Should Roe V. Wade Overturned?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:26:36 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Should Roe V. Wade Overturned?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3
Poll
Question: Should Roe V. Wade be overturned?
#1
Yes and abortions should be banned
 
#2
Yes
 
#3
No but The Hyde Amendment shouldn't be overturned either
 
#4
No but I support federal funding for abortions with some restrictions
 
#5
No and there should be no restrictions on abortion
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 103

Author Topic: Should Roe V. Wade Overturned?  (Read 4904 times)
Vice President Christian Man
Christian Man
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,343
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -2.26

P P P

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 02, 2021, 11:25:14 PM »

Do you believe that Roe V. Wade should be overturned?
Logged
West_Midlander
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.19, S: 1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 03, 2021, 09:19:01 AM »

Yes
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,509
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2021, 10:41:48 AM »
« Edited: August 03, 2021, 10:47:13 AM by Frodo »

By this point, overturning Roe vs. Wade (and Casey vs. Planned Parenthood), thereby returning the issue to the states, will have the effect of making official a reality that already exists.

Just get it over with already, and deliver the coup-de-grace.  Enough with the ‘death by a thousand cuts’ strategy.  
Logged
MarkD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,130
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 05, 2021, 10:04:38 AM »

Yes, and if the SCOTUS doesn't overturn it, I have drafted a proposal for a constitutional amendment that will overturn it.

Roe and Casey claimed that the right to get an abortion is protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. That theory supposes that the DP Clause not only says
"No State shall ... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law,"
but the Clause also means
"No State shall ... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due law."
Giving the Clause the second meaning (known as "substantive due process") turns the Court into a superlegislature, second-guessing the merits of every law that gets challenged.

Not only should Roe be overturned, but the doctrine of "substantive due process" needs to be buried once and for all at the same time. That is something my proposal will accomplish as well.
Logged
progressive85
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,312
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 05, 2021, 10:07:42 AM »

I think the solution is federal statute and not relying on a fragile Supreme Court majority.  They should have never gotten into it in the first place, imo.  The laws were gradually moving towards some liberalization.

I believe it took a powerful Protestant religious right in the 1970s and 1980s to make abortion the issue it's become.  When Roe was decided, from what I understand it were mostly Catholics who were opposed.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,802


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 06, 2021, 06:48:11 PM »

Absolutely not.
Logged
Schiff for Senate
CentristRepublican
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,132
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2021, 07:02:52 PM »

The third option.
Logged
Ferguson97
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,800
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: December 10, 2021, 11:25:21 AM »

No, and there should be no restrictions on abortion.
Logged
Biden his time
Abdullah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,644
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: December 11, 2021, 12:58:05 PM »
« Edited: December 11, 2021, 07:41:53 PM by Big Joey »

Yes, it can be decided on the state level

Truth is, and many people don't know this, but Roe v. Wade was truly a very radical ruling in that it forced all states to allow virtually every abortion right up the third-trimster, even when the fetus is only a little bit different from infants and incredibly unsavory methods have to be used to kill it. Even today 70% of Americans as per Gallup disagree with second-trimester abortions, and Roe v. Wade forces these to occur.

The main reason that Europe doesn't have such a toxic abortion debate isn't that they're more enlightened and liberal than us, but because they've generally come to a moderate position of allowing it until 12 weeks.

EDIT: Fixed thanks to Donerail's correction
Logged
John Dule
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,319
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.57, S: -7.50

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: December 11, 2021, 01:00:18 PM »

As much as it pains me to say it, yes. Judicial activism isn't ok just because you agree with the outcomes.
Logged
CEO Mindset
penttilinkolafan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 925
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: December 11, 2021, 01:20:17 PM »

It should be replaced with a federal law that protects abortion at all stages and ensures it's funding by federal health services.

Courts making law is literally medieval/somalia tier. I'm surprised more people don't mock the US/anglosphere for it.
Logged
MarkD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,130
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 11, 2021, 01:29:29 PM »
« Edited: December 11, 2021, 01:41:29 PM by MarkD »

First,
As much as it pains me to say it, yes. Judicial activism isn't ok just because you agree with the outcomes.


Bingo.

You said it almost exactly the same way the late Robert Bork said it.

Quote
Constitutional philosophy is a theory of what renders a judge's power to override democratic choice legitimate. It is no answer to say that we like the results, no matter how divorced from the intentions of the lawgivers, for that is to say that we prefer an authoritarian regime with which we agree to a democracy with which we do not. [Bork, The Tempting of America, (1990), page 78.]


I prefer to paraphrase that Bork quote, and say the same thing in a slightly different way. Whatever is your constitutional philosophy, it is your theory of what it is that legitimizes the power of judges to strike down democratically made laws. It makes no sense to say that you like the results, no matter how far divorced they are from the intentions of those who made the pertinent part of the Constitution, for that is to say that you prefer an authoritarian government - an authoritarian oligarchy - with which you agree to a democracy with which you do not.

Second,
It should be replaced with a federal law that protects abortion at all stages and ensures it's funding by federal health services.

Courts making law is literally medieval/somalia tier. I'm surprised more people don't mock the US/anglosphere for it.

Bingo again about the last sentence, but the part I bolded fails to remember one thing: the Constitution is silent about the topic of abortion. Congress cannot pass legislation to address the topic just because it wants to, nor because of public opinion polls indicating that about 55% of the people or so want to ensure abortion remains legal. If the Supreme Court overturns Roe - and you clearly know that it should - then at that point, at that very moment, the Fourteenth Amendment will no longer prohibit anti-abortion laws in the states, and likewise that means Congress will be powerless to ban states from passing anti-abortion laws. A federal law that forces states to legalize abortion will be struck down as a violation of the Tenth Amendment. The issue will be returned to the states, where it should be.
Logged
fhtagn
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,521
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 11, 2021, 03:33:36 PM »

Yes and abortions should be banned.
Logged
THG
TheTarHeelGent
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,192
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 11, 2021, 04:58:25 PM »

Absolutely. It is debatably the worst SCOTUS rulings from a legal standpoint in the history of the court.
Logged
Donerail
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,345
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 11, 2021, 06:00:55 PM »
« Edited: December 11, 2021, 07:16:22 PM by Donerail »

Absolutely. It is debatably the worst SCOTUS rulings from a legal standpoint in the history of the court.
So absurd i'm not sure where to begin. Even if we limit ourselves to the post-Roe era (which your language — "in the history of the court," no qualifications — explicitly says we should not), Bowers v. Hardwick came over a decade later. If we look at the entire history, the parade of monstrosities the Court has produced is really without comparison. Korematsu, Plessy, Buck v. Bell, Lum v. Rice, Lochner, and of course Dred Scott are just the beginning of the list. Roe, whatever the holes you can poke in the trimester framework, is just not in the same universe.
Logged
Donerail
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,345
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: December 11, 2021, 07:21:43 PM »

Truth is, and many people don't know this, but Roe v. Wade was truly a very radical ruling in that it forced all states to allow every abortion right up until birth, even when the fetus is barely different from infants and incredibly unsavory methods have to be used to kill it. Even today 70% of Americans as per Gallup disagree with third-trimester abortions, and Roe v. Wade forces these to occur.

"Many people don't know this" because it's straight up wrong lmfao
Quote from: Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 164-65 (1973)
For the stage subsequent to viability [the third trimester], the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.
Roe explicitly did not "force all states to allow every abortion right up until birth." States are allowed to forbid abortion entirely during the third trimester (claiming Roe "forces these to occur" is wrong), and states are allowed to "regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health" during the second trimester. The idea that Roe "forced all states to allow every abortion" is just utterly divorced from reality.
Logged
Biden his time
Abdullah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,644
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: December 11, 2021, 07:41:08 PM »

Truth is, and many people don't know this, but Roe v. Wade was truly a very radical ruling in that it forced all states to allow every abortion right up until birth, even when the fetus is barely different from infants and incredibly unsavory methods have to be used to kill it. Even today 70% of Americans as per Gallup disagree with third-trimester abortions, and Roe v. Wade forces these to occur.

"Many people don't know this" because it's straight up wrong lmfao
Quote from: Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 164-65 (1973)
For the stage subsequent to viability [the third trimester], the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.
Roe explicitly did not "force all states to allow every abortion right up until birth." States are allowed to forbid abortion entirely during the third trimester (claiming Roe "forces these to occur" is wrong), and states are allowed to "regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health" during the second trimester. The idea that Roe "forced all states to allow every abortion" is just utterly divorced from reality.

Thank you, I stand corrected. I must have been misinformed.

Facts still remain that 70% of Americans say abortion should not be allowed in the second trimester, which every state except Texas and Mississippi currently does only due to Roe v. Wade. And "reasonably related to maternal health" is not strict enough IMHO, and most Americans would agree.


Image Link
Logged
°Leprechaun
tmcusa2
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,114
Uruguay


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: December 12, 2021, 08:35:56 PM »

Write in option: no... Which wasn't a choice, which means the poll isn't really "pro-choice".
Logged
RFayette
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,951
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: December 13, 2021, 09:56:24 AM »

Yes, even setting aside the issue of abortion itself, the reasoning of the decision was horrendous.
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,763
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: December 18, 2021, 08:10:10 PM »

And end abortion while we’re at it.
Logged
Samof94
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,312
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: December 20, 2021, 08:55:52 AM »

I think the solution is federal statute and not relying on a fragile Supreme Court majority.  They should have never gotten into it in the first place, imo.  The laws were gradually moving towards some liberalization.

I believe it took a powerful Protestant religious right in the 1970s and 1980s to make abortion the issue it's become.  When Roe was decided, from what I understand it were mostly Catholics who were opposed.
Exactly !!!
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,417
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: December 27, 2021, 02:35:42 PM »


Good luck with that.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,417
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: December 27, 2021, 02:49:19 PM »

Yes, even setting aside the issue of abortion itself, the reasoning of the decision was horrendous.

That's a common myth/propaganda point but it's simply not true.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,417
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: December 27, 2021, 02:51:09 PM »

As much as it pains me to say it, yes. Judicial activism isn't ok just because you agree with the outcomes.

The legal reasoning in Roe is perfectly easy to understand as consistent with the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent if you aren't being willfully obtuse or acting in bad faith.
Logged
Pericles
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,066


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: December 28, 2021, 05:05:36 AM »

It should be replaced by federal legislation that provides clear protections for abortion rights in all 50 states.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.065 seconds with 13 queries.