What will be the fallout "IF" Roe Vs Wade is Overturned

[puck]

With the nomination of John Roberts for Supreme Court Justice, the possibility exists that Roe V Wade will be overturned. Now everyone look into your crystal balls and make your predictions as to how life will change.

 

[blogger31]

Well it will go back to pre Roe v. Wade. The states will again have control over abortion and will make their own laws. We will have some states with abortion and some without, how many no one could know. PL groups would claim victory and then take their fight to the states who legalize abortion. PC groups would protest, no doubt try to organize some kind of demonstration on Washington, and would also take their fight to the states. With the power being in states hands this fight could get even more interesting.

 

[Alex]

Well it will go back to pre Roe v. Wade. The states will again have control over abortion and will make their own laws. We will have some states with abortion and some without, how many no one could know. PL groups would claim victory and then take their fight to the states who legalize abortion. PC groups would protest, no doubt try to organize some kind of demonstration on Washington, and would also take their fight to the states. With the power being in states hands this fight could get even more interesting.

Women would seek illegal abortions which would put their lives at risk. This would cause sympathy for women seeking abortions. It would put enough pressure on all states to legalize it. It would probably also cause a greater majority of women to want it to be legal. When they realize that they are being told they cannot have an abortion, more will become upset for not having the choice. The "want what you cannot have" effect will be great.

 

[puck]

According to The "Disappointment Trolley" web site @ http://users.accesscomm.ca/ollenbep/dtroll/
1.4 million abortions are performed in the U.S. every year. (I don't know where they pull this number from so won't defend it).

If that number is correct, and abortion is criminalized, even assuming that 90% of those who would have gotten an abortion catch a clue and use birth control; that leaves 140,000 unwanted children in the U.S. every year.

In the book "Freakenomics" the author postulates that the decrease in crime from the 60s and 70s is due to the legalization of abortion. Unwanted children were not born. By his reasoning, unwanted children, being poorly cared for grew to be a large part of the criminal element. By the legalization of abortion, crime decreased. If he is correct, and If Roe v Wade is overturned. Then may we not expect more crime in 10-15 years?

What would this do to the economy? Would the work force be able to absorb them? How many would end up on welfare or in prison? A positive note would be we would have more workers to pay for social security. However if you think about it social security is being payed for right now by a decrease number of workers, now drop a city sized number of unwanted children into the mix, and taxes go up to pay for social programs. If social programs are cut, crime goes up, so now we have to pay for all those new prisons. A glut of workers coming of age approximately the same time would wages drop?

Can anyone else come up with repercussions of criminalization?

 

[Diogenes]

Well it will go back to pre Roe v. Wade. The states will again have control over abortion and will make their own laws. We will have some states with abortion and some without, how many no one could know. PL groups would claim victory and then take their fight to the states who legalize abortion. PC groups would protest, no doubt try to organize some kind of demonstration on Washington, and would also take their fight to the states. With the power being in states hands this fight could get even more interesting.

Exactly. And that's where the fight belongs - in the political arena rather than the courts.

 

[Alex]

Exactly. And that's where the fight belongs - in the political arena rather than the courts.

Wrong, it belongs to the individual.

 

[Navy Pride]

Wrong, it belongs to the individual.

Yeah the individual innocent defenseless baby that is being murdered in the womb.........

 

[blogger31]

Women would seek illegal abortions which would put their lives at risk. This would cause sympathy for women seeking abortions. It would put enough pressure on all states to legalize it. It would probably also cause a greater majority of women to want it to be legal. When they realize that they are being told they cannot have an abortion, more will become upset for not having the choice. The "want what you cannot have" effect will be great.

Actually you are only partially right. There will be states that will be given pressure to legalize abortion, but the restrictions will be far greater then they are now. Abortion would be legalized for rape, incest, life of the mother. All these abortions for careers, school, convenience sake will not be legalized by many states. Matter of fact most Americans are in favor of more restrictions, so you can't possibly justify that there would be any pressure for those abortions to be legal.

 

[Alex]

Actually you are only partially right. There will be states that will be given pressure to legalize abortion, but the restrictions will be far greater then they are now. Abortion would be legalized for rape, incest, life of the mother. All these abortions for careers, school, convenience sake will not be legalized by many states. Matter of fact most Americans are in favor of more restrictions, so you can't possibly justify that there would be any pressure for those abortions to be legal.

It can be justified. Do you think the women who are seeing abortions for careers, school, and/or convenience sake are just going to stop seeking them? No, they will not. They will seek illegal abortions from people who are not regulated by the government. This will cause more women having abortions that will affect their health and possibly kill them. It will lead to more sympathy for these women. It can be somewhat compared to the HIV issue of the 1980s. People were very much more against gays before HIV came along. When gays started dying from the disease, it cause sympathy for them. Now more people are better with gays.

 

[blogger31]

It can be justified. Do you think the women who are seeing abortions for careers, school, and/or convenience sake are just going to stop seeking them? No, they will not. They will seek illegal abortions from people who are not regulated by the government. This will cause more women having abortions that will affect their health and possibly kill them. It will lead to more sympathy for these women. It can be somewhat compared to the HIV issue of the 1980s. People were very much more against gays before HIV came along. When gays started dying from the disease, it cause sympathy for them. Now more people are better with gays.

WRONG! It is not the same as HIV. This country was not educated on HIV and AIDS. It started out as a disease for gays, then it became more known. Some liberal groups might have tried to spread sympathy for them, but most Americans in the 80's didn't give it a second thought because it happened to gay people, which they didn't like either.

Now fast forward and you have abortion which has been around for a while and people are more informed then when it first started. They know all about illegal abortions and what women did before and still; the majority of Americans want more restrictions on abortion, while only a small percentage want it unrestricted, or completely illegal. You can't put pressure on a legislation with the majority not being in favor. That is why abortion has always been fought in the courts, because it is the only place where it can survive. If it was up to the American people to vote abortion would be for rape, incest, life of the mother bottom line.

You can live in this fantasy world that there is going to be an uproar and all these state governments will bow down, but here in a little place I call the real world no legislation can be pressured without a majority. WELCOME TO THE REPUBLIC!!

 

[Naughty Nurse]

Yeah the individual innocent defenseless baby that is being murdered in the womb.........

It is a foetus and it is not being murdered. Check your dictionary.

 

[asmith555]

If R vs W is overturned it will mean someone actually looked at the constitution and realised the Federal government has no authority to rule over the state in this case and states would decide for themselves through the voters.

It may sound un-American to have the voters decide the issues but none the less it is the best way.

 

[Alex]

If R vs W is overturned it will mean someone actually looked at the constitution and realised the Federal government has no authority to rule over the state in this case and states would decide for themselves through the voters.

It may sound un-American to have the voters decide the issues but none the less it is the best way.

This is a part of Article VI of our Constitution:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. "

It is the Supremacy Clause. It means all state's laws are under the Constitution. No state law can override the Constitution.


The Fourteenth Amendment states:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

There is nothing more fundamental to the concept of "liberty" than personal freedom and privacy. Without those things, we are not a free nation.

This country tried giving states the power to govern themselves with The Articles of Confederation. It did not work. That is why we now have The Constitution and the Supremacy Clause.

 

[blogger31]

It is interesting you bring up the 14th amendment with you being for a woman's right to have an abortion and all. I was just wondering if you noticed this little piece:

"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Notice the words deprive, life, equal, protection! :mrgreen:

 

[blogger31]

It is a foetus and it is not being murdered. Check your dictionary.

The dictionary contains many definitions that people could argue about for days. So I decided to look somewhere else to see what I could find with the word murder, you know just for kicks. It is interesting what I found in the thesaurus:

Synonyms: dispatch, do in, execute, liquidate, slay

Related Words: blot out, destroy, fell, kill, smite, zap; assassinate; butcher, massacre, mow (down), slaughter; annihilate, eliminate, eradicate, exterminate, wipe out

Just thought that was interesting!

 

[Alex]

It is interesting you bring up the 14th amendment with you being for a woman's right to have an abortion and all. I was just wondering if you noticed this little piece:

"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Notice the words deprive, life, equal, protection! :mrgreen:

Here is Section 1 of the 14th Amendment:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

It specifically states, "All persons born..."
A fetus is not "born." It is not life to itself. It is dependant on the woman for life, therefore it is her decision to keep or abort it. The government does not have any right to tell another person what to do with his or her body. That is the essence of "liberty."

 

[Diogenes]

A fetus is not "born." It is not life to itself.

The question of just when a potential citizen becomes eligible for the protection of the state is a political question which should be answered by the people, not dictated from the judicial bench on a legal theory manufactured in the smoke of seeds and stems.

 

[Alex]

The question of just when a potential citizen becomes eligible for the protection of the state is a political question which should be answered by the people, not dictated from the judicial bench on a legal theory manufactured in the smoke of seeds and stems.

Legal "theory"? Not so. You'll need to elaborate on this. Prove it is only a "theory." The judical branch did not write the 14th Amendment, they are only ensuring it is enforce. Thank the stars for them.

The states do not have authority over our Constitution. The Constitution specifically calls for "liberty." Privacy and personal freedom are the most fundamental concepts of liberty. The question of abortion is not a political one which should be answered by the people. It is one left up to the individual woman.

You state "not dictated from the judical bench..." Who are you to "dictate" to another person what they can or cannot do with their own bodies? A person who believes they have this authority is nothing more than a person who is not content with their own views. If they were, they would not need to impose it on others.

 

[26 X World Champs]

That is why abortion has always been fought in the courts, because it is the only place where it can survive. If it was up to the American people to vote abortion would be for rape, incest, life of the mother bottom line.

Wrong, sorry. Two-Thirds of Americans support Roe V. Wade....That's 2 out 3 people. Translation? Only 1 out of 3 people are against Abortion as defined by Roe V. Wade.

The Supreme Court supports Roe V. Wade by 6-3, the same two-thirds majority.

Abortion is here to stay, it will ALWAYS be legal in the USA, it will never again be necessary for a woman to use a hangar to abort her child or to go to some backroom butcher.

Thank GOD!

 

[teacher]

Wow. I agree with champs. While I am against abortion, it's not my place to say what a woman does with her body. Talk about a rock and a hard place.



Are you over here Billo.......

 

[blogger31]

Wrong, sorry. Two-Thirds of Americans support Roe V. Wade....That's 2 out 3 people. Translation? Only 1 out of 3 people are against Abortion as defined by Roe V. Wade.

The Supreme Court supports Roe V. Wade by 6-3, the same two-thirds majority.

Abortion is here to stay, it will ALWAYS be legal in the USA, it will never again be necessary for a woman to use a hangar to abort her child or to go to some backroom butcher.

Thank GOD!

Bullcrap! Check the polls, you are wrong. While 2 out of 3 may support Roe v. Wade, that has nothing to do with the majority of Americans feeling there should be more restrictions on abortion. Many Americans support Roe v Wade for women who need abortion due to rape, incest, or life. Your translation is way off base, explain to me how you can say for fact what someone else thinks by such a vague poll. Nice job of putting some PC :spin: on that!

 

[blogger31]

Here is Section 1 of the 14th Amendment:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

It specifically states, "All persons born..."
A fetus is not "born." It is not life to itself. It is dependant on the woman for life, therefore it is her decision to keep or abort it. The government does not have any right to tell another person what to do with his or her body. That is the essence of "liberty."

You know another interesting piece is in the early days of this country people who supported making slaves out of black people looked at the Constitution and anywhere it said person, their thought was "They aren't persons, so this doesn't apply to them, we are free to do to them or with them what we wish."

I wonder if back in the 1860's Congress would have put in protection of the unborn if they knew 100 years from them we would be killing unborn children? Just a couple of interesting thoughts on using the Constitution to defend your point.

 

[blogger31]

You know what let me put this poll up here just to get it started notice the date, very recent poll:

CBS News Poll. July 13-14, 2005. N=632 adults nationwide. MoE ± 4 (for all adults).

"What is your personal feeling about abortion? (1) It should be permitted in all cases. (2) It should be permitted, but subject to greater restrictions than it is now. (3) It should be permitted only in cases such as rape, incest and to save the woman's life. OR, (4) It should only be permitted to save the woman's life."

All Cases = 25%

Greater Restrictions = 14%

Rape, Incest, Woman's Life = 38%

Only Woman's Life = 15%

Never = 3%

Unsure = 5%

So as you can see over 50% are in favor of abortion only in the case of rape, incest, or woman's life, and over 65% want greater restrictions. You see how things can change when you stop trying to interpret polls with your brand of spin and actually get specific? :doh

 

[blogger31]

Wow. I agree with champs. While I am against abortion, it's not my place to say what a woman does with her body. Talk about a rock and a hard place.



Are you over here Billo.......

Well you and Champs sit over in the corner and agree then and I will agree with the majority of Americans, BTW if it is not your place to tell a woman what to do with her body, are you in favor of legalizing all drugs so you are not telling junkies what to do with their bodies?

 

[nkgupta80]

yeah drugs should be legalized. I mean seriosuly.. alcohol is legalized, smoking is legalized, whats wrong with other drugs.