• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Roe is as good as gone

Abortion isn't against the law in Texas.

.
The supposed window of abortion in Texas closes before most women know that they are pregnant, so it does ban abortion. Your failed attempt at intellectual dishonesty isn't something to be proud of.


I support your right to kill your baby. I believe the right should get out of the way.
No comment.
 
Abortion isn't against the law in Texas.

.
No it makes doctors, nurses and even Uber drivers liable for a $10,000 fine for assisting or performing an abortion. We don't fine people for things that are not against the law.....except in Texas I guess.
 
So what?

It doesn't make abortion illegal, it just leaves it up to each state to decide.

.
What gives States the right to decide what medical procedures are allowed? Can they ban appendectomies too if they want? Since when does the State make medical decisions for private citizens when it affects no one but themselves? It's not a vaccine that helps protect society from a contagious disease. I can see such behavior only then. The govt. has a clear interest in the health of the society with vaccines but private medical procedures? That is quite a leap for big brother. Of course it is a "Conservative" idea and we all know they are only interested in a large and controlling Govt. Next we will be told when to eat and sleep.
 
Last edited:
LOL Just $10,000 civil suits for every abortion that caused all clinics to shutdown all abortions. If the law doesn't ban abortion how can people sue if they are performed?
The law doesn't ban abortions, you can get one up until 6 weeks. also abortion was never established as a right.
 
They have to live with themselves.
Anyone who needs/gets an abortion "has to live with themselves", including all of the Conservatives I've personally known that opted to receive abortions for various reasons.
 
The law doesn't ban abortions, you can get one up until 6 weeks. also abortion was never established as a right.
According to Roe vs Wade, abortion is a Constitutional right up until viability and no govt. can interfere with that right. No State may restrict abortions to before many women even know they are pregnant.
 
According to Roe vs Wade, abortion is a Constitutional right up until viability and no govt. can interfere with that right.
Rvw didn't establish a constitutional amendment
No State may restrict abortions to before many women even know they are pregnant.
No state is.
 
The GOP controlled SCOTUS has signaled to their bosses that they will soon kill the Roe decision. How you say, by not blocking the Texas Law, but giving it an emergency hearing. And soon, only those who can afford to go to other countries will have safe abortions available to them. The rest will have to return to the days of the back room abortions that had become to be known as the coat hanger abortions. And only those who have had the abortions performed within the state shall face the law. In many states women who have been raped will not be allowed to take the morning after pill to insure that they do not have to carry and raise their rapists child. Of course these same states will not provide a penny to help these women raise the children that they force them to have, as of coure the rape had to be the woman's fault. .
So what
 
And there will always be people with lawsuits to block States from keeping them legal using the SC precedent. The pro-illegal abortionists will not stop with abortions either. The next step is to ban contraceptives. They want to legislate "morality" as they see it. Texas already allows rapists to procreate by force. That is the "morality" they seek.
So your mad that Republicans might dictate moral standards just like democrats do. You really don't have much of an argument to stand on with that one.
 
Well, I really don't have a dog in this hunt.

I'm Catholic. I do not see abortion as a personal choice for me & mine. But, I very strongly believe in not getting involved in others' business. If the Constitution supports abortion, then I accept it for those that desire it, because I accept the Constitution as the lawful governance of our nation.

So, my opinion here is not a personal opinion of desire, but rather it is my objective political analysis. And as an objective observation, I think Roe is likely here to stay.
You may be the only other person I know who is generally indifferent on this topic.
 
You have no idea what Roe is, do you.
Do you have concept of your own rhetoric? Why should pro life judges just stop at overturning Roe? You say abortion is murder and worse than chattel slavery, so you obviously think it should be illegal federally.
 
It's a shame and an embarrassment that we now have a SCOTUS with 3 members appointed by an insurrectionist president deciding the future of women's rights.
were you upset when FDR's supreme court ignored over 100 years of precedent and the clear meaning of the commerce clause, in order to give FDR and the Democrat congress all the powers they craved? Those three justices were appointed by the duly elected president. Find something else to get butt hurt over
 
The right can't wait for rapists to procreate. They are the beneficiaries they want to protect.
what a stupid comment. highly esteemed leftwing law professor Pamela Karlan of Stanford, has noted time after time that felons, when they are able to vote, support Democrats. Seems to me that the spawn of rapists have a better chance of being mopes than many other children. Perfect Democrat minions
 
Not stopping the ban sounds like a ruling to me. The law clearly contradicts Roe Vs, Wade.
It is not "ruling". In fact, it's an avoidance of making a ruling until they've actually considered the case.
 
So long as very narrow exceptions are carved out, I would think that would be wonderful, though, I think the odds of that are roughly equivalent to the odds that I win the lottery (I buy no tickets).

That, however, would not be simply "overturning Roe", but, rather, creating an entirely new standard.
I really don’t understand your belief system. You think abortion is evil and murder. You want it federally banned and recognized as murder at a national level, but you have essentially no faith in that ever happening in America? What does that say about your perception of your own country? That it is morally bankrupt and essentially evil?
 
It is not "ruling". In fact, it's an avoidance of making a ruling until they've actually considered the case.
It isn't the ban anyway it's a civil right of action.

I don't know what's with the misinformation on this.

It's like they don't like any attempt to restrict this at all.

Which it's going to come from more angles and from more States.

The back of couple decades ago they were selling this abortion thing as they said they should be safe legal and rare. Ever since then it's been a war of attrition. And maybe it's time to draw it back.

It's not like there are bans in abortion, birth control and the like. It's also not like people don't know how they get pregnant. So after a night of unprotected sex if you can't think ahead five min you have six weeks to visit a doctor determine if you are pregnant and do what you have to do.
 
Last edited:
...Okay... but, what I asked you was: Is that also your opinion when it comes to other instances of what the Catholic Church considers murder?

If the country were to - for example - decide that children were the property of their parents, and so they had the right to (for example) kill children who came out as gay, and the Catholic Church were to declare that such was murder: would you oppose allowing parents to do that? Or say that "under our Constitution, parents have this right, and I don't want to impose my beliefs on others".?
He is speaking from the perspective of literal written law, not religious moral arguments. It’s clear when he says he respects the law as it stands, and obviously murdering a gay person for being gay is defined as criminal act under the law as written.

What would you do if religious leaders defined killing a gay for being gay as not murder?
 
Good reason to vote against Republicans
States are free to still make their own laws, so no there will be no nationwide abortion ban.

Where it would end is in the fact roe vs wade used something not in the constitution, basically the court granting themselves the ability to create rights, off a decision nowhere in the constitution supports. This is why the supreme court has tried to avoid abortion issues, and liberals have feared it going to the supreme court, the decision was not based anywhere in the constitution, but rather off rights and powers the court granted itself, meaning any court that sides with the constitution would rule it unconstitutional.

The supreme court has tried to dodge that decision for that reason, there would be heavy liberal backlash over actually ruling on what the constituion says. However it looks like now it is heading to the court, and the only thing that kept roe v wade alive was it not going before a supreme court that backs what the constitution says rather than what they wish it said.

This is one of those issues that could have been resolved easily through federal law, but no left wing politician ever planned to adress it, to the democrats it is just a wedge issue, solving it permanently means they they have no rally call anymore, hence they never planned to do anything to actually solve the problem.
 
Back
Top Bottom