Roe v. Wade

[Peter]

Note: This thread has been merged with two other threads about the same topic. This may cause some posts to seem slightly odd our out-of-place, especially the posts that started the later topics. -Alcon

Thirty-two years ago today the Supreme Court handed down the Roe v. Wade decision. It is probably one of the most contentious decisions in US history.

I split the poll this way because I know that there are certainly people who think that abortion should be allowed, but just don't agree that a Right to it can be found in the Constitution.

[Tory]

Slightly Pro-Choice/Strongly Anti-Roe

[John Dibble]

I'm reluctantly pro-choice. I don't like abortion, and feel it is an irresponsible act, but I think it is a deeply philisophical issue, so I think it should be allowed to an extent.

I'm anti-Roe. I think this decision was not made in the context of the consitution.

[Schmitz in 1972]

December 7, 1941 wasn't the only day which lives in infamy, there are several. September 11, 2001, November 22, 1963, and the highly underrated April 19, 1993 are days which live in infamy as well. There is no day that more singularly lives in infamy than January 22, 1973. I am (in case you hadn't guessed) strongly pro-life and strongly anti-Roe (who by the way, became pro-life a few years ago in conjunction with becoming Christian).

The heinous, dastardly deeds that continue day in and day out because of the misinformed opinion of seven idiot "justices" 32 years ago is not only goes against what is Ameican, it goes against what is human.

[opebo]

Strongly pro-abortion rights and strongly pro Roe V. Wade.

[Jake]

Strongly Pro Life and Very Anti-Roe v. Wade not becuase it made abortion legal, but because it violated States Rights.

[nclib]

Pro-Choice/ Pro Roe v. Wade

[Jake]

Whoa, shock therapy.  Disclaimer Redefeat, please.

[opebo]

Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision. Not quite as bad as Bush v. Gore but still horrible.

By the way pro-choicers.....here is somethin to think about:

Don't post that crap.  I don't post pictures of porn, or dead bodies in Iraq, or Rick Santorum, or human feces.  It is a matter of courtesy.

And seeing that certainly doesn't change my mind.

[Jake]

Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision. Not quite as bad as Bush v. Gore but still horrible.

By the way pro-choicers.....here is somethin to think about:

Don't post that crap.  I don't post pictures of porn, or dead bodies in Iraq, or Rick Santorum, or human feces.  It is a matter of courtesy.

And seeing that certainly doesn't change my mind.

Because you are the kind of human being who thinks of himself and is guided by his dick.  That is a child dead on a table because of a court descision that was unconstitutional. 

[WalterMitty]

pro-life.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision. Not quite as bad as Bush v. Gore but still horrible.

By the way pro-choicers.....here is somethin to think about:

Don't post that crap.  I don't post pictures of [...] Rick Santorum

LOL!

[Redefeatbush04]

I posted it because I feel strongly about this issue, and it better puts into perspective what Roe v. Wade made it ILLEGAL to outlaw. It is purely political. Granted this is a late-term abortion, it should give you a better understanding of what we are debating. Pro-choicers......how come it is ok for someone to take away the childs right to ever make a choice (by killing it), but it is not ok for the states to CHOOSE to pass a bill that saves lives.

[nclib]

Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision. Not quite as bad as Bush v. Gore but still horrible.

By the way pro-choicers.....here is somethin to think about:

Don't post that crap.  I don't post pictures of porn, or dead bodies in Iraq, or Rick Santorum, or human feces.  It is a matter of courtesy.

And seeing that certainly doesn't change my mind.

Because you are the kind of human being who thinks of himself and is guided by his dick.  That is a child dead on a table because of a court descision that was unconstitutional. 

Abortion would/will still happen regardless of Roe v. Wade.

The issue is should we try to reduce the need for abortions or should we just throw people in jail and abortions will still happen anyway.

[Peter]

Sorry but there are 13/4 year old kids who visit this forum, not to mention those of us who frankly have nowt to do with the fact that abortion is legal. Whilst redefeat might think it is clever and shocking to post that sort of stuff to a forum, I certainly don't. It does nothing to alter my opinion of abortion particularly since I am fully aware that the result of any medical procedure can look gruesome, yet we won't criminalise those. He only need post that he considers a life lost immoral and then maybe give us a walk through, he need not make me feel sick to get his point across.

[Jake]

Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision. Not quite as bad as Bush v. Gore but still horrible.

By the way pro-choicers.....here is somethin to think about:

Don't post that crap.  I don't post pictures of porn, or dead bodies in Iraq, or Rick Santorum, or human feces.  It is a matter of courtesy.

And seeing that certainly doesn't change my mind.

Because you are the kind of human being who thinks of himself and is guided by his dick.  That is a child dead on a table because of a court descision that was unconstitutional. 

Abortion would/will still happen regardless of Roe v. Wade.

The issue is should we try to reduce the need for abortions or should we just throw people in jail and abortions will still happen anyway.

I'd rather have the mother die than the child die.  The mother screwed up by getting pregnant, the child screwed up by being unlucky enough to be created in a irresponsible, misguided person.

[Moooooo]

I'd rather have the mother die than the child die.  The mother screwed up by getting pregnant, the child screwed up by being unlucky enough to be created in a irresponsible, misguided person.

What if the mother was raped?  Should she have to give birth to a child she never wanted in the first place?

Personally I am pro-choice.   But I am against partial birth abortions unless the mothers life is in danger.  After 2-3 months a woman should have made a decision whether to abort the pregnancy or not.  I also believe abortion should not be used as form of contraception.  After one abortion you should have learned your lesson.  The people that have 2,3,4 abortions should be forcefully placed in a mental insituition or something.

[Jake]

I'd rather have the mother die than the child die.  The mother screwed up by getting pregnant, the child screwed up by being unlucky enough to be created in a irresponsible, misguided person.

What if the mother was raped?  Should she have to give birth to a child she never wanted in the first place?

That's why I support abortion in the first month of the pregnancy for rape/incest victims.  By then they've figured out they have been raped, so I can compromise there.

[Moooooo]

I altered my post above a little bit to show I feel about abortion. 

[Brandon H]

Found this a few days ago on World Net Daily. http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42462 It mentions how abortion advocates lied to get help gain support for abortion. There are doctors, including the founder of NARAL, who were once pro-choice and are now pro-life and admitted to lying and misleading people on abortion.

I've said a few times in the past. In someone truly is pro-choice then they will want someone considering an abortion to have as much information as possible to make the best decision possible. They would support laws that require doctors to give them information on fetal pain and possible side affects of the procedure. But many self-proclaimed "pro-choice" people oppose this so they aren't really pro-choice after all. And if they are not pro-choice, they are "anti-choice", they same thing they refer to pro-lifers as.

[Colin]

I believe that Roe v. Wade should be overturned and that the abortion issue should be turned over to the states. If Vermont wants to allow any type of abortion to be legal and available without parental consent, if the patient is a minor, so be it but if Utah wants to allow no abortions it should have the right to do that also. If we allow the States to handle this seperately this abortion issue would be solved in many ways. Some states would allow abortions and some would not. People in any state may vote for whether or not they want abortions to be legal in their states. It solves a problem that is being mishandled by both the legislature, and the judiciary.

[angus]

Thirty-two years ago today the Supreme Court handed down the Roe v. Wade decision. It is probably one of the most contentious decisions in US history.

I split the poll this way because I know that there are certainly people who think that abortion should be allowed, but just don't agree that a Right to it can be found in the Constitution.

first option, I think.  though I did see Ms. Garvey give a talk in the early 90s and I can assure you she became pretty anti-abortion in her later years.  Still, I think abortion should be allowed in all cases, but not forced on people either by the state or by the impregnator.  Axiomatic to this, I believe that men who do not want children should not be forced to support them economically if the partner is unwilling to terminate the pregnancy.

[TeePee4Prez]

I believe that Roe v. Wade should be overturned and that the abortion issue should be turned over to the states. If Vermont wants to allow any type of abortion to be legal and available without parental consent, if the patient is a minor, so be it but if Utah wants to allow no abortions it should have the right to do that also. If we allow the States to handle this seperately this abortion issue would be solved in many ways. Some states would allow abortions and some would not. People in any state may vote for whether or not they want abortions to be legal in their states. It solves a problem that is being mishandled by both the legislature, and the judiciary.

NO WAY! NO WAY!  In my opinion, state boundaries do not relfect the values of the people living in it.  Look at Pennsylvania.  Within our boundaries is a very large range of opinion on this matter.  Should Cnetral PA dictate the values of Southeastern PA?  Absolutely not.  That's why there is a federal government. 

I'm also saying this ebcause I don't want the likes of John Perzel making the decision on abortion.

[Keystone Phil]

I believe that Roe v. Wade should be overturned and that the abortion issue should be turned over to the states. If Vermont wants to allow any type of abortion to be legal and available without parental consent, if the patient is a minor, so be it but if Utah wants to allow no abortions it should have the right to do that also. If we allow the States to handle this seperately this abortion issue would be solved in many ways. Some states would allow abortions and some would not. People in any state may vote for whether or not they want abortions to be legal in their states. It solves a problem that is being mishandled by both the legislature, and the judiciary.

NO WAY! NO WAY!  In my opinion, state boundaries do not relfect the values of the people living in it.  Look at Pennsylvania.  Within our boundaries is a very large range of opinion on this matter.  Should Cnetral PA dictate the values of Southeastern PA?  Absolutely not.  That's why there is a federal government. 

I'm also saying this ebcause I don't want the likes of John Perzel making the decision on abortion.

This is exactly why these topics turn into PA debates.

Whether you like it or not, Flyers, this is a state Pro-Life state. No, not just Central PA should be dictating the values of SE PA but that's not the point. The state as a whole has Pro-Life values.

[TeePee4Prez]

I was actually giving an good example fo why I'm not a fan of states rights in this case.