• 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!

Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Cardinal said:
I’m a little bit surprised that this came out before the midterms, but only a little bit. Ever since Trump won in 2016, this was essentially a fait accompli. The effort to ban abortion nationwide is of course next.

“The Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wadedecision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO.

The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” he writes in the document, labeled as the “Opinion of the Court.” “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

www.politico.com

Exclusive: Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft circulated inside the court.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
Click to expand...
There are scholars who agree with the premise that it wasn't good law, even if they agreed with abortion.
 
jmotivator said:
The fetus is not part of a woman's body. You can actually differentiate the woman's body from the child becausde the tissue has diferent DNA. Also on a physiological level the differentiation is clear since a pregnant woman doesn't have two hearts, for instance..

From conception the unborn is a living human. It displays all of the biological characteristics of a living organism, and its DNA is human.
Click to expand...
So, a woman should not be allowed to live and should be forced to carry a pregnancy until they both die....correct?
 
ClaraD said:
the people? Only 27% of voters want Roe V Wade to be overturned>
Click to expand...
You’re looking at it the wrong way. It’s not a question of how many want federal abortion rights overturned. It’s a question of there never being enough people to make such protections the law of the land.
 
Think about this:

A person can shoot or stab someone else, and that other person, the victim, needs an organ transplant. Even if the perpetrator is then killed, and a viable match to save the victim's life, they can absolutely refuse to donate their organs (either right before death or by simply not being an organ donor), body parts to save that person whom they put in that position, whom they attacked, basically have now also killed.

That means a dead killer has more rights than a gestating woman to their body.
 
NatMorton said:
Actually, it’s too bad for you. Your dogmatic views on fetal rights will no longer be the law of the land. Voters in states will now get to decide what they think is best for them.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, for now. This won't last. It will go down as soon as there is a change of the makeup of the Court.
 
Josie said:
Well, not on his/her own. They will need to be in the NICU for some time.
Click to expand...
The NICU is manned by volunteers, whether paid or working without pay, to be there, to take care of those patients. Society voluntarily takes on that burden.
 
NatMorton said:
You’re looking at it the wrong way. It’s not a question of how many want federal abortion rights overturned. It’s a question of there never being enough people to make such protections the law of the land.
Click to expand...
wanna bet? Put it to a national vote to see if abortion as a right should be preserved...and since women are who are directly affected, let only women vote for or against it.
 
NatMorton said:
The people of many states want the fetus recognized as a person with rights. Who are you to deny them that right?
Click to expand...

So you support a system of unequal rights? A fetus has rights in one state but not another? How does equal protection apply in your scenario?
 
You might want to consider shuffling the Handmaid's Tale novels across to the non fiction section in your public libraries.
 
roguenuke said:
The NICU is manned by volunteers, whether paid or working without pay, to be there, to take care of those patients. Society voluntarily takes on that burden.
Click to expand...

Ooooooookay.
 
If the issue was stopping abortion, its advocates would work to make a wide variety of birth control as available as possible. But the issue isn't just abortion, as Hobby Lobby has shown us. it's about forcing women to bear children and punishing them for enjoying sex.
 
BlueTex said:
Ironically, abortion was completely legal during the founders time.....
Click to expand...

It was; ironically it was the scientific community that initially made arguments in favor of anti-abortion legislation, once they determined the scientific processes of cell division. There were also concerns raised among medical professionals in the 19th Century that abortion wasn't sanitary. When conditions improved, medicine gradually nuanced its position to advocate for regulated abortion within certain guidelines. Much of the debate around abortion is rendered moot by contraception, but of course the American Taliban won't have any of that either.

What I don't get is the contradiction by which conservatives oppose abortion rights on the one hand and then condemn poor mothers and children for 'making poor life choices' and being the product of that environment. Anti-abortionists don't give a drop of ant piss about protecting the sanctity of life; they just want power and control. That's it.

They're not going to stop with this ruling at all. Their lust for power and trying to 'one-up' will only intensify. If they get power in 2024-25, I can almost guarantee that they will propose a federal ban on abortion, and I highly doubt this Court will stop them. Roberts might try, but he'll fail and incur the wrath of the far right. There will also be laws in state legislatures that challenge gay rights laws, with the same kinds of radically extreme laws that the anti-abortion movement used. There will be laws that allow businesses to discriminate - first against the gay and lesbian community, and this Court will probably allow it. And then from there...we'll soon be back to attempts to restore Jim Crow. We're not that far away, folks.
 
jmotivator said:
The fetus is not part of a woman's body. You can actually differentiate the woman's body from the child becausde the tissue has diferent DNA. Also on a physiological level the differentiation is clear since a pregnant woman doesn't have two hearts, for instance..

From conception the unborn is a living human. It displays all of the biological characteristics of a living organism, and its DNA is human.
Click to expand...

So states have a compelling interest to determine the father of that unborn human and order child support for that unborn human?
 
roguenuke said:
Think about this:

A person can shoot or stab someone else, and that other person, the victim, needs an organ transplant. Even if the perpetrator is then killed, and a viable match to save the victim's life, they can absolutely refuse to donate their organs (either right before death or by simply not being an organ donor), body parts to save that person whom they put in that position, whom they attacked, basically have now also killed.

That means a dead killer has more rights than a gestating woman to their body.
Click to expand...
This is a very bad analogy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom