- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Roe opponents, what do you really, really want?
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:36 pm to AggieHank86
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:36 pm to AggieHank86
A legitimate Supreme Court.
This is a small but important first step
This is a small but important first step
0
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:37 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
I support abortion rights,
Why?
quote:
but live in Texas
Why?
quote:
and fully-understand that Texas will ban all abortions about 25 seconds after Roe is overturned.
I doubt it.
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:40 pm to AggieHank86
Overturn simply on States rights issue. I oppose abortion. Would vote against it but it doesn’t rank high on my priority list of legislation issues. I
I do believe special considerations should be given to certain circumstances..eg; health, rape and viability of child in consultation with appropriate physicians. I generally believe emotional topics/laws should not contain absolutes
I do believe special considerations should be given to certain circumstances..eg; health, rape and viability of child in consultation with appropriate physicians. I generally believe emotional topics/laws should not contain absolutes
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:40 pm to AggieHank86
quote:All abortions? Doubtful.
fully-understand that Texas will ban all abortions about 25 seconds after Roe is overturned.
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:41 pm to AggieHank86
Roe is a State's Rights issue. If individual States can put to death a felon it surely has the right to decide for itself it's own reasons regarding abortion.
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:43 pm to TROLA
quote:"Health of the mother" is not close to the same as "life of the mother." Health is far more nebulous. Could be "anxiety" that impacts the health of the mother resulting in an allowable abortion.
I do believe special considerations should be given to certain circumstances..eg; health,
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:43 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Would you be content with reversal of Roe, or do you want an Amendment to the US Constitution to prohibit abortion?
The Feds have no good reason to meddle around with abortion. It should be a matter left to the states to regulate in accordance with the political wishes of their citizens.
It is most certainly not a "Constitutional right", but it is nuanced and complicated enough for there to be room for both views to be codified depending on the cultural/community values in each state.
My opinion is apparently a "radical, far right" opinion in 2022, but there it is.
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:44 pm to AggieHank86
What do I really, really want? I want abortion to be codified into law as the willful act of murdering an unborn child and thus a capital offense. The abortion doctor who performs the act will be charged with first degree murder in my perfect world while the mother would be charged as an accessory to murder.
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:45 pm to AggieHank86
quote:Amendment would be ideal. I don't think any nation that murders it's own children is one destined for greatness and blessing in the long run.
Would you be content with reversal of Roe, or do you want an Amendment to the US Constitution to prohibit abortion?
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:48 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
In other words, do you simply believe that it is a federalism issue, with each state to chart its own course?
I oppose Roe, because it is an awful decision, jurisprudentially.
Both of these...
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:49 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Would you be content with reversal of Roe, or do you want an Amendment to the US Constitution to prohibit abortion?
In other words, do you simply believe that it is a federalism issue, with each state to chart its own course? Or do you want to impose your views nationwide?
Your question is flawed.
What someone personally wants (I would want that Amendment) is different than what it wants out of the government short of the Amendment (State's right to decide).
I don't want the Federal government to implement a ban on abortion by exceeding its power. I don't want some bastardization of the Commerce Clause to be used to do it, either.
Liberals always approach it right to left. What they want drives them to finding a way to get there. Your question resembles that.
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:51 pm to td01241
quote:I was curious. Sounds like you expected near-unanimity on 10th Amendment. I expected about 2:1 on state issue vs. federal prohibition. Pretty close so far, but slightly more for a federal prohibition than I anticipated.
Why make this thread? You’re on this board often. You already know almost everyone here believes in the federalist stance.
This post was edited on 5/5/22 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:51 pm to AggieHank86
Since civil rights are a federal issue it would be consistent to protect life at a federal level.
That's not to say I don't recognize a huge positive impact from having it settled at the state issue, I just don't find it very consistent.
That's not to say I don't recognize a huge positive impact from having it settled at the state issue, I just don't find it very consistent.
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:53 pm to AggieHank86
Absolutely
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:54 pm to AggieHank86
Reversal would be fine.
Kick it back to the states, as the 1973 Court should have done.
Kick it back to the states, as the 1973 Court should have done.
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:56 pm to AggieHank86
This isn't a question about abortion legality.
It's a question of who gets to decide abortion legality.
SCOTUS or Democracy
It's a question of who gets to decide abortion legality.
SCOTUS or Democracy
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:56 pm to momentoftruth87
quote:
Take pill within 48 hours $50
Go to doctor to get pill after 48 hours
We absolutely cannot have a gray area, of taking a pill to kill an unborn child.
I am not telling you anything you don't already know, when I urge you to recognize that each unborn child facing abortion (despite their circumstances), has a fundamental right to life, just like the rest of us.
Posted on 5/5/22 at 2:57 pm to squid_hunt
quote:
If this is really all the right wants, we really are lost as a society. There is nothing redeemable in a society that kills its weakest members for convenience. Democracy isn't worth this.
well, the societies of those states that opt to allow abortion would be the lost ones; strictly speaking.
Posted on 5/5/22 at 3:02 pm to AggieHank86
What I really want is to see abortion completely outlawed, but that won't ever happen.
Where Roe is concerned, I want the states to decide. This should never have been federalized.
Where Roe is concerned, I want the states to decide. This should never have been federalized.
Posted on 5/5/22 at 3:02 pm to AggieHank86
I agree with the concept of subsidiarity, that most governance issues are handled best by the smallest, most local, governmental structure, assuming it can be properly dealt with on that level. So I generally am inclined to allow each state decide on their own about the abortion issue, rather than a 1 size fits all law from the federal level.
However…
Consider this other set of questions. They’re hypothetical and currently unthinkable, but maybe could help shed light on this question.
If Mississippi decided to make incest legal, and lowered the age of consent to 14. Would you be okay with Mississippi having that set of laws, knowing that a Louisiana father could simply drive to Mississippi to legally have sex with his 14 year son?
What if New York passed a law to allow “abortion” up to 2 months POST-BIRTH? New York simply redefined it’s definition of a fully formed human and modified its murder statute accordingly. Would you be accepting of that change, knowing that a parent could drive to New York to murder their infant?
My point is that there is probably a limit to the concept of subsidiarity that we are willing to accept. For me, I am opposed to abortion in all forms, but could only allow for the concept of subsidiarity, allowing for other states to legalize abortion, but not beyond viability, or about 20 weeks of gestation.
However…
Consider this other set of questions. They’re hypothetical and currently unthinkable, but maybe could help shed light on this question.
If Mississippi decided to make incest legal, and lowered the age of consent to 14. Would you be okay with Mississippi having that set of laws, knowing that a Louisiana father could simply drive to Mississippi to legally have sex with his 14 year son?
What if New York passed a law to allow “abortion” up to 2 months POST-BIRTH? New York simply redefined it’s definition of a fully formed human and modified its murder statute accordingly. Would you be accepting of that change, knowing that a parent could drive to New York to murder their infant?
My point is that there is probably a limit to the concept of subsidiarity that we are willing to accept. For me, I am opposed to abortion in all forms, but could only allow for the concept of subsidiarity, allowing for other states to legalize abortion, but not beyond viability, or about 20 weeks of gestation.
Page 2 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News