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

[blogger31]

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

Are you seriously asking what is wrong with drugs like cocaine, heroin, meth, crack, ice, etc, etc. Do you live under a rock, or did you just move here from a remote island?

 

[puck]

Are you seriously asking what is wrong with drugs like cocaine, heroin, meth, crack, ice, etc, etc. Do you live under a rock, or did you just move here from a remote island?

Off topic gentlemen. If you want to discuss drugs, start a new thread.

 

[blogger31]

Off topic gentlemen. If you want to discuss drugs, start a new thread.

Now that is a good idea.

 

[Alex]

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."

Right, but the Constitution was changed to fix this.

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.

Abortion was around when this Amendment was ratified. "Texas first enacted a criminal abortion statute in 1854. Texas Laws 1854, c. 49, 1" The creators of this amendment were aware of abortion.

Source:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&friend=oyez&friend=oyez&vol=410&invol=113

 

[Alex]

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

Here is something you conveniently left out of the same poll:

"More than thirty years ago, the Supreme Court's decision in Roe versus Wade established a constitutional right for women to obtain legal abortions in this country. In general, do you think the Court's decision was a good thing or a bad thing?"

Good Thing: 59%
Bad Thing: 32%
Both(vol.): 4%
Unsure: 5%


Source:
http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

What does all this say? It says that people's personal beliefs that abortion is wrong exept in very restricted cases does not mean they will allow those personal beliefs to interfer in a woman's right to choose.

Also, as part of the same polls, I found this:

"If one of the U.S. Supreme Court justices retired, would you want the new Supreme Court justice to be someone who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade -- the decision that legalized abortion -- or vote to uphold it?"

Vote To Overturn: 29%
Vote To Uphold: 65%
Unsure: 5%

A majority of people want abortion to be legal regardless of their personal beliefs.

 

[26 X World Champs]

Also, as part of the same polls, I found this:

"If one of the U.S. Supreme Court justices retired, would you want the new Supreme Court justice to be someone who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade -- the decision that legalized abortion -- or vote to uphold it?"

Vote To Overturn: 29%
Vote To Uphold: 65%
Unsure: 5%

A majority of people want abortion to be legal regardless of their personal beliefs.

Thank you for clarifying my earlier post where I wrote that two-thirds of Americans are PRO Roe V. Wade.

Unfortunately, those who want to take a woman's personal privacy rights away will do almost anything to convince themselves that the whole world agrees with them.

I think I've written the same simple message on this board more times than I count:

"Abortion will ALWAYS be LEGAL in the USA."

No one that I know is trying to convince people who are against Abortion that they should be for it. All that we are saying is that the only person who gets to choose whether she will have an abortion is the woman who is pregnant.

If you're against abortion do not have one. It's that simple.

If you're against abortion you should support any program that gets birth control out to as many people as possible. Statistically the best way to reduce unwanted pregnancies is to distribute birth control. The argument that abstinence is the best is a swiss cheese argument because the reality is that people are going to have sex a lot more than they are going to be abstinent. Since people will have sex it behooves us to give them simple means to birth control.

Every public high school in America should openly distribute birth control....

 

[Diogenes]

Abortion was around when this Amendment was ratified. "Texas first enacted a criminal abortion statute in 1854. Texas Laws 1854, c. 49, 1" The creators of this amendment were aware of abortion.

And it took from 1854 until 1973 for the court to discover this law was unconstitutional???

A majority of people want abortion to be legal regardless of their personal beliefs.

Great! So what's your problem with taking the issue away from the court and letting people vote on it?

 

[Alex]

And it took from 1854 until 1973 for the court to discover this law was unconstitutional???

Obviously. Your point? If no one brings an issue before the court, then that court cannot rule on it. No one brought the issue of abortion before the court until 1973. Just because a law is old does not exempt it from constitutional review.

Great! So what's your problem with taking the issue away from the court and letting people vote on it?

I have no problem with that specifically. The problem I have is with over-zealous politicians who will take it into their own hands. Remember the Terri Shiavo case? A great majority of Americans believed the government should not interfere. The over-zealous politicans tried anyway.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

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?

Does anyone else see that and think "Civil Rights Movement?" Maybe that's what led to a decrease in crime....?

 

[puck]

Does anyone else see that and think "Civil Rights Movement?" Maybe that's what led to a decrease in crime....?

That's definitely a possibility! I only offered what I had read as an example of what I meant when I started this thread. We have too many is it right or wrong kind of responses, and not enough earnest thinking.

Sure some women will undoubtedly go and have the old fashion under the table abortions. Will there not be more and farther reaching effects? As an individual I can see some of them. I was hoping that as a group we might investigate and come up with those that I have not anticipated.

 

[Dezaad]

Abortion Poll and Historical Polls

 

[Diogenes]

Obviously. Your point? If no one brings an issue before the court, then that court cannot rule on it. No one brought the issue of abortion before the court until 1973. Just because a law is old does not exempt it from constitutional review.

Good deal! That means that a more sensible court, one that can actually read the Constitution, can review the case again and overturn a prior bad decision.

I have no problem with that specifically. The problem I have is with over-zealous politicians who will take it into their own hands. Remember the Terri Shiavo case? A great majority of Americans believed the government should not interfere. The over-zealous politicans tried anyway.

Politicians, unlike federal judges, are answerable to the people. That makes them our only hope against tyranny by a black-robed elite. In the case of Terri Schiavo, they were too late and too ineffective to successfully protect her civil rights and prevent her murder.

Does anyone else see that and think "Civil Rights Movement?" Maybe that's what led to a decrease in crime....?

No. Do you remember the rash of Florida carjackings a few years ago? Do you remember that the problem was gone ninety days after Florida passed a concealed-carry law? Some solutions are more effective than others.

 

[Alex]

Good deal! That means that a more sensible court, one that can actually read the Constitution, can review the case again and overturn a prior bad decision.

I have already addressed this. See posts #13 and #16 in this thread.

Politicians, unlike federal judges, are answerable to the people. That makes them our only hope against tyranny by a black-robed elite. In the case of Terri Schiavo, they were too late and too ineffective to successfully protect her civil rights and prevent her murder.

You wrote earlier:

Great! So what's your problem with taking the issue away from the court and letting people vote on it?

Now you write: "In the case of Terri Schiavo, [politicans] were too late and too ineffective to successfully protect her civil rights and prevent her murder."

Which is it?

The polls should overwhelmingly that the people of this country felt the politicians should stay out of the Terri Schiavo case. The politicans interfered anyway. If abortion were left up to the people it would stay legal, but over-zealous politicians would take it into their own hands as they did with Schiavo.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

No. Do you remember the rash of Florida carjackings a few years ago? Do you remember that the problem was gone ninety days after Florida passed a concealed-carry law? Some solutions are more effective than others.

??

Wow. That's completely unrelated. Let's say that an unwanted child starts automatically committing crimes at age 14(I know it's a retarted thing to say, but that's what we're pre-supposing). Roe v. Wade was passed in 1973. 1973 + 14 = 1987. We're talking in a crime rate drop between the 60's(CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT) and the 70's(DISCO).

This does not compute.

 

[Diogenes]

I have already addressed this. See posts #13 and #16 in this thread.

Neither addresses the fact the USSC has become activist and developed the habit of making up law as they go along. There is much work for a future (and more sensible) court to do in correcting the recent (last 40 years or so) bad decisions.

Now you write: "In the case of Terri Schiavo, [politicans] were too late and too ineffective to successfully protect her civil rights and prevent her murder."

Which is it?

Both. The fact that politicians are answerable to the people doesn't mean they will always be effective, which is why we change them periodically.

This does not compute.

You need a new computer.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

You need a new computer.

You need a new face!

 

[blogger31]

Abortion was certainly around, but it was not legal in many cases. I am curious to know if the Constitution would have included the unborn if the lawmakers knew we would be killing the unborn 100 years later. I never said abortion wasn't around and that they were not aware, read the post.

 

[blogger31]

Here is something you conveniently left out of the same poll:

"More than thirty years ago, the Supreme Court's decision in Roe versus Wade established a constitutional right for women to obtain legal abortions in this country. In general, do you think the Court's decision was a good thing or a bad thing?"

Good Thing: 59%
Bad Thing: 32%
Both(vol.): 4%
Unsure: 5%


Source:
http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

What does all this say? It says that people's personal beliefs that abortion is wrong exept in very restricted cases does not mean they will allow those personal beliefs to interfer in a woman's right to choose.

Also, as part of the same polls, I found this:

"If one of the U.S. Supreme Court justices retired, would you want the new Supreme Court justice to be someone who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade -- the decision that legalized abortion -- or vote to uphold it?"

Vote To Overturn: 29%
Vote To Uphold: 65%
Unsure: 5%

A majority of people want abortion to be legal regardless of their personal beliefs.

Either you just like to argue for the sake of it, or you really just can't comprehend what is being written in front of you. :roll: My argument is that abortion needs to stay in the courts in order for it to remain the way that it is. I have no issue believing that the majority of Americans favor Roe v. Wade, so by posting your polls you prove nothing. My argument is that the only reason a majority favor R v. W is because they favor abortion for rape, incest, life of the mother. My poll proves that argument beyond a reasonable doubt. So in conclusion if abortion was put to a vote by the American people, abortion would only be allowed in the cases of rape, incest, and life of the mother. Not for a career choice, not because they have to go to college, etc. It is amazing how someone who is PC will take any poll that agrees with them and spin it so it makes it seem Americans are in favor of abortion for convenience sakes.

 

[blogger31]

Thank you for clarifying my earlier post where I wrote that two-thirds of Americans are PRO Roe V. Wade.

Unfortunately, those who want to take a woman's personal privacy rights away will do almost anything to convince themselves that the whole world agrees with them.

I think I've written the same simple message on this board more times than I count:

"Abortion will ALWAYS be LEGAL in the USA."

No one that I know is trying to convince people who are against Abortion that they should be for it. All that we are saying is that the only person who gets to choose whether she will have an abortion is the woman who is pregnant.

If you're against abortion do not have one. It's that simple.

If you're against abortion you should support any program that gets birth control out to as many people as possible. Statistically the best way to reduce unwanted pregnancies is to distribute birth control. The argument that abstinence is the best is a swiss cheese argument because the reality is that people are going to have sex a lot more than they are going to be abstinent. Since people will have sex it behooves us to give them simple means to birth control.

Every public high school in America should openly distribute birth control....

Again the only reason they are pro Roe v. Wade is because they favor abortion in the case of rape, incest, and life of the mother. My poll proves my point. You and every other PC person likes to spin a vague poll to make it seem as if they are 100% behind it no matter what.

Yeah, give out birth control and send the message that having sex is OK as long as you are safe. A person can be taught that abstaining is the best choice if it is taught properly. There is not a program in the country right now that is getting it right unfortunately. But I do not favor promoting sex by handing out condoms, I favor people taking responsibility for their own actions, and killing a defenseless human is not taking responsibility. Also you can preach on about abortion remaining legal, but the flip can happen just as easily as it became legal. Two more justices will resign before Bush's time is up, expect abortion to be overturned.

 

[puck]

Yeah, give out birth control and send the message that having sex is OK as long as you are safe. A person can be taught that abstaining is the best choice if it is taught properly.

Why do so many people try to make sex dirty? If we're talking STD's sure abstinence is better than promiscuous unprotected sex. That doesn't mean that the message should be put out there "Sex is bad, evil." Of course sex is good, but if you're going to do it, be smart, don't make babies you don't want, don't take chances with diseases you don't want. There are many methods of contraception out there, yes I know none are 100% sure. I would still rather prevent unwanted pregnancies than abort potential human life. No I'm not pro life or pro choice. I'm on the fence.

Why not provide free birth control, it's cheaper than babies?

 

[Alex]

Abortion was certainly around, but it was not legal in many cases. I am curious to know if the Constitution would have included the unborn if the lawmakers knew we would be killing the unborn 100 years later. I never said abortion wasn't around and that they were not aware, read the post.

Abortion has been around for centuries. Abortions had not been almost completely outlawed until 1900. So they were legal when this amendment was passed. The people who passed it were aware that abortions were legal.

Source:
http://womenshistory.about.com/library/weekly/aa012200.htm


You wrote:

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?

Looks like you were trying to say they were not aware of abortion to me.

 

[Alex]

Either you just like to argue for the sake of it, or you really just can't comprehend what is being written in front of you. :roll: My argument is that abortion needs to stay in the courts in order for it to remain the way that it is. I have no issue believing that the majority of Americans favor Roe v. Wade, so by posting your polls you prove nothing. My argument is that the only reason a majority favor R v. W is because they favor abortion for rape, incest, life of the mother. My poll proves that argument beyond a reasonable doubt. So in conclusion if abortion was put to a vote by the American people, abortion would only be allowed in the cases of rape, incest, and life of the mother. Not for a career choice, not because they have to go to college, etc. It is amazing how someone who is PC will take any poll that agrees with them and spin it so it makes it seem Americans are in favor of abortion for convenience sakes.

You have become seriously irrational. You are stretching the truth, making false statements, leaving out important information in your "facts", and not absorbing all the information given to you. You cannot just pick and choose information to prove a point, all of it must be presented. You have not proven anything you post, and have not provided any sources. That only means one thing; you have no valid points to make. All your points have been countered with more valid ones. You have been defeated.

 

[26 X World Champs]

Again the only reason they are pro Roe v. Wade is because they favor abortion in the case of rape, incest, and life of the mother. My poll proves my point. You and every other PC person likes to spin a vague poll to make it seem as if they are 100% behind it no matter what.

Show us please where Laura Bush & John McCain said they're only pro-choice in case of rape, incest etc? For example, McCain said:

McCain said, “I’d love to see a point where Roe vs. Wade is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade, which would then force women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.”
Source: Ron Fournier, Associated Press Aug 24, 1999

How about Laura Bush?

January 19, 2001
Web posted at: 9:12 p.m. EST (0212 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Laura Bush, the wife of President-elect George W. Bush, said Friday she believes the country could do more to minimize the number of abortions, but also indicated she doesn't believe the 1973 Supreme Court ruling legalizing abortions should be overturned.

"No, I don't think it should be overturned," Mrs. Bush told NBC's "Today Show" when asked about the high court's decision, Roe vs. Wade.

Yeah, give out birth control and send the message that having sex is OK as long as you are safe. A person can be taught that abstaining is the best choice if it is taught properly.

That thinking is not correct at all. I've posted links previously proving that handing out birth control in high school does not increase the number of people having sex at all, period:

Won't it encourage teens?
While some people might be concerned that offering birth control at school encourages teens to become sexually active, Sidebottom says this wasn't the case. Under both the voucher system and the direct access system, about 11 percent of teens requested contraception.

Health-care behaviours are not altered by the availability of reproductive health-care services for adolescents, says Dr Michael Lotke, a paediatrician who heads the adolescent wellness programme at Mount Sinai Hospital in Chicago.

These types of clinics aren't going to get these kids in trouble; they're only helping to protect them, Lotke says.

Source: http://www.health24.com/Woman/Sexual_health/711-730,25338.asp

Also you can preach on about abortion remaining legal, but the flip can happen just as easily as it became legal. Two more justices will resign before Bush's time is up, expect abortion to be overturned.

It will never happen IMHO. Plus even if somehow Roe V. Wade is struck down all it would mean is that the States get to decide, and with few exceptions most States would still have legal abortions.

 

[Diogenes]

Plus even if somehow Roe V. Wade is struck down all it would mean is that the States get to decide, and with few exceptions most States would still have legal abortions.

And that's the way it should be, for this and all other decisions of public policy. I would also expect quite a bit of variation in regulations from one state to another with respect to partial birth abortion, public assistance, estimated time to birth, etc.

 

[blogger31]

Abortion has been around for centuries. Abortions had not been almost completely outlawed until 1900. So they were legal when this amendment was passed. The people who passed it were aware that abortions were legal.

Source:
http://womenshistory.about.com/library/weekly/aa012200.htm

Looks like you were trying to say they were not aware of abortion to me.

How many abortions were done back then? What was the issue of the times? Surely you are not trying to compare legislation during the 1860's to legislation of 100 + years later. I am talking about the thinking of lawmakers if they knew we were aborting children by the millions every year. What were the reasons for abortion back in 1860? Do you know? Or are you trying to compare that to modern day as well? You seem to have a problem thinking in terms of the times and only take what you can apply to your opinion.