We have been down this "states rights" path before, and it ended badly.
- Thread starter soybean
- Start date
It's amazing you fail to see that the main influence to overturn Roe was Christianity and that you believe SCOTUS would actually put that in their opinion.
Why wouldn’t they try to ban abortions then? The same way they legalized them 50 years ago.
Again, I’m going to point you to all the legal opinions that said it was fallible and ripe to be overturned.
That is just what you choose to see. Was RBG motivated by Christianity when she said roe was bad law and would likely be overturned?
The fact is the democrats we're too busy using the issue to rile their base for the last fifty years to codify it. Shame on them if anyone. They wanted the controversy and they are absolutely loving this right now because they get to use it as a wedge issue
Democrats could have a federal abortion law put together by this time next week. It might fail but they could absolutely push it to a vote or force the Republicans to filibuster it. They won't though because like the last 50 years they like what is happening. They love what is happening. It will be a cash cow and a issue to run against for the midterms. They might even be able to push it to the next presidential election and likely will try. They love that they can now push this narrative in all states and use it as a fundraiser and voting wedge in the state elections as well.
Truth is neither side wants this solved reasonably because it has been and will continue to be a fundraiser and a voting wedge for both parties.
The people should rally around this and come to a reasonable abortion standard. I think Europe actually has this one figured out. The sad part about roe is we likely would already have a reasonable abortion standard similar to Europe's if it were not for the supreme court intervening 50 years ago.
Look, those guys are too smart to state outright that they are overturning Roe because of religion. But since nearly all objections to abortion are ultimately based in religion, and given what we know about the religious background of the justices in question, it's not hard to see what drove this stripping away of women's rights.
Perhaps you could say it is the judeo-Christian values of the west that have influence. When you consider abortion as murder, you don’t have to have religion as a factor telling you it’s wrong. Unless all the atheists I see saying they don’t need religion to know right from wrong aren’t being honest. When do you feel a person should be granted the right to life? When they are born?
I’ll say it again, they didn’t rule abortion to be illegal. The gave it back to the states.
Farrell said the book was immensely popular, and she did not find any evidence of objections to the inclusion of the section.
"It didn't really bother anybody that a typical instructional manual could include material like this," she said. "It just wasn't something to be remarked upon. It was just a part of everyday life."
So does this beg the question that they were well aware of abortions, maybe even supported them, but didn’t put it in the constitution? Why wouldn’t they do that?
It's amazing you think that only Democrats are against the removal of Roe v. Wade.
Still haven’t read the 9th Amendment yet?
Show me where the words marriage or women are in the Constitution.
I don't but if we were to pick where most against it being overturned they would live in the democratic party. Remember when all the pull string democrats on this site started blaming trump and republicans? I remember.
Unless of course you believe all Democrats believe in abortion?
That doesn't make it wrong. It just makes it hard for simple-minded bigots to follow and easy for religious and political frauds to capitalize on.
As this ruling clearly demonstrates.
Agreed. I would say that Democrats are typically pro-choice. I just think this is going to backfire on the Republicans. I am not sure why you brought Trump into this?
A
anon_b29nm7v7dwp6r
Guest
Yep, frankly I’ve realized many people in this country just stink. I’m ready to give up on the whole United States thing, embrace “states rights” and move to a state I agree with….and tell the federal gov and other states to stay out of my business
It's a weird thing. It's like the founders put the intent right in the name of the country
No. I think most are blaming the influence of Evangelicals on the Republican Party.
Unless I missed there are no mentions of any medical procedures or treatments in the constitution.
Why would there be?
Are you suggesting that their failure to mention medical care means they somehow thought banning medical care was OK?
So . . . if the new standard is that whatever isn't specifically protected by name in the constitution can be banned, what other medical care would you like to see states be able to ban?
Probably because they never believed the government would get involved in personal health choices. There are lots of things that aren't spelled out in the constitution. They laid out ideals that could be applied to most situations.
These people are a cancer. They will be the undoing of the good ol’ USA.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the right to travel isn't protected in the constitution, either.
Sure, you might extrapolate that right from the Commerce clause. But apparently extrapolation isn't legitimate. And even if it was, that would only allow business travel.
Or you might extrapolate it from the right to assemble in 1A. But, again, you don't like extrapolation.
Evangelicals along with the plutocrats and corporations who are delighted to pay to inflame issues like abortion to keep the party of corporate power and lower taxes strong enough to protect their entrenched privilege.
They've wanted to ban abortion for 50 years but they didn't have the proper Christian firepower on the supreme court.
I know full well Roe was ripe, RBG made that clear.
Now the state supreme court's can use Christianity in their opinions too.
Enumerated vs Unenumerated Rights
In the United States, enumerated rights are written down in the constitution, especially the first eight amendments. People in the United States also have unenumerated rights, which are not written down in the constitution but are still legally relevant.The Supreme Court makes decisions based on unwritten rights and what is written in the constitution. Unenumerated (unwritten) rights include the right to travel, privacy, autonomy, and dignity. None of these rights are specifically stated in the constitution, but the Supreme Court defends these rights.
Many Rights Americans Have are Unenumerated
Some would assume that “innocent until proven guilty” is in the constitution, but it is actually an unenumerated right based on legal tradition.A person has an enumerated right to due process, mentioned in the constitution. However, the constitution does not define due process. Instead, courts always believe that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty because courts have always interpreted due process that way.
What Enumerated and Unenumerated Rights Does an American Have?
United States citizens enjoy written Constitutional rights and unwritten rights. What enumerated and unenumerated rights does an American have?
constitutionus.com
I’ve read it, plenty of text is out there for how the 9th doesn’t make the argument.
In terms of marriage, 10th amendment.
Perhaps lead a push to explicitly put the word woman where you want it to be.
RGB didn't say Roe was a bad law, she didn't like it because it left women's rights open for attack.
A stolen SCOTUS seat and stacking the court with radical Christian fundamentalists overturned Roe, Democrats can't legislate against that.
The SCOTUS isn’t there to ban anything. The constitution is meant to limit power of the government. They function on the basis of decisions through the lens of the constitution.
You really believe a state could constitutionally ban marriage? Good luck with that one.
