roe v. wade??

Question

what would be the alternative decisions?? for roe v. wade

what facts are important? unimportant?

Why did the parties act as they did?

Answer 1

The important facts in Roe, in my opinion, is that the pregnant woman lived in a state where abortion was illegal.

I think the correct alternative decision would have been to uphold the 10th Amendment, and leave it with the State.

Some say Roe was a "right to privacy" ruling. I disagree. Roe was judicial activism. There was no stare decisis to support the decision, and the Supreme Court provided no justification for usurping State's rights. Unfortunately, Roe and other decisions which came down around the same time, caught the moral majority asleep outside of politics. "Good" Christians who didn't understand their Constitutional rights.

In 1968, the birth control pill became widely available. There is no justification for 40 million dead Americans. And the people who talk about "the woman who will do it anyway," are failing to take into account the people who also break every other law anyway. We do not change laws because people might die breaking them.

Answer 2

When that was brought before the supreme court, the law in Texas, where it originated, was NO abortions. It included even if the girl was raped by her father. If giveing birth was going to kill the baby and the mother. No abortions, and no exceptions. Also during that time girls were haveing, whats called back ally abortions. Most of the time it was performed in places other than back allies, but the result was the girl would die from bleeding to death or infections. The court ruled in the way I feel is right; A woman has a right to choose. Takeing into consideration no contraceptive is 100% effective, abstanance is not the answer, especially for married people that choose not to have children at the present time.

Answer 3

Without Roe v Wade, people would no longer be free from governmental intrusion in decision making. The government woulkd decide who and when people could have babies, and given their record, I would say that MORE abortions would occur, if the government decided who had them. And the threat of genocide would be strong. I know many people think that Roe was about a woman being able to have an abortion. It isn't, as women have ALWAYS had abortions. it just meant that governement could not go into the doctor's office and tell people what to do.

Answer 4

That the right to privacy is not inferred in the constitution and that the supreme court itself acted unconstitutionally in taking the decision away from the states.

If you think 44,000,000 babies dying was important. I think it was important.

The supreme court was dominated by leftists and that is why they acted unconstitutionally. You'll notice a lot of this and that inferred in the constitution when leftists are on the court as long as it expands the power that government can hold over the people

It was one of the first instances of legalized first degree murder if you want a precedent to add

Answer 5

roe v. wade gave babies up for murder.

Pro Choice to me means the freedom to choose to conceive which takes planning, action, and effort. By choosing to share your body with another in this manner, you have now volunteered to share your body with a defenseless life inside until it matures.

Few people are forced into conceiving. They just want to have pleasure void of consequences. Those who are forced, in my view, were not given a choice. So they now deserve the choice, after conception.

Even parents should not be allowed to take the life of their child. Give it up for adoption if you don't want it OR choose not to share your body in the first place. It is the governments role to protect life and liberty for all.

Answer 6

They need to dump that - R v W built on the sand castle of the right to privacy ruling-