Many of us take for granted that bans would then be passed in so-called "red states"... But what about historically pro-choice states like California? Or New York? What about your state? For the 33 years since the historic decision of Roe v. Wade, anti-choice extremists have steadily chipped away at a woman's right to choose. But now, two anti-choice Justices have been appointed to the Supreme Court. South Dakota has banned abortion. Louisiana has passed a ban on abortion to go into effect if Roe is overturned. And 12 other states including Ohio, Georgia, and Missouri are considering or have considered similar abortion bans.
How do you feel about this??
2006-06-20 06:36:41 · 14 answers · asked by Bethany 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
What about the morning after pill... do you anti-choice advocates agree with pharmacists refusing to fill the prescription based on their personal beliefs at their job?
2006-06-20 09:29:54 · update #1
If it's up to God, let him do his job, and you guys go do yours.
2006-06-20 09:30:52 · update #2
It is conceivable that the US Congress might try to pass a law outlawing abortion federally.
Women who have taken their reproductive freedom and personal privacy in this area should be aware that the shrill vocal minority who oppose freedom of choice are doing their best to deprive them of their rights.
The countervailiing position to the argument that a fetus is a human is that, so is the impregnated female. She is not an incubating machine who should have to bear the seed of a rapist or a relative to term just to satisfy the moral smugness of a minority of the populace.
olderandwiser is right on. I am buying up stock in coat hangar factories right now.
2006-06-20 09:41:12 · answer #1 · answered by Mr. October 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Remember, before Roe, certain states (NY, HI, AK, WIS(i think), CAL) legalized abortion.
So, if you wanted an abortion pre Roe, all you had to do is go to one of those states.
The Roe decision changed that focus, from a state issue to a federal issue, by determining that the constitution allows women the right to an abortion. The linchpin of the decision is that women are entitled to the right to privacy (as well as other legal rights), and that abortion is a penumbra of those rights.
Right now, it is unconsitutional for any state to ban abortion. Legally speaking such a ban would be no different that requiring minorities to pay a poll tax or an all out ban on alcohol.
If Roe is overturned, which I think it likely will be, then it reverts back to the states to decide.
One interesting thing to consider, pre Roe, travelling for many people to the states that legalized abortion was expensive and cumbersome. Now, though, I think that people can travel much easier, thus making it easier for people to travel to the states where abortion would be legal.
Thus, the only legal way to resolve this is a federal ban on abortion. This is where the next big fight will come should Roe get tossed.
2006-06-20 13:54:21 · answer #2 · answered by lawless 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Casey is the primary case on Abortion right now, essentially replacing Roe v. Wade, so, if a case were to be overturned, it would be Casey. It would become a state by state issue, which is generally where the realms of personal freedoms go (and belong) because people should be able to choose the ethical standards of the community in which they live (but not the whole country)
2006-06-20 14:09:04 · answer #3 · answered by J C 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It should be left up to the people in each state to decide the issue. If people in California want to rip babies apart, and then suck them out with a vaccum cleaner thats up to them.
The Court should've never gotten involved in this area. I find it funny that liberals moan about the Supreme Court now, but they never had a problem when liberal judges were "interpreting" the law the opposite direction. Can anyone show me in the Constitution where it talks about abortion being a right?
If the voters of a state decide they want to restrict, or eliminate, abortion why is that a problem for people in other states? If you want unfettered, unrestricted abortions then move to a state that would support it. If the people, remember, it is "We the People", vote against it then shut up and quit whining about it. Silly liberals...
2006-06-20 14:55:51 · answer #4 · answered by Whitey 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Women will go back to doing what they have always done. Getting back street abortions. Risking life and health because for whatever reason a baby is not wanted. For some reason this has become a crusade for the right wing extremists. Women back in days of old got rid of unwanted pregnancies . For some unknown reason the right wants you to think that wanton women use this as birth control. Nonsense!! I have been in the Medical field since I was 18. I saw what damage illegal abortions did to women, mentally and physically. Someone needs to stop these people. Maybe Jesus could come back and try again. It seems that they have taken his message of Love and turned it into hate and God weeps
2006-06-20 14:40:16 · answer #5 · answered by olderandwiser 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it would be GREAT!!!
Abortion is MURDER, in every sense of the Word!
Look at some sites with aborted fetuses and see what comes out. Those are formed little babies that have hands and feet. Thier hearts were beating!
You would see perfectly formed bodies, with the heads ripped off, so that the child wasnt born alive!!
Partial birth abortiong is a bigger abomination!!
Ripping off limbs, and heads so that child doesnt survive outside the womb...while its just moments away from being born!!!
Inserting a needle in the skull and sucking the brains out!! HOW BARBARIC can we become as a Civilization???
Even if the kids lives in poverty, and filth, its still alive!! The child can pull itself out of poverty and live a better life!
The only thing abortion is for, is that the Mother and Father is not "inconvinienced" with the birth of a child... (IF YOU DONT WANT TO HAVE A BABY...DONT HAVE SEX!!)
Sick people, who kill children... No better than Child predators...
I wish you well..
Jesse
2006-06-20 13:53:40 · answer #6 · answered by x 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Okay, I am anti- CHOICE. Let's get this straight, everyone makes choices everyday. A choice to breathe, how your going to live, ect. MURDER is a choice. Abortion is murder and there is no other word for it. Babies can feel pain more than us at 18 weeks! But even if they didn't it is still wrong. We shouldn't get to choose when a person isn't wanted and needs to die! Thats crazy!
What do you think about killing a precious baby that can't even fight for it's own life? A woman's right to choose, ha! It's God's, and He says, "Thou shall not kill."
2006-06-20 14:29:24 · answer #7 · answered by suthurnbabe 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Legality of Abortion would become a state by state issue.
2006-06-20 13:56:02 · answer #8 · answered by mattwbell 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The question everyone seems to be jumping all around with these abortion rights arguments is:
When does life begin?
Conception
Birth
Somewhere in between
If you answer that question all the other become unimportant. Because it is either a human being or ?.
Since no one has the right to end a life we need to decide when it begins.
2006-06-20 15:19:38 · answer #9 · answered by Chris C 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a womans right to choose what she wants to do with her body. Not mine. Just like it is my right to answer this question. I don't want to be judged, so i wont judge others. But if Roe vs. Wade was overturned, then it would be up to the states to decide.
2006-06-20 14:28:52 · answer #10 · answered by Richard A. 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋