Roe v. Wade based on a false allegation of gang rape.

rokzilla

Green Belt
@Green
Joined
Jul 8, 2017
Messages
1,378
Reaction score
245
Just hit me that it’s ironic that the Supreme Court Justice that may have tipped the scale to overturn Roe v. Wade had false allegations of gang rape, while that case also involved false allegations of gang rape.

But I still believe all women and false rape allegations NEVER happen.
 
Different culture, hard to judge.
 
Funny, I never knew this.
It's an interesting story that TS is misrepresenting. Roe v. Wade wasn't based on a false rape claim. But there was one in connection with the pregnancy giving rise to the case.

Basically, Jane Roe (McCorvey) got pregnant and wanted an abortion (abused kid with problems, was married off and an alcoholic by 16, two previous children taken from her).

Texas law forbade abortions except when there was a danger to the life of the mother, but McCorvey mistakenly believed that there was also an exception if the pregnancy resulted from rape. So she attempted to obtain an abortion by claiming that she had been raped by an unknown person (although she had previously been raped by a family member, it was not what caused this pregnancy). She did not get one.

She was then contacted by two attorneys who were seeking a plaintiff to challenge the strict anti-abortion laws, at which point Roe v Wade began. The rape allegation did not play any role in the case.
 
It's an interesting story that TS is misrepresenting. Roe v. Wade wasn't based on a false rape claim. But there was one in connection with the pregnancy giving rise to the case.

Basically, Jane Roe (McCorvey) got pregnant and wanted an abortion (abused kid with problems, was married off and an alcoholic by 16, two previous children taken from her).

Texas law forbade abortions except when there was a danger to the life of the mother, but McCorvey mistakenly believed that there was also an exception if the pregnancy resulted from rape. So she attempted to obtain an abortion by claiming that she had been raped by an unknown person (although she had previously been raped by a family member, it was not what caused this pregnancy). She did not get one.

She was then contacted by two attorneys who were seeking a plaintiff to challenge the strict anti-abortion laws, at which point Roe v Wade began. The rape allegation did not play any role in the case.

Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story.
 
It's an interesting story that TS is misrepresenting. Roe v. Wade wasn't based on a false rape claim. But there was one in connection with the pregnancy giving rise to the case.

Basically, Jane Roe (McCorvey) got pregnant and wanted an abortion (abused kid with problems, was married off and an alcoholic by 16, two previous children taken from her).

Texas law forbade abortions except when there was a danger to the life of the mother, but McCorvey mistakenly believed that there was also an exception if the pregnancy resulted from rape. So she attempted to obtain an abortion by claiming that she had been raped by an unknown person (although she had previously been raped by a family member, it was not what caused this pregnancy). She did not get one.

She was then contacted by two attorneys who were seeking a plaintiff to challenge the strict anti-abortion laws, at which point Roe v Wade began. The rape allegation did not play any role in the case.
It absolutely did. Nice spin.
 
It absolutely did. Nice spin.
It did not. Roe's prior rape allegation was not the basis for her attorneys' argument and they did not bring it up in their pleadings. Nor was it mentioned in the scotus opinion or that of the lower court. The Texas AG referenced it in passing at arguments, but it was not the basis for the lawsuit or for the courts decision.
 
She did not get one.
The baby that was born because Roe wasn't able to get a legal abortion in time.......

That's one person that doesn't complain about how slow the legal system works!

 
It was all based on lies.


The main lie was that an abortion was needed for Roe (whom we later learned was Norma McCorvey) because she was supposedly gang-raped. But that was not true. McCorvey just wanted an abortion, and her attorney falsely promised to help her get one, knowing full well it could not happen in time (since cases that go up to the Supreme Court take time to adjudicate).


Another lie was the number of women who supposedly died in America because of illegal abortions. Abortionist Bernard Nathanson told the media that each year about 10,000 women died from illegal abortions. He later admitted that he made the number up from thin air, but a willing media reported it as if it were gospel truth.


In 1972, the last year before Roe, the CDC reports that 39 women died from illegal abortions in America. That may be 39 too many, but it’s a far cry from 10,000.


Thankfully, both McCorvey and Nathanson became pro-life Christians and came to strongly oppose abortion....

https://www.christianheadlines.com/...-i-think-roe-v-wade-should-be-overturned.html
 
It is astonishing for me that abortion is still such a high agenda item in the US.
The rest of the developed world (outside of some small Catholic countries) seems to have come to the conclusion that abortions should be tried to prevent by a social security net.
But at the same time still, give the options to have one within a reasonable time period.
Also, ironically a lot of the same people that are against abortions also make the arguments that guns should be legal because criminals will have guns anyway.
The same sort of reasoning applies to abortions even if it would be illegal women would still get them. Just in a much more dangerous fashion.
 
It is astonishing for me that abortion is still such a high agenda item in the US.
The rest of the developed world (outside of some small Catholic countries) seems to have come to the conclusion that abortions should be tried to prevent by a social security net.
But at the same time still, give the options to have one within a reasonable time period.
Also, ironically a lot of the same people that are against abortions also make the arguments that guns should be legal because criminals will have guns anyway.
The same sort of reasoning applies to abortions even if it would be illegal women would still get them. Just in a much more dangerous fashion.

Sure, on the surface that seems to make sense. But what if you're a God-fearing American who hates the social safety net because women with kids they can't afford will abuse it and you also hate abortions because you think that women should have kids that they can't afford?

What do you do then? How do you have your cake and eat it too?
 
Yeah, Roe vs Wade was started out of a fake rape claim.

Which means -- if you make abortion illegal then the only way to get an abortion is for a woman to make a fake rape claim. As a man, that's scary.

I think abortion sucks -- it's a bit evil, even -- but the alternative where it's illegal just blows even more because people also suck.
 
I for one am shocked that our leftist comrades would sink to low. Shocked I say!
 
Yet another false assertion that is somehow "emotionally true" to stupid people.
 
What do you do then? How do you have your cake and eat it too?
I believe the position is you are responsible for the child's well-being before and after it is born, i.e. it is 100% consistent.
 
Just hit me that it’s ironic that the Supreme Court Justice that may have tipped the scale to overturn Roe v. Wade had false allegations of gang rape, while that case also involved false allegations of gang rape.

But I still believe all women and false rape allegations NEVER happen.
Ends justified the means.

Women should have the option. Overpopulation needs to be subsided.

Modern medicine and longer lives make the lack of resources a possibility. We shouldn't fight that.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,047
Messages
55,463,597
Members
174,786
Latest member
JoyceOuthw
Back
Top