No.
The Court should not usurp its authority. It is called separation of powers.
And, when it comes to abortion the industrialized world, except for a handful of countries permit abortion past the 20 week of gestational life. The average in Europe is between 12 and 20 weeks. So, by your argument, the US just returned to the industrialized mainstream.
That sounds like a good reason to ban the killing of all gestational babies. Most “deadline” statutes have a measure of arbitrariness, because the idea that “human life” starts sometime after conceived life is nonsensical mental gymnastics. Banning abortion is the most humane approach.
Let me add, there is nothing illogical about the state making this decision. It takes death decisions out of the hands of biased individuals all the time.
[edit] - saying it is illogical for the state to decide is to claim it illogical for the voters of a state to decide laws about abortion by casting votes for their desired legislators. That seems illogical.
Last edited:
Unfortunately, slavery probably permanently damaged the state's rights concept for everybody.
Mississippi (southern state), counselor, 15 weeks. Right smack in the middle of the European countries.
From the Civil War until around 2001, the Democratic Party absolutely dominated Kentucky's executive offices and Kentucky's General Assembly, and throughout that 135-year span it fought tooth and nail to keep abortion illegal (see 1974 and 1980 in particular). So there's no shortage of hypocrisy to go around.
Last edited:
The abortion stat for those associated with rape are .05%.
Where was this fear of government overreach for the last 2 years?
I'm a little surprised to see some that were happy to attack their fellow citizens over a personal health choice are suddenly concerned about how the states lays out laws that may affect someone's personal health choice.
I'm a little surprised to see some that were happy to attack their fellow citizens over a personal health choice are suddenly concerned about how the states lays out laws that may affect someone's personal health choice.