2006-08-30 04:47:51 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No, they shouldn't.
Take your silly religious nonsense elsewhere.
2006-08-30 04:50:19 · answer #1 · answered by ceprn 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Abortion is each and every females's suitable! i've got self assurance that earlier a undeniable time, that's no longer a sprint one yet. i'm professional decision. there are diverse circumstances why females have abortions and if the final courtroom variations the guidelines the only ingredient which will take place is females would be in courtroom scuffling with for that suitable, regrettably it may be too previous due by the time they have been given earlier a decide it may be to previous due for an abortion. and what which skill is this, this females never needed the toddler
2016-12-11 17:52:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by andie 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Supreme Court does not write legislation and therefore cannot "institute murder charges" for doctor and mother. Perhaps the Legislature should institute education for people who make statements like that one you just made?
2006-08-30 04:52:29 · answer #3 · answered by Allen G 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's pretty silly to think it's going to change anytime soon. It's too much of a pivotal topic for politicians to actually do anything about, a platform issue they could no longer use. And honestly, no, I don't think they should reverse it. GOD gave us the power of free will, and it is up to us to determine how we use it.
Imagine your twelve year old daughter being raped by some boy, she becomes pregnant. Do you make her have it, or abort it? The trauma of a pregnancy for a 6th grader, that will affect the rest of her life, may not be something to push for. Not to mention the physical and mental aspects. Taunts from children, her body acting in ways she can't understand, and isn't mature enough to deal with........................................
2006-08-30 05:28:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No! They should reverse Roe V. Wade because it a constitutional abomination, contrary to all the Constitution stands for. Then the decision would revert back to the states, for them to decide, like it was before the Supreme Court decided to embrace tyranny and impose their personal views upon the rest of us.
It has nothing to do with religion - it has EVERYTHING to do with Constitutionality.
2006-08-30 04:58:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
A unborn baby is not a mother's or doctor's or anyone's life to take. It is a totally separate being from the mother, with it's own heartbeat, organs, and growing life.
We have to stop accepting half-truths about abortion and accept as what it truly is, murder.
http://www.prolife.com
2006-08-30 04:53:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that abortion should be illegal because you are killing a living being. I also think that any further abortion activities should be considered as murder. But, we cannot charge prior activities of abortion as murder because there was no law against it. If that were to happen we would be going against our expost-facto laws.
2006-08-30 04:53:37 · answer #7 · answered by J. Rej 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, because the 13th Amendment still protects against involuntary servitude.
Even if (for sake of argument) we grant that life begins at conception, no person can be compelled into service of another life against their will. That's the same reason you can't be compelled to donate blood or a bone marrow or a kidney against your will.
2006-08-30 05:40:43 · answer #8 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is a Child, why do Children have no rights?
Abortion is murder! It is so simple!
Can you imagine Jesus running an Abortion Clinic?
Peace!
2006-08-30 04:51:28 · answer #9 · answered by C 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
strike down abortion yes.
2006-08-30 04:54:08 · answer #10 · answered by ML 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋