Decent place to start

[Isaac]

This is a pretty well written kind of calm and reasoned place to start the new conversation now in the hands of the people and potential legislation as it ought.

Opinion: Roe was very bad for America. The court gives us a chance to reset | CNN

O. Carter Snead writes, "By my lights, Roe and its progeny have been very bad for America. By virtue of those precedents, the Supreme Court imposed on the nation an extreme, one-size fits all regulatory regime for abortion of its own invention, without any justification in the text, history, or...

www.cnn.com

 

[The_Doc_Man]

The conversation is simple. We have tried for decades, nay, centuries to govern people into doing what other people think is right. Abortion sits at the fringes because religions do not agree on the beginnings of life, from the extreme of conception to the other extreme of either severing the umbilicus or taking the first breath. To say that you believe one way is well and good, but still does not give you the right to say that someone who disagrees with you on religious or other commonly used grounds is wrong.

We have tried to abolish slavery, but human trafficking still exists in the USA as part of the prostitution trade. That is a form of slavery.

We have tried to abolish the use of hard liquor, even to the point of an amendment - that got repealed because the cure was worse than the disease.

We have tried to take various extreme drugs out of commerce but that war started 40+ years ago and is losing ground. (E.e. Marijuana was totally banned but now, not so much.) Cartels now make so much money that they can field an army big enough to face down a national army.

People try to take away guns from law-abiding citizens only to find that we have even more guns than before.

People tried to control homosexuality by banning gay marriages, but that ban fell apart. The people who obtain these guns ignore the laws and the ones who COULD use the guns for self defense get told by states to go away. Totally illogical, particular with defunding the police as a rallying cry.

Does anyone actually think that overturning Roe v. Wade will end abortions? Honestly? If you really believe that then I've got some bottom land in south Louisiana that I think you would like. If you think dilation and curettage is ugly, let's try the coat-hanger method.

But that leads to the more seriously underlying question: Am I my brother's keeper? Do I have the right to tell someone what to do and what not to do in their private lives? Who died to make ME God?

We have agreed on laws regarding murder, theft/robbery, assault, arson, etc. but where does the right to interfere in the lives of others end? (Answer: It ends when we stand up and say "Enough. Go away and don't bother me.")

This is why we CANNOT permit the Democrats to make this country a true democracy. We MUST have the ability to say, "No, your request will harm others in a way that we cannot allow." The "tyranny of the majority" must never be allowed to take hold.

 

[Isaac]

We have agreed on laws regarding murder, theft/robbery, assault, arson, etc

Exactly.

And on what basis?

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Exactly.

And on what basis?

The basis? That before any formalized religion, people learned how to get along - by not killing each other or stealing their property or other types of bad behavior. Sociological forces that predated any modern (and quite a few ancient) religions.

 

[Isaac]

The basis? That before any formalized religion, people learned how to get along - by not killing each other or stealing their property or other types of bad behavior. Sociological forces that predated any modern (and quite a few ancient) religions.

Right and so now States will be able to agree on this issue too

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Pardon me for cynicism, but lately we can't get the states to agree on squat most of the time.

 

[Isaac]

Pardon me for cynicism, but lately we can't get the states to agree on squat most of the time.

I mean the people inside the state for local legislation.
You know, like all those conservative states that everyone is moving to? Montana, florida, texas, arizona...

 

[Pat Hartman]

Roe v Wade was bad law from the beginning because it had no Constitutional basis. It was passed by activists jurists. It did what the left wanted. It made abortion, albeit with limits, legal in all states. Much as I abhor abortion, I don't think that was a bad thing because an absolute ban on abortion is almost as bad as unrestricted abortion. But the left wasn't happy. They pushed and they demonstrated and they wined about "my body, my choice". Bull. They only mean that when they are talking about legally killing another human being. It doesn't count when they are talking about forcing my grandchildren to take a drug they do not need. They consider my grandchildren's bodies to belong to them. THEY get to decide whether untested, unnecessary drugs are administered to them. There is no consistency in their positions. NOTHING less than abortion even after delivery would satisfy them. As long as the baby hasn't left the delivery room, the "mother" can have it killed. Casey weakened Roe to the point where it was useless so more and more states started passing laws that allowed late term abortion for any reason. When NY passed their baby killing law (that is what late term abortions is folks - you are killing a baby that could survive outside the womb), the evil people who voted for it applauded. You can come down on either side of first trimester abortion. Even the old testament provides leeway but once the fetus is viable, the consensus favors the baby being a separate human and therefor protected. Not too long ago, states passed laws that made killing a pregnant woman a double homicide because the baby was a person also. I know, it makes your head spin. Just follow my finger. Those are not the Droids you are looking for.

Now we're back to states implementing absolute bans on abortion. That is a very bad place for us to be.

Make no mistake. This court is just as activist as the ones that passed Roe v Wade, Dred Scott, and Plessy v Ferguson. They just have a different agenda. They are quite alright with upholding unconstitutional laws if they hurt the evil orange man for example.

 

[Isaac]

That's another term that liberals misunderstand. "Activist" judge means one who invents a lot of extra stuff that doesn't actually exist in the law, for the purpose of achieving some particular outcome.

Liberals have usually been the ones most often using this tactic, ergo Roe v. Wade.

Now all of a sudden liberals want to use the term 'activist' to refer to today's court, which makes no sense, as today's court actually went BACK to the LAW rather than allowing a bunch of extra imaginary invented stuff to be the law of the land.

I don't even see what the big deal is honestly. The Court followed the law, there was no right to an abortion.

It's a legislative issue, if it's an issue at all, the people get their say now, they vote for state legislatures, they can do what they want.

Late term abortion without justification was barbaric. Almost nobody else but the USA was doing it. Extremely early-term abortion is very different IMO, I wouldn't be against abortion in the first few weeks.

If you're living such a chaotic life that you're running around town having sex with so many people that you can't organize the party well enough to check for pregnancy in the first 30 days, maybe, just maybe, the problem is with you and not everyone else.

This country had fully-grown babies being torn apart like chicken wings. I think most people who are pro-unlimited-abortion are just ignorant as to the facts, I choose to believe the best of them, because no normal person would be totally OK with that, if informed.

Did I ever tell you a funny thing at my dollar tree ? There is an aisle for Quick Picks near the front. Hanging bundled directly adjacent to each other on the wall are these three things: Fragranced body spray, marijuana drug test and pregnancy test. Let that sink in..

 

[The_Doc_Man]

I don't even see what the big deal is honestly. The Court followed the law, there was no right to an abortion.

But there is this problem that a lot of other things are not expressly legal under the constitution, such as the right to go to a doctor when you are feeling ill or have another medical problem. In fact, the penumbra of the 4th amendment guarantees privacy and privileged communications because even that isn't explicitly a federal law. It was at least part of the origin of the Roe v Wade decision in the first place, and that amendment hasn't changed. (For the record, most states codify the types of client/counselor communications that are privileged and confidential, including my own home state of Louisiana.)