Abortion bans gives the government too much power.

[Subduction Zone]

1 good thing, not jailing these women for it

BUT

Indeed it's really stupid to go after the providers, like the scenario you describe below

IF governments get this kind of power, where does it end?

In Holland the government tries to change people to eat vegetarian and stop eating meat. At least they do it gradually and don't jail meat eaters (yet).

And government banned smoking almost everywhere, they did it gradually

But here we don't have these abortion troubles as far as I know

Personally all those rules in Holland I like for myself. But having the goverment deciding what we should eat and do is a bad idea. Soon many more Freedoms might be gone, before we realize it

Imagine that the goal behind these changes is to create a kind of Super Race. Of course it's nice to be healthy, but if it is done by imposing, I call it Adharmic (not right, and doomed to give big troubles)

I agree. European countries tend to have lower abortion rates because they have much better support. From even before pregnancy occurs. Some of our states with the worst abortion rates, and definitely worst teenage abortion rates also have the worst sex education classes. "Just say no" is still taught in some areas. Guess what? That does not work. If one wants to lower the abortion rates do what Planned Parenthood does in the US. Educate and provide birth control without judgement for no or low cost and abortion rates drop. Anti abortion people hate Planned Parenthood since they include abortion as one of their services, but neighborhoods with a Planned Parenthood have lower rates of abortion than those that do not. And lastly if one really does not want abortions support must be available for the mothers after pregnancy. Anti abortionists seem to believe that all they have to do is to make it illegal and abortions will go away.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But Mitch McConnell said they might pass a Federal abortion ban when they get the chance.

That is a pipe dream. The latest statistics are 61% support for abortions to be with little limitations to none for the voting US population. If they succeeded it would be political suicide. For decades the Republicans only gave lip service to overturning Roe v Wade. It was a very useful tool for acquiring those single issue voters. Now that they may have done that, not official yet, they may find that those voters will not be so eager to venture out on voting day. I think that they will find that the idea was more useful to them when they promised but could not deliver.

 

[fantome profane]

That is a pipe dream. The latest statistics are 61% support for abortions to be with little limitations to none for the voting US population. If they succeeded it would be political suicide. For decades the Republicans only gave lip service to overturning Roe v Wade. It was a very useful tool for acquiring those single issue voters. Now that they may have done that, not official yet, they may find that those voters will not be so eager to venture out on voting day. I think that they will find that the idea was more useful to them when they promised but could not deliver.

Maybe. I am just not so sure anymore. I keep trying to figure out which are the true believers and which are the political opportunists.

I don’t understand why McConnell would say that, it seems like something that will cost Republicans more. So I just don’t know.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Maybe. I am just not so sure anymore. I keep trying to figure out which are the true believers and which are the political opportunists.

I don’t understand why McConnell would say that, it seems like something that will cost Republicans more. So I just don’t know.

The Republican leadership may be in a bit of a tizzy right now. They are the proverbial dog that caught the car. What do they do now? And just s a car is more powerful than a dog the American people are far more pro-abortion than the Republicans want to admit. I had been quoting a 59% rating for people that thought that there should be little to no restrictions on abortions but yesterday the latest poll indicates that the number is 61%. That does not bode well for future Republican elections. The anti-abortion plank was one that they used to get a single issue voter group. Now that they have what they wanted a lot of those people may not be going out to vote at the next election. Turn out is key and the Republicans desperately need every vote that they can get. Meanwhile there is a big middle which is probably slightly more pro-abortion which is going to shift Democratic. I had poor hopes for the Democrats in the fall election but that has been flipped on its head. Now they are likely to make quite large gains.

 

[Shaul]

Try to think of it this way. If one gives the government the power to decide if one can have an abortion then one is also given the government the power to force an abortion. They both amount to the same thing. Telling a women what she has to do with her uterus.

Personally I would not give the government that much power.

There is a fundamental error in the case you have stated. There is no attempt being made for the Federal government to ban abortion. Overturning Roe v. Wade would not ban abortions. What it would do is return the controlling authority on abortion to the states. Which, according to the tenth Amendment of the Constitution, is where it should always been. (A key reason why Roe v. Wade is legally flawed.) Overturning Roe v. Wade would not be a case of government taking more power. It is actually an example of the Federal government giving up a power it usurped from the states and never had a legitimate basis in taking.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is a fundamental error in the case you have stated. There is no attempt being made for the Federal government to ban abortion. Overturning Roe v. Wade would not ban abortions. What it would do is return the controlling authority on abortion to the states. Which, according to the tenth Amendment of the Constitution, is where it should always been. (A key reason why Roe v. Wade is legally flawed.) Overturning Roe v. Wade would not be a case of government taking more power. It is actually an example of the Federal government giving up a power it usurped from the states and never had a legitimate basis in taking.

State or federal it is still giving the government too much power. I am anti death penalty too and those are decided on the state level so I do not think that I made a fundamental error.

 

[Revoltingest]

You totally twist my point here

I am doing my best to infer your intent
behind some very twisted posts.

Men are as responsible as women for the pregnancy. Unfair to punish by jail only the women.

I'm addressing the mother abusing drugs during
pregnancy, & this resulting in birth defects. After
conception, this is the mother's province. To make
the father liable for her heinous actions that he
legally control is absurd.
Your repeated desire to jail fathers for the mother's
actions still smack of misandry.

BUT

America is still male dominated, so men find it normal to not take responsibility if they can blame a woman for what they both created

Just pointing out and proving the absurdity to jail women for it.

Men understand men should not be jailed, but the same men find it fair to jail women for it. Crazy and totally Adharmic

I've nothing to add.

 

[Shaul]

State or federal it is still giving the government too much power. I am anti death penalty too and those are decided on the state level so I do not think that I made a fundamental error.

There is no new power. Any power that a state has over abortion it has had since the Constitution was enacted. If you still don’t agree there are two ready remedies. One is not residing in a state whose abortion laws you don’t like. The other is to use the influence of other states on those whose laws you find irksome. Understand that that is a two way street. If these remedies don’t satisfy then attempt to amend the Constitution.

 

[Revoltingest]

There is no new power. Any power that a state has over abortion it has had since the Constitution was enacted.

Roe v Wade changed that for the states.
If that decision is over-turned, then this
would be a new power, ie, the fed &/or
the states could ban abortions

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is no new power. Any power that a state has over abortion it has had since the Constitution was enacted. If you still don’t agree there are two ready remedies. One is not residing in a state whose abortion laws you don’t like. The other is to use the influence of other states on those whose laws you find irksome. Understand that that is a two way street. If these remedies don’t satisfy then attempt to amend the Constitution.

So what? New or old it is still excessive power. Where is the error?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Try to think of it this way. If one gives the government the power to decide if one can have an abortion then one is also given the government the power to force an abortion. They both amount to the same thing. Telling a women what she has to do with her uterus.

Personally I would not give the government that much power.

Banning murder gives the government too much power because obviously they could force you to murder also.

 

[Sand Dancer]

The Republican leadership may be in a bit of a tizzy right now. They are the proverbial dog that caught the car. What do they do now? And just s a car is more powerful than a dog the American people are far more pro-abortion than the Republicans want to admit. I had been quoting a 59% rating for people that thought that there should be little to no restrictions on abortions but yesterday the latest poll indicates that the number is 61%. That does not bode well for future Republican elections. The anti-abortion plank was one that they used to get a single issue voter group. Now that they have what they wanted a lot of those people may not be going out to vote at the next election. Turn out is key and the Republicans desperately need every vote that they can get. Meanwhile there is a big middle which is probably slightly more pro-abortion which is going to shift Democratic. I had poor hopes for the Democrats in the fall election but that has been flipped on its head. Now they are likely to make quite large gains.

Younger GOP members do not tend to be so anti-abortion, so once the majority of the GOP voters are passed on, who will they have? The far right tend to be older white males. The younger GOP are centrist.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Banning murder gives the government too much power because obviously they could force you to murder also.

Abortion is not murder.

Are you bound and determined to lost this argument?

 

[Shaul]

Roe v Wade changed that for the states.
If that decision is over-turned, then this
would be a new power, ie, the fed &/or
the states could ban abortions

No. The only current Federal power being asserted is because of Roe v. Wade. Overturning it would eliminate Federal power affecting abortion. The power of state would remain the same. Overturning Roe v. Wade results in a net reduction of government power being exercised regarding abortion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No. The only current Federal power being asserted is because of Roe v. Wade. Overturning it would eliminate Federal power affecting abortion. The power of state would remain the same. Overturning Roe v. Wade results in a net reduction of government power being exercised regarding abortion.

Incorrect. Roe v. Wade may have been federal, but it was a federally ordered decrease in government power.

 

[stvdv]

I've nothing to add

It seems we disagree on this one

Well, that happens
Let's agree to disagree
Okay?

 

[Shaul]

So what? New or old it is still excessive power. Where is the error?

Eliminating Roe v. Wade eliminates Federal power over abortion while leaving state powers unchanged. It is a net reduction of government power exercised regarding abortion. That is your error. Your premise is that overturning Roe v. Wade will increase government power over abortion. It wouldn’t. It would be lessened.

 

[Shaul]

Incorrect. Roe v. Wade may have been federal, but it was a federally ordered decrease in government power.

No. It was an increase in Federal power over the existing powers of the states. The net government powers exercised under Roe v. Wade were increased. Its overturning will be a net reduction of government power being exercised.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Eliminating Roe v. Wade eliminates Federal power over abortion while leaving state powers unchanged. It is a net reduction of government power exercised regarding abortion. That is your error. Your premise is that overturning Roe v. Wade will increase government power over abortion. It wouldn’t. It would be lessened.

Sorry, but you are wrong. There was no federal laws on abortion. By limiting state laws on abortions that limited government power. You might want to work on your logic skills. When one talks about lessening of government power one has to take all government power into consideration. Not just federal. The ruling is neutral federally over the control over an individual. It limits what states can do lessening their power so it is clearly a net lessening of government control. You don't get to ignore the control of state government.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No. It was an increase in Federal power over the existing powers of the states. The net government powers exercised under Roe v. Wade were increased. Its overturning will be a net reduction of government power being exercised.

Repeating an error does not help you.