If abortion is banned in South Dakota by the vote of the people, will liberals respect that?

Question

will they respect the votes of the people...or will groups like the ACLU, planned parenthood and others sue the state...don't the people have a voice? or do liberals rely on liberals judges to push their agenda rather than what the voters want...

The Republicans passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a4526d74ade.htm

Answer 1

They'll be on that like stink on horse poop. That's on the liberals cherished beliefs.

As for judges, they depend on their's jusy as much as conservatives do theirs.

Answer 2

well i'm a liberal from SD. i'm not for the abortion ban. i think there will be constant appeals on this issue any way. i do think that there should be regulations, such as you can only have an abortion within the first trimester, but the proposed ban goes too far. this piece of legislation states that you cannot have an abortion even if you were raped, the victim of incest or if it is life threatening to the mother. it goes too far and that is what this fight is about. actually i think if it is voted down i think the conservatives will give it another try. abortion is a constant battle that i doubt will ever go away no matter where you are on the spectrum. i would however rather see it legal with restrcitions (ie time limitations) so that women don't go to "butchers" like they did when it was banned years ago. it should be a safe alternative for any woman, and with legislation that bans it that won't be the case.

in other news, in recent poles, over 50% of voters will be voting no on initiated measure 6 (the abortion bill), but would vote to enact it if cases of rape, incest or mother's health were considered in the individual cases of abortions. so as it sits now according to the polls it will not become law. thank god!

Answer 3

Well, if I was for absolute abortion rights, then I would see that as an imperative right. The will of the people isn't always a good thing, if not regulated, it's only mob rule. While I don't support abortion, if I was in fact against the restriction of something, the fact that it would be against my perception of morality to restrict it would be more important than the will of the people, because the people in that case would have an immoral will.

Powers amongst government become corrupt, which is why the founding fathers distributed it as evenly as possibly and certainly the most even way to do it is with democracy, by leaving it in the hands of the whole people, but democracy by itself is nothing but a mob rule, that's why there were also regulations on that power, regardless of what the people wanted the government to do, there are certain things that the founding fathers did not want to be within the capacity of the government, lest it become oppressive, hence, the bill of rights.

A just government upholds its obligations to the social contract and protects the people's rights, while I don't think homicide is a right, if I did, the fact that it was a right that a just government should not have it within its capacity to restrict would be more important than the people's will, because it would be my belief that the people simply wanted to restrict the right.

Just the same, if it was a belief that I do in fact hold, for example I'm for the protection of the right to bear arms, if everyone in the entire population except for me wanted to get rid of guns, I would be there protesting at the foot of the white house door, because regardless of the will of the people the fact still remains that the general populace of people needs to be armed for a violent overthrowing of the country, not to necessarily do it, but to keep the government in check, and no person should be deprived of the right to create a government that acts benevolently because it fears its citizens.

Answer 4

I believe the right to choice is mandated by federal law. The states cannot pass laws that go against federal law without repercussions & fines from the federal government. Let me illustrate the problem with your argument. If the same state outlawed gun ownership, would republicans fight it...don't the people have a say? On big issues like these, it is better to have one law that rules all instead of 50 different laws all with their own little idyoscrencies.

Would this law you propose also include a new tax to provide the needed funds to care for all those unwanted babies left to rot as a result? I could never have an abortion myself, but I would not support telling others not to as I believe it is more immoral to force all these little souls to endure a life of mental and/or physical abuse as unwanted and resented people than to allow them to move on and be born later as a wanted person.

Answer 5

Look at "oldgruffgrump"s answer and you'll see the typical liberal mentality on a question such as this: no respect at all for popular sovereignty -- unless, of course, the voters make a liberal law! Robert Bork said it best in his classic book "The Tempting of America,"

"Perhaps those liberals who want a political Court are right in their confidence that in the modern era judges will usually be more liberal than the electorate. If so, they are right, in terms of their immediate self-interest, to oppose original understanding and judicial nominees who insist upon it. That stance is, however, profoundly antidemocratic and it is dangerous to the long-term health of the American Republic."

Answer 6

you know the answer... of course even an overwhelming vote to ban abortion will face court challenges. remember, abortion is legal in all states not because any law has been passed, but because of court decisons. that being said, why should "The People" have any right to determine when life begins. I personally believe abortion is reprehesible, but I feel that in terms of the law, tyrany of the majority is a dangerous thing, and that in situations where there is a moral controversy, it is best to let the induvidual make their own decisions, esspecially in such a personal realm as one's own body.

Answer 7

"... what the voters want?"

Hmmm...

Once upon a time, the voters (white male landowners) wanted black people to be segregated, they only wanted landowners to vote, and they wanted women to not have a vote. Would you respect that, Mr. Genius, or do you prefer the rights which liberals have fought for?

Answer 8

Ain't gonna happen.
And what has Jerry Falwell said about Teletubbies, if that really IS your name?