• 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!

Why are Pro Choice People so afraid to battle the issue out state by state?

Many of us support the right to get high.

You only support the right to smoke weed.

The left does not support a woman's right to ingest, inhale, or inject any drug she chooses into her own body.
 
You only support the right to smoke weed.

The left does not support a woman's right to ingest, inhale, or inject any drug she chooses into her own body.
That’s broad brush.

Pretty much everybody I know is quite tolerant of substances in general. Mad about fentanyl in everything, so concerned about dangers to themselves and others from substances. Safe smoking kits, which the right was quite incensed by.
 
how funny would it be if us guys had to fight it out, state by state, for our right to privacy between us and our doctors? or our right to buy stuff (like a gun, condoms, etc).
 
Pretty much everybody I know is quite tolerant of substances in general.

But they're not "tolerant" of a free market in all drugs, hence none of them support the right to bodily autonomy.
 
how funny would it be if us guys had to fight it out, state by state, for our right to privacy between us and our doctors? or our right to buy stuff (like a gun, condoms, etc).
If the reds decide to secede they'd find out how well the 2nd protected them from the US military.
 
About one third of the states are going to effectively ban abortions or already have.

About one third are going to keep abortion legal no matter what.

About one third of the states could go either way.

Why are pro choice advocates so afraid to battle the issue out on a state by state basis?
I'm not afraid to battle the issue out on a state by state basis.
I believe that the Constitution of the United States supports an individual woman's right to choose to end or continue a pregnancy, and that this is, therefore, a basic Constitutional right of every woman.

Since Thomas, Alito, Barrett, and Kavanaugh are conservative Catholics and Gorsuch was raised as a Catholic and converted to Anglicanism in his late twenties to marry his wife, I believe that their decision in Dobbs v Jackson is nothing but a conservative Catholic biased interpretation of the Constitution.

That interpretation ignores the religious variety in views of life and personhood in this country that elevated the principle of freedom of religion. The Jews on the Supreme Court have never sided with the conservative Catholic view, and the interpretation of the Constitution should be capable of accommodating the major world religions, at least in their more modern form, e.g., Conservative and Reform Judaism, Mahayana Buddhism, etc.

To me, it is an almost cosmic disappointment that we now have these conservative Catholic justices in the SC, and I consider it a time for political non-violent war to take back this nation from these horribly misguided people.

In every one of the 50 states, there are both pro-choice and anti-abortion populations. The last time I checked the Pew research on this, Mississippi had the lowest portion of pro-choice supporters, 42-45%, and some New England state had the highest, 67%.

While the West Coast, New England, and central mid-Atlantic states as well as Colorado had strong pro-choice portions, except for a very small number of Southern states, almost all the other states split close to 50/50 or slightly higher for pro-choice. In addition, anywhere from 58% to 68-70% of the US population did not want Roe v Wade overturned. More were young, since 18-24 year olds have the highest pro-choice rate and those over 65 have the lowest, i.e., the future is necessarily pro-choice except in the event of destruction of democracy.

In every state, there are women who support Roe v Wade and believe, as I do, that the choice to end or continue a pregnancy is a basic Constitutional right that absolutely belongs to them. Part of loving the US is loving it for recognizing that right of women. If it had not been recognized in my youth, after going abroad, I would not have come back and would have seriously considered taking a different citizenship.

So if I have to slog it out state by state, I will, but that right on a state by state basis would not be the same even if every state recognized it. A basic Constitutional right is a basic commitment of one's nation. When the SC cut that commitment, it worked two ways. My nation has so disappointed me that a certain joy is gone and probably won't return even if a less conservative SC majority later restores recognition of the right for all women in the US.

The narrow-minded anti-abortion people were never impinged on by Roe v Wade, which never touched their bodies, never forced them to be or do anything they didn't want, but they are using force now to try to control the behavior of millions of actual persons against their will. That they do not grasp the horror of this is, perhaps, the saddest thing of all.
 
Last edited:
You only support the right to smoke weed.

The left does not support a woman's right to ingest, inhale, or inject any drug she chooses into her own body.
The right to remove what is inside the body is completely different from the right to put things into one's body. If you can't grasp that, I just feel sorry for you.
 
The right to remove what is inside the body is completely different from the right to put things into one's body. If you can't grasp that, I just feel sorry for you.
I'm liberal and I'm not getting what you are saying. The right to both is my right as long as it is legal.
 
It strikes me as fashionable in conservative circles these days to get on the "States rights" bandwagon while abandoning their personal choice mantra. Every thing is so political .People side up with their side no matter . They have forgotten how to think for themselves.
States rights

Such as drug laws

How many have chosen to ignore federal laws regarding marijuana and legalize it?

How many have different drinking ages for adults?

States should be able to handle their own agenda.....and of course they are not always going to please EVERYONE

But it is their issue and their problem.....

Feds need to make sure they take care of interstate commerce, and the borders, and the defense of the country

Most everything else should have been left to the states.....and yes, some will screw it all up i am sure

And their constituents will let them know about it every other November
 
But they're not "tolerant" of a free market in all drugs, hence none of them support the right to bodily autonomy.
Historically, that’s because the freedom right would crucify them if they did.

“Look at these liberals trying to make it so your kids become gay junkies!”
 
If someone in Montana or New York has an abortion, the people who aren't having an abortion don't know about it. It doesn't effect them. Nobody would care unless they know about it, which they won't because an abortion is typically a private decision.
I believe i was talking OVERALL state laws.....not just abortion

So you believe that Montana and California should have the EXACT same laws governing the states.....all the way from federal to state and local?
 
Same reason gun advocates don't want gun laws to be left up to the states to regulate how, what they view as a fundamental right, each state sees fit.
 
I'm liberal and I'm not getting what you are saying. The right to both is my right as long as it is legal.
When you remove something that was put into your body from the outside, you are cleaning your house, making things that should not be there get out. If a robber comes in a window, you make him/her get out and make your house the way it was.

When you put something into your body from the outside, you are furnishing your house, putting something there to change it.

They coincide when, for example, a woman ingests methotrexate to make an ectopic pregnancy get out, or she takes bc pills to prevent sperm from fertilizing her ova and an embryo from implanting in her uterus.

Similarly, if you experience pain because your body changed, even if you can't change the body back, you want to ingest a painkiller so your experience can be free of pain again, as if pain had been put in your mind and you want to get it out of there.

But however much I may sympathize with people who want to smoke pot or feel they need cocaine or want to experiment with LSD, any mind-bending substance can remove your capacity for rational thought and quick reaction, things that make you competent. I don't want anybody driving a car, flying a plane, or working a crane who isn't completely capable of reason and quick reaction, as they could cause accidents to others, actual harm to what is external to their body.

Having an abortion will not cause an accident to others. Unless one treats an entity with potential for a future life of a born child as if it is already an actual life of an actual child, one cannot claim abortion is a harmful action because no one external to one's body is actually affected.
 
Historically, that’s because the freedom right would crucify them if they did.

No, it's the strain of puritanism which has always been a part of the progressive movement. Hence the Progressive push for alcohol prohibition in the 20s and the censoring of comic books in the 40s.

Seriously, you don't even believe an adult can decide for himself how much to work for without daddy government "protecting" him with minimum wage laws.
 
So you believe that Montana and California should have the EXACT same laws governing the states.....all the way from federal to state and local?

No, and that's not even remotely what I said. My point is, not all laws are the same. My bigger point is, people in Montana are not going to be deprived of anything if they have the same abortion laws that New York has -- because abortion is a private matter. Those who don't want abortions aren't going to be forced to have abortions.

Now contrast that to, say, gun laws. New York City's residents want gun laws to reduce violent crime, but because shit kickers in Montana helped rig the courts, New Yorkers are stuck with the same shit ass "freedumz" that Montanans have. And unlike abortion, violent crime isn't a private, personal matter. We all go out in public sometime..
 
No, it's the strain of puritanism which has always been a part of the progressive movement. Hence the Progressive push for alcohol prohibition in the 20s and the censoring of comic books in the 40s.

Seriously, you don't even believe an adult can decide for himself how much to work for without daddy government "protecting" him with minimum wage laws.
So what do you call the same behavior from the right? They sure got a set of acceptable behavior that is smaller than that of the left.

And minimum wage was reactive. Employers were grotesquely exploiting labor. Like the third world now. It’s illegal to sleep outside landlords want their money. Y’all always act like you can just live off the land. You can’t. Employers used to have various forms of slaves, peasants. Unions fought and died to get us weekends off and only 40 hours a week. So they set a floor for pay. Seems fine to me, all things considered.
 
The left does not support a woman's right to ingest, inhale, or inject any drug she chooses into her own body.
And the Libertarian Party says that all human rights start with the self-ownership of our bodies, right before they whole-heartedly endorse the GOP's abortion policies. They also have a lot of very true and meaningful things to say about the nature of policing and violence, until the police kill another unarmed black man.

It's funny how much liberal and even anarchist rhetoric comes out of their mouths, and how much of the GOP's campaign budgets come out of their bank accounts.

"Taxes are slavery! Alimony is slavery! Child support is slavery!" ... say the men sipping mint juleps in the shade of their gigantic Confederate flag. And now saying that women having the right to control their own bodies, having the right to use force to prevent an unwanted person from growing inside of them... is slavery.
 
Well, that is a fallacy to ask but I will say it is better than McConnell and McCarthy having say, isn't it?

Look how many people each represents and how much GDP.

Minority rule is the main cause of this civil war.

Best is compromise.
Second best is majority rule.
Worst, minority rule.

The problem with your talking points is there isn't a clearcut majority or minority when total population of each states is added up between Blue and Red. Last Census put the cumulative population of the blue states at about 141 million and the Cumulative population of red states at about 185 million. Given the margins of error with census data, it's probably closer to a 50/50 split.

This graphic pretty much says it all:

1656342704282.png
 
About one third of the states are going to effectively ban abortions or already have.

About one third are going to keep abortion legal no matter what.

About one third of the states could go either way.

Why are pro choice advocates so afraid to battle the issue out on a state by state basis?
I think the greater concern is that Congress will pass a law banning abortion nationwide. And people right now no longer have the right to an abortion, and if you believe the right to bodily autonomy includes the right to choose not to carry a pregnancy to term, the ability to "fight it out" in state government isn't much of a comfort.
 
Back
Top Bottom