Unless you get raped. Then it's out of your control and you have to carry the pregnancy to term. But the rareness of these cases makes it okay to Republicans. Who cares if a few women have their lives ruined by being forced to carry their rapists baby?
It's their "rapist's" baby, or rapists' in the case of a gang-bang.
You’re errant in thinking that it’s a political move. Many conservatives see this as a political liability. But when it’s the right thing to do, you follow through and do it anyway.
And you’re correct that a large number of Americans support early abortion, but also a large portion support restrictions after the first trimester. Progressives were pushing for any time abortion on demand. The Supreme Court has appropriately sent the issue to states, where it belongs.
Nah. It’s pretty clear that the furor over abortion was manufactured by powerful evangelical politicians when they realized they were losing the culture war in the 90s. Only a slim minority of strict anti-abortion types (who are a significant minority of Americans) are religious enough to validly make “sanctity of life” arguments. Most are just standard barely-religious Americans swept up in a few decades of propaganda. Anyone who argues this was done “as the right thing to do” has swallowed the conservative oligarch messaging hook-line-and-sinker.
Thinking that killing people is wrong is a belief manufactured by "powerful evangelical politicians." Interesting argument.
Interpreting our laws correctly isn't the "right thing to do."
Unless you get raped. Then it's out of your control and you have to carry the pregnancy to term. But the rareness of these cases makes it okay to Republicans. Who cares if a few women have their lives ruined by being forced to carry their rapists baby?
It's their "rapist's" baby, or rapists' in the case of a gang-bang.
Or they can accurately decipher the proper roles of the Supreme Court and legislative branch of government. You gotta take emotion out of this and look at it from a rational viewpoint. Hard for people to do now. But justice Alito summarized it well in his statement. Roe was legislation at the Supreme Court level. Dobbs gets rid of that overreach and allows the people to vote for representatives that reflect their view on the topic.
I think you’re the one who took the bait.
Upending years of precedent and categorically removing rights from a subset of the population is not obviously correct or rational. Substantive due process is a well accepted doctrine that is only controversial to the most ardent conservatives justices. Nothing changes the fact that Roe was not a huge political fulcrum until there was a massive push to turn it into a national issue from conservative oligarchs. It was incredibly politically savvy but anyone who acts like this decisions is anything but political gamesmanship has been hoodwinked by smarter and wealthier interests.
You keep saying it’s political like that’s a bad thing. The judiciary is a branch of government, so of course everything it does has political ramifications.
Political gamesmanship alone isn’t enough. There needs to be a critical mass of people sufficiently vested in that interest for it to be sustainable. It’s like saying we have so many guns because of NRA’s shrewd gamesmanship. Not really, there’s enough Americans who strongly care about freely owning guns whose backs NRA can ride. Likewise, there’s enough Americans who actually either see abortion as a sin against the sanctity of life or are sufficiently religious or conservative to be turned off by what they see as an increasingly decadent society. The fact that many of them are poor further makes them want to blame the “elite liberals” for it.
As for the polls about first trimester abortion, they don’t mean anything because the only polls that matter are at the voting booths and about half the country votes conservative when it matters.
I was talking about the few supreme court justices of the early 1970's, not laws passed with the support of the majority of the public. There's a difference of millions and millions of people.
That's an amusing reply. Why? Because it does not in any way address the point I made. Here, I'll type this slowly to help your reading comprehension efforts.
Draconian abortion laws impose the will of others upon women. Those "others" are largely conservatives, imposing their will upon women. Thus the irony of you typing "Liberals will always try to impose their will" in relation to this topic.
Do I need to spell it out any more for you?
Well this entire thread is related to the reversal of Liberal supreme court judges imposing their will on the nation. If you'd just like to stick the last few sentences because it's easier, that's fine.
Pro lifers know that we have to accept draconian Liberal abortion laws when they're passed legitimately. In that case our task is to persuade others if possible.
Roe vs. Wade was illegitimate and everyone knows it. Everyone on both sides knew it wouldn't last.
Barack Obama called abortion the “most intensely personal decision”. He conveniently left out the fact that having sex with someone is actually the most intensely personal decision we make. It is, after all, what leads to the need for an abortion. Pregnancy is easily avoidable. I can go to my local health department and get condoms for free. It also doesn’t cost me anything to not have sex if I’m not in a position to deal with the consequences of said action
Unless you get raped. Then it's out of your control and you have to carry the pregnancy to term. But the rareness of these cases makes it okay to Republicans. Who cares if a few women have their lives ruined by being forced to carry their rapists baby?
Using rape victims to allow yourself to kill the inconvenient children you conceive in beyond disgusting. >99% of abortions are not due to rape, yet the abortion-obsessed advocates never mention that or ever advocate make for legal abortions only for rape victims. Why are abortion advocates never honest and up-front about their intentions? It's almost like they know it's wrong.
Or they can accurately decipher the proper roles of the Supreme Court and legislative branch of government. You gotta take emotion out of this and look at it from a rational viewpoint. Hard for people to do now. But justice Alito summarized it well in his statement. Roe was legislation at the Supreme Court level. Dobbs gets rid of that overreach and allows the people to vote for representatives that reflect their view on the topic.
I think you’re the one who took the bait.
Upending years of precedent and categorically removing rights from a subset of the population is not obviously correct or rational.
It very well could be correct and rational, if the precedent starting case was flawed to begin with. You know the history of Roe.
Substantive due process is a well accepted doctrine that is only controversial to the most ardent conservatives justices.
That is not true. Substantive due process has always been controversial, because of its open ended nature. It is hardly the "most ardent conservative justices" that have criticized it.
Nothing changes the fact that Roe was not a huge political fulcrum until there was a massive push to turn it into a national issue from conservative oligarchs. It was incredibly politically savvy but anyone who acts like this decisions is anything but political gamesmanship has been hoodwinked by smarter and wealthier interests.
I think its actually a bit of the opposite. Abortion wasn't a huge national issue until Roe made it one. And if you read Alito's opinion in Dobbs, it is hardly "political gamesmanship."
Roe was a terribly flawed case, even if one is a strong supporter of substantive due process doctrines.
Unless you get raped. Then it's out of your control and you have to carry the pregnancy to term. But the rareness of these cases makes it okay to Republicans. Who cares if a few women have their lives ruined by being forced to carry their rapists baby?
Using rape victims to allow yourself to kill the inconvenient children you conceive in beyond disgusting. >99% of abortions are not due to rape, yet the abortion-obsessed advocates never mention that or ever advocate make for legal abortions only for rape victims. Why are abortion advocates never honest and up-front about their intentions? It's almost like they know it's wrong.
I accounted for your response in that post. "It's rare so it's fine for rape victims to be forced to carry the baby." I've been very honest with what I believe. I'm just pointing out the worst parts of the decision so that others can see. You believe rape victims should have to carry their rapist's (there you go) baby to term. You do believe that, right? Why don't you be honest now.
Late-term abortions are also rare and typically are medically indicated -- but that doesn't stop the cons from offering that scenario as if it is a common practice.
Upending years of precedent and categorically removing rights from a subset of the population is not obviously correct or rational.
It very well could be correct and rational, if the precedent starting case was flawed to begin with. You know the history of Roe.
Roe was a terribly flawed case, even if one is a strong supporter of substantive due process doctrines.
Even ignoring the iffiness of the argument that privacy is encoded in the “penumbra” of other amendments, it makes no logical sense to use the right to privacy as an unrestricted right to abortion.
If the state says purchasing potatoes is legal but you need the state’s permission, then you can reasonably invoke the argument that the state has no business knowing about private matters like whether I’m purchasing potatoes. But if the state says purchasing potatoes is illegal, I don’t have a privacy-based claim to purchasing potatoes.
Liberals have had 50 years to get an amendment done to protect abortion from state laws. However, they’ve been lazy and relied on Roe v. Wade. All constitutional scholars, no matter their political views, knew that Roe was a flimsy ruling at best. Similar to Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) being overturned by the correct ruling of Brown v. Board of Education (1954). In reality Roe is lucky to have lasted this long.
Unless you get raped. Then it's out of your control and you have to carry the pregnancy to term. But the rareness of these cases makes it okay to Republicans. Who cares if a few women have their lives ruined by being forced to carry their rapists baby?
Using rape victims to allow yourself to kill the inconvenient children you conceive in beyond disgusting. >99% of abortions are not due to rape, yet the abortion-obsessed advocates never mention that or ever advocate make for legal abortions only for rape victims. Why are abortion advocates never honest and up-front about their intentions? It's almost like they know it's wrong.
Rape is one of the worst crimes in the world. Justice will be served when the perp is castrated. No law should take away a woman's choice. You must really hate women.
Using rape victims to allow yourself to kill the inconvenient children you conceive in beyond disgusting. >99% of abortions are not due to rape, yet the abortion-obsessed advocates never mention that or ever advocate make for legal abortions only for rape victims. Why are abortion advocates never honest and up-front about their intentions? It's almost like they know it's wrong.
Let’s set aside Roe and the issue of constitutional rights. I’d like to hear your notion of an ideal law as it pertains to abortion as crafted by the state. What would you do about ectopic pregnancy? How about a woman who accidentally becomes pregnant who has severe pulmonary hypertension? Her mortality if she brings a baby to term is extraordinarily high. How about anacephalic fetuses, do they need to be delivered at term only to die right after vaginal birth? What’s your plan for embryos? There are millions on ice across the country. Do they have a right to a uterus? How about after implantation in a fertility clinic? You know that the standard practice is to implant multiple embryos at a time, and if three or more implant, they usually will destroy one or more after implantation for the good of the mother and the other embryos. Would you be good with laws that dictate what parents must or must not do with their embryos?