Roe is dead

mchammer said:
While I prefer the abortion be left up to the states, this editorial is one long lie. First, Americans prefer a 15 week ban over all options. Second, Americans want restrictions on abortion though the article neglected to show that survey report. Third, how is an abortion policy similar to Europe a disaster?

Editorial: A national 15-week abortion ban would be a nightmare. Voters can make sure it doesn't come true
Click to expand...

It's an example of overtly partisan issue-framing, so any factor that weighs against Republicans is amplified, and any factor that weighs against Democrats is ignored. Having said that, I do think this is stupid politics and bad policy. It hurts our credibility when we claim to care about states rights, and because the country is so divided on the issue, we're going to get wild flips in abortion laws based on who's in power. There won't be a lot of stability. There's a reason why the founders left stuff like this to the states.
 
Mr. Deez said:
It's an example of overtly partisan issue-framing, so any factor that weighs against Republicans is amplified, and any factor that weighs against Democrats is ignored. Having said that, I do think this is stupid politics and bad policy. It hurts our credibility when we claim to care about states rights, and because the country is so divided on the issue, we're going to get wild flips in abortion laws based on who's in power. There won't be a lot of stability. There's a reason why the founders left stuff like this to the states.
Click to expand...
Why would anyone from OK, TX, etc vote for it since it would actually loosen the abortion restrictions in their states?
 
mchammer said:
While I prefer the abortion be left up to the states, this editorial is one long lie. First, Americans prefer a 15 week ban over all options. Second, Americans want restrictions on abortion though the article neglected to show that survey report. Third, how is an abortion policy similar to Europe a disaster?

Editorial: A national 15-week abortion ban would be a nightmare. Voters can make sure it doesn't come true
Click to expand...
I'm still undecided if this was the right time to make this move but ultimately i think it is the right political position, but conducted from a state level. Every GOP rep should say "i support a ban at 15 weeks as a compromise position AT THE STATE LEVEL".

We have had 2 generations of people grow up being told that abortion was a right. You are not going to turn that ship around in 3 months. Even if your desire is to see no abortions, you are going to have to accept that 60+% of the country is adamantly opposed to that position right now.
 
guy4321 said:
I imagine the proposed federal law says states may restrict further.
Click to expand...
I don’t think so. I think it is consistent across states to get support from folks who want to increase the number of weeks in places like Texas as a compromise for losing weeks elsewhere.
 
mchammer said:
Why would anyone from OK, TX, etc vote for it since it would actually loosen the abortion restrictions in their states?
Click to expand...

Two reasons. First, it's a federal ban, so they get to screw with blue states. Second, I'm pretty sure it permits states to have stronger restrictions.
 
mchammer said:
I don’t think so. I think it is consistent across states to get support from folks who want to increase the number of weeks in places like Texas as a compromise for losing weeks elsewhere.
Click to expand...

If this is the bill, it does. It contains a provision that says, "Nothing in this section may be construed to preempt or limit any Federal, State, or local law that provides greater protections for an unborn child than those provided in this section."
 
Mr. Deez said:
If this is the bill, it does. It contains a provision that says, "Nothing in this section may be construed to preempt or limit any Federal, State, or local law that provides greater protections for an unborn child than those provided in this section."
Click to expand...
If that is the case, then letting the states decide it is the better approach, or increase it to 22 weeks.
 
I don't think it is possible, Deez.

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... may not come from the Constitution, but the founders believed those were unalienable rights endowed on all men by God, and that government must protect them. Therefore, among the guiding principles in the Constitution is a fundamental respect for individual life, not the taking of innocent life because of some made-up right to privacy.
 
Sangre Naranjada said:
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...
Click to expand...

Thomas Jefferson was a genius. He very simply included natural rights and natural law. In the 18th Century natural rights were listed by John Locke as the right to life, liberty, and property. Jefferson changed that last bit to both include natural rights and broaden to natural law. Natural law is summarized as "do good, avoid evil". It also contains the idea that when you do good you live out your purpose on the Earth. Your purpose is determined by God's design. When you live by God's design and enjoy meaning in life you are happy. Not selfish happiness though. But a rich happiness aligned with created order and having purpose and meaning in life. Jefferson said that we have a right to live freely in our pursuit of meaning and purpose according to God's created order. That is what brings true happiness.
 
Sangre Naranjada said:
I don't think it is possible, Deez.

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... may not come from the Constitution, but the founders believed those were unalienable rights endowed on all men by God, and that government must protect them. Therefore, among the guiding principles in the Constitution is a fundamental respect for individual life, not the taking of innocent life because of some made-up right to privacy.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I've heard someone defend abortion and why women should be able to get them. If you gloss over enough facts or selectively make the argument that you shouldn't control what someone does with her body (as if we don't pass laws that regulate what you do with your body all the time), you can defend abortion.

What I haven't heard is an explanation of why abortion rights are required by the Constitution. If someone asked me why the Constitution prohibits a law banning Muslims or Catholics, I could point to the First Amendment that bars Congress from passing a law inhibiting the free exercise of religion. I've never heard such a an explanation about a law banning abortion.

Obviously, I read Roe in law school, and it relies on the 14th amendment substantive due process doctrine (which I've attacked several times here). However, even the Court did a very superficial analysis and had little to rely upon. But your average abortion-rights advocate can't even do that. They have absolutely nothing and just go back to the "it's not fair" argument.
 
guy4321 said:
How safe is the abortion pill compared with other common drugs | CNN


“[Mifepristone] has been used for over 20 years by over five million people with the capacity to become pregnant,” said Ushma Upadhyay, an associate professor in the department of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive science at the University of California, San Francisco. “Its safety is very well established.”

Unless, of course, you are the baby.
Click to expand...

Lost me with "people with the capacity to become pregnant."
 
Mr. Deez said:
What the Left is doing with the English language is just ridiculous. We could easily do a whole thread just on that.
Click to expand...

There is already a political correctness thread. What is going on today is just the ever developing churn of political correctness.
 
This is funny. Vox is mad because the NC GOP smartly introduced anti-abortion legislation that thwarted hard-liners from imposing a 6 week ban. The 12 week ban plus other restrictions on the abortion centers comes close to essentially achieving the same thing. In summary, Vox is angry that the GOP is denying them an easy law to vilify.

What North Carolina’s proposed abortion ban does — and why it matters — Vox
 
Losing Roe v Wade precedent is the best thing ever. These folks have to justify their position. They fail so miserably.

 
mchammer said:
Losing Roe v Wade precedent is the best thing ever. These folks have to justify their position. They fail so miserably.

Click to expand...


I saw that. It's just rank idiocy, and doctors don't know how badly this kind of thing hurts their credibility. They think they will be listened to on credentialism alone. I don't care if you're the greatest astronomer in the history of science. If you tell me the sky is green or that you can breathe on the moon, you're full of ****. I don't care what degrees are on your wall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top