Overturning Roe V Wade

[Wandering Monk]

No because the constitution actually prohibits slavery:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. 13th amendment to the US Constitution

Also, I am actually advocating for the states to decide on the abortion issue. I have never claimed abortion is murder.

But prior to the Civil War, slavery WAS permissible and was defended as a 'states rights' issue. SCOTUS has just done the same thing with the latest ruling on Roe.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

So, to all you conservatives out there: is abortion murder? If so, why should any state be allowed by the SCOTUS to permit abortion? If you agree that SCOTUS should NOT permit states to perform abortions, how do you square that with states' rights under the Tenth Amendment which says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Unfortunately us conservatives that are for the constitution have to allow the states to decide. That is what the constitution says no matter if I think is is murder or not. I would like a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion in the US but that is unlikely to happen.

Should women who have abortions be prosecuted for murder?

No one should. I don't think most women or doctors actually think they are killing a person. The penalty should be on the medical professionals not the women.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

But prior to the Civil War, slavery WAS permissible and was defended as a 'states rights' issue. SCOTUS has just done the same thing with the latest ruling on Roe.

I agree. I don't see your point. And SCOTUS has not decided the case yet.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

If you read the leaked decision, the specifically limited privacy implications ONLY to abortion.

I agree. What justification did they have to do that?

 

[Wandering Monk]

I agree. I don't see your point. And SCOTUS has not decided the case yet.

My point is that 'states rights' cut both ways in the abortion debate. Are ant-abortion people OK with that?

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't think most women or doctors actually think they are killing a person.

And that's the problem, and even if they do think it is a person they rationalize.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

My point is that 'states rights' cut both ways in the abortion debate. Are ant-abortion people OK with that?

I am saying that is what I am advocating for and most conservatives understand this. It is the protesters that think this ruling, if it is official, will ban abortion, it doesn't. I am ok with that because that is what the constitution allows. I cannot speak for anyone else.

 

[Audie]

Consent to sex is not consent to childbirth. Any more than consenting to drive a car is consent to having to donate blood and organs to someone you may hit as a natural consequence of driving a car.

Also, medical consent (and this is for @Audie too) does not work like a labor contract. You can't sign anything and it's forever taken away, it's actually illegal to attempt to do so (just like signing yourself into slavery is both illegal and unenforcable.) Consent can be revoked at any time. Even if doing so might kill someone. Nobody is entitled to your body no matter what you previously agreed to. No matter how responsible you are for someone needing your body.

" might mean"

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

And that's the problem, and even if they do think it is a person they rationalize.

Well I cannot make a case that a zygote is a person, but it should be protected and given the right to become a person.

 

[Wandering Monk]

I am saying that is what I am advocating for and most conservatives understand this. It is the protesters that think this ruling, if it is official, will ban abortion, it doesn't. I am ok with that because that is what the constitution allows. I cannot speak for anyone else.

If the Constitution allows states to perform abortions, how can an anti-abortion, Strict Constructionists reconcile these things? How do they deal with the cognitive dissonance? Is there a God-given right to life for the unborn that the US Constitution leaves to the states? Why defend a Constitution that permits that as if the Constitution were some kind of hallowed document?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

THAT, my dear friend, is something that isn't federally mandated and should be. At this point it is up to each business.

We don't agree often, but we couldn't agree more on this. It's unnatural and destructive for us to be away for our families for so long, the demands of a new born are overwhelming, the demands of pregnancy and birthing are over whelming, and kids and parents need to develop healthy, secure bonds with each other. There is no arguing the data on this, unless you hate humans with every fiber of your being.
This idea we should live to work is probably the worst thing for families since we decided to depend significantly less on family, and let some schmuck who doesn't even know us rigidly decide who is "close enough" family for work leave. And, historically speaking, they cut out damn near all our family.

 

[icehorse]

Ever heard of child support? Other than that he does not have to be active if he doesn't want to be.

Statistically, there are a myriad of problems associated with single parent homes. That's exacerbated with low income, and to be sure, "banning" abortion is going to hit low income mothers the hardest.

Ever heard of adoption? There are many women desperate to have a child who cannot have a child so any baby that is born would be wanted by many women.

As I recall, there is no where near a 1 to 1 ratio, so lots of kids would not get adopted. And BTW, I have heard of adoption, my sister was adopted.

Too bad about the raging hormones. If children were brought up right they would not be having sex as teenagers or before marriage. If course that is just according to my beliefs which are not the norm in this society which lacks any sense of morality.

I'm not aware of any society for which your approach has worked unless harsh coercion was involved. Can you name any? It strikes me that you're hoping against hope that our biology won't be what it is.

As for morality, I would say that most of us share a common morality on many points, ultimately disagreeing on only a few.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Consent to sex is not consent to childbirth. Any more than consenting to drive a car is consent to having to donate blood and organs to someone you may hit as a natural consequence of driving a car.

Also, medical consent (and this is for @Audie too) does not work like a labor contract. You can't sign anything and it's forever taken away, it's actually illegal to attempt to do so (just like signing yourself into slavery is both illegal and unenforcable.) Consent can be revoked at any time. Even if doing so might kill someone. Nobody is entitled to your body no matter what you previously agreed to. No matter how responsible you are for someone needing your body.

Many conservatives are upset that with birth control and abortion, sex doesn't equate to childbirth. They don't realize that we are one of a few species who have sex for pleasure. Otherwise, women would just go into heat like most female mammals.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Statistically, there are a myriad of problems associated with single parent homes. That's exacerbated with low income, and to be sure, "banning" abortion is going to hit low income mothers the hardest.



As I recall, there is no where near a 1 to 1 ratio, so lots of kids would not get adopted. And BTW, I have heard of adoption, my sister was adopted.

Sadly, adopted children, even those adopted at birth, have more behavioral issues than biological children. Not sure why. The primal wound I guess.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Sadly, adopted children, even those adopted at birth, have more behavioral issues than biological children. Not sure why. The primal wound I guess.

What is that?

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

If the Constitution allows states to perform abortions, how can an anti-abortion, Strict Constructionists reconcile these things? How do they deal with the cognitive dissonance? Is there a God-given right to life for the unborn that the US Constitution leaves to the states? Why defend a Constitution that permits that as if the Constitution were some kind of hallowed document?

We respect the constitution. We can work to change the constitution to add an amendment to abolish abortion just like the 13th amendment abolished slavery. There is no dissonance. We accept the reality of the law. Respecting the rule of law does not mean we think the constitution is perfect.

 

[pearl]

Unfortunately us conservatives that are for the constitution have to allow the states to decide

Really? Rember Bush v Gore? The constitution was interpreted against state right of FL.

 

[Sand Dancer]

What is that?

Sorry, it's a book title, but also a theory. It holds that “severing the connection between the infant and biological mother through adoption causes a primal wound which often manifests in a sense of loss (depression), basic mistrust (anxiety), emotional and/or behavioral problems and difficulties in relationships with significant others affecting the adoptee’s sense of self, self-esteem and self-worth throughout life.” My son is definitely one of these.

 

[Kenny]

I think our government reimburses employers the losses they would incur for said Paid Parental Leave anyway. So the “mom and pop” small businesses wouldn’t really care that much here. Or they can apply for “grants” to cover the costs.
Something along those lines anyway. I mean it’s what we pay taxes for, right?

If that happened in the US, you’d be in favour of all businesses having mandatory parental leave I take it?

I don’t know of many families (outside of people with really great paying jobs) that can even live on a single income.
That you and your wife managed to devote your time to child rearing is commendable. I wish our system allowed for more intimate family time. Especially for single parents having to worry about putting food on the table.

Yes... I would be for it. The "how" would be important but some form of help in that area would be great.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Getting an abortion is sure a lot easier than carrying a child for nine months, delivering and raising a child.

But not really akin to going to the store for a soda. It is a medical procedure, after all.

I really do not know how women view abortions and make decisions about them, but I imagine it is very individualized.

As it should be, imo, because each case will be different.