Overturning Roe v Wade brings power to the states

[Bucky]

Individual states have the right to outlaw or legalize abortion. That's how it was before Roe v. Wade.

Roe v. Wade was a bad law based on bad medicine. It overturned social policy in this country that has been here for over 200 years.

A few men and women in black robes shouldn't be making decisions on social policy. The power belongs to the state, which overturning Roe v Wade does.

 

[reflechissez]

Individual states have the right to outlaw or legalize abortion. That's how it was before Roe v. Wade.

Roe v. Wade was a bad law based on bad medicine. It overturned social policy in this country that has been here for over 200 years.

A few men and women in black robes shouldn't be making decisions on social policy. The power belongs to the state, which overturning Roe v Wade does.

We should have left slavery to the states...right?

 

[Geoist]

Individual states have the right to outlaw or legalize abortion. That's how it was before Roe v. Wade.

Roe v. Wade was a bad law based on bad medicine. It overturned social policy in this country that has been here for over 200 years.

A few men and women in black robes shouldn't be making decisions on social policy. The power belongs to the state, which overturning Roe v Wade does.

I thought it was always the argument of conservatives and right-libertarians that institutions and groups don't have rights, only individuals do?

 

[Geoist]

A few men and women in black robes shouldn't be making decisions on social policy. The power belongs to the state, which overturning Roe v Wade does.

Conservatives have long argued the War on Drugs is a federal issue due to interstate trafficking (commerce clause). What do you think involuntarily pregnant women are going to do once their state bans abortion?

 

[Liberal7360]

Individual states have the right to outlaw or legalize abortion. That's how it was before Roe v. Wade.

Roe v. Wade was a bad law based on bad medicine. It overturned social policy in this country that has been here for over 200 years.

A few men and women in black robes shouldn't be making decisions on social policy. The power belongs to the state, which overturning Roe v Wade does.

Then you are going to see many red states turn blue.

You are going to see many red states lose seats in the House because people have left the state for blue states.

You are going to see the blue states have more seats in the House because they have gained the populations that have left the red states.

You are going to see business leave red states and it will be impossible to convince them to come there.

You are going to see huge losses in state and federal tax dollars resulting in red states becoming even more of a garbage dump then they already are.

You will never see an anti choice president ever get elected again.

Have fun with that.

 

[Bucky]

Then you are going to see many red states turn blue.

You are going to see many red states lose seats in the House because people have left the state for blue states.

You are going to see the blue states have more seats in the House because they have gained the populations that have left the red states.

You are going to see business leave red states and it will be impossible to convince them to come there.

You are going to see huge losses in state and federal tax dollars resulting in red states becoming even more of a garbage dump then they already are.

You will never see an anti choice president ever get elected again.

Have fun with that.

Ya....

People aren't going to flood into LA or New York. Taxes are already high enough. Too many homeless people as well.

 

[aociswundumho]

I thought it was always the argument of conservatives and right-libertarians that institutions and groups don't have rights, only individuals do?

Whatever rights we have, they have to be equal for all persons. Hence a group of people cannot have any more rights than an individual of the group.

To put it another way, if it's morally wrong for you do it on your own, then it remains morally wrong when you and your friends do it together.

 

[Geoist]

Whatever rights we have, they have to be equal for all persons. Hence a group of people cannot have any more rights than an individual of the group.

To put it another way, if it's morally wrong for you do it on your own, then it remains morally wrong when you and your friends do it together.

What does this have to do with state's rights?

 

[aociswundumho]

What does this have to do with state's rights?

It explains why states have powers, not rights.

 

[Geoist]

It explains why states have powers, not rights.

Then conservatives and right-libertarians should be talking about 'state powers' not 'state rights.' To me it's a slight quibble but to them the definition of a right is everything and it seems hypocritical when they then freely use the term when it comes to states.

 

[trouble13]

Then you are going to see many red states turn blue.

You are going to see many red states lose seats in the House because people have left the state for blue states.

You are going to see the blue states have more seats in the House because they have gained the populations that have left the red states.

You are going to see business leave red states and it will be impossible to convince them to come there.

You are going to see huge losses in state and federal tax dollars resulting in red states becoming even more of a garbage dump then they already are.

You will never see an anti choice president ever get elected again.

Have fun with that.

Half the country is pro-life

 

[phoenix2020]

Individual states have the right to outlaw or legalize abortion. That's how it was before Roe v. Wade.

Roe v. Wade was a bad law based on bad medicine. It overturned social policy in this country that has been here for over 200 years.

A few men and women in black robes shouldn't be making decisions on social policy. The power belongs to the state, which overturning Roe v Wade does.

Please note, everyone, that the OP was silent when the prior administration was litigating states over sanctuary city policies. He didn't offer a full throated defense of state rights when select states took measures to mitigate COVID. These are people who consider "state's rights" a convenient argument when it serves their purpose, but are more than happy to kick it to the curb when it doesn't. You can't consider them credible when they flip flop more often than John Kerry at a pancake house.

 

[reflechissez]

Half the country is pro-life

And your definition of "pro-life" is what?

 

[Geoist]

Half the country is pro-life

Depends on what you mean by 'pro-life.' Only 19% of Americans believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances while 32% say it should be legal in all circumstances.

Abortion

With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life? Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?

news.gallup.com

 

[Geoist]

And your definition of "pro-life" is what?

Exactly.

 

[aociswundumho]

Then conservatives and right-libertarians should be talking about 'state powers' not 'state rights.'

Yes, they should.

To me it's a slight quibble but to them the definition of a right is everything and it seems hypocritical when they then freely use the term when it comes to states.

I agree.

 

[ttwtt78640]

We should have left slavery to the states...right?

Slavery was outlawed via constitutional amendment. Slavery was not left to a majority of our nine robed umpires to “interpret“ out of existence and then to decide to grant citizenship to former slaves.

 

[ttwtt78640]

What does this have to do with state's rights?

States don’t have rights - they have powers. If states had rights then secession would surely be among them.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

 

[Sweden]

Half the country is pro-life

That half of the US that calls themselves 'pro life' can choose not to have an abortion if they so wish. The other half, 'pro choice', should be equally free. As a Conservative I believe in freedom for individuals and that freedom should not be regulated by laws imposed on the whims of others.

 

[yankintx]

I can see those knocked up Republican teens traveling to freedom loving States to do the deed.

Thankfully i live in a freedom loving State, Mass. We value individual liberty, and have done so since the Anerican Revolution.

Go ahead Righties, I dare you to try it Mass!!
,

 

[yankintx]

We should have left slavery to the states...right?

Please, i am sure that thought has crossed a few Right Wingers fascist minds. Don't encourage

 

[Loulit01]

States don’t have rights - they have powers. If states had rights then secession would surely be among them.

LOL. These states that people think would secede are the ones that receive the most federal funding except for Texas. If they seceded their economies would collapse in weeks and their legislators know it. Talk of secession is crazy.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I can see those knocked up Republican teens traveling to freedom loving States to do the deed.

Thankfully i live in a freedom loving State, Mass. We value individual liberty, and have done so since the Anerican Revolution.

Go ahead Righties, I dare you to try it Mass!!
,

Hmm…

Salem witchcraft trial (1878) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[j brown's body]

Whatever rights we have, they have to be equal for all persons. Hence a group of people cannot have any more rights than an individual of the group.

To put it another way, if it's morally wrong for you do it on your own, then it remains morally wrong when you and your friends do it together.

What law prevents men from controlling their own bodies?

 

[ttwtt78640]

LOL. These states that people think would secede are the ones that receive the most federal funding except for Texas. If they seceded their economies would collapse in weeks and their legislators know it. Talk of secession is crazy.

Forming a new state from part of another state is specifically discouraged (prohibited?) by the Constitution (while secession is not even mentioned), yet West Virginia was formed from part of Virginia.

History of West Virginia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org