Do you support Roe Vs. Wade?

[Ice That Jaw]

No. I'm also not against it.

 

[Tylerl90]

Democrats will be super lucky if the POTUS doesn't get two more picks on the SC before his term is up, especially if he gets reelected. If he's reelected, just give it up because the SCOTUS is completely flipping lol

Justice Breyer is 79 and Justice RBG is 85, I believe.

 

[spamking]

I guess I am the only who finds the irony in conservatives talking about how the left takes advantage of black voters, when they do the same damn thing to the Christian right.

Uh, hardly . . . that's not anything new or original. That's pretty much straight out of the GOP playbook. Just as how the Democrats deal with black voters.

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

A lot fewer people would be getting abortions if the poor and lower middle class had safety net programs worth a damn. No one gets up wanting an abortion. They look at their paycheck and realize this doesn't work.

I'm pro-choice, that's not correct

 

[spamking]

My mother is Ben anti-marijuana my entire life who now has rheumatoid arthritis voted yes

Interesting. My mom grew up with an alcoholic father and is anti-anything that someone might become addicted to.

 

[44nutman]

Uh, hardly . . . that's not anything new or original. That's pretty much straight out of the GOP playbook. Just as how the Democrats deal with black voters.

I agree, neither party has my best interest. We desparately need at least one more option, preferably 2 more at a minimum.
Most democracies have multiple parties. 2 parties can not possible fill the needs of the masses. There are issues I find more important than you(and vice a versa) but some how both of us trapped with only 2 options.

 

[Prefect]

I'm pro-choice, that's not correct

 

[PainIsLIfe]

Can we get a poll?

It would appear that Roe v Wade could be reviewed again.

I support Roe v Wade.
The idea of States being able to allow or not allow abortions, in my opinion, will be a disaster.


Would you like to see it overturned and given back to the states?

http://theweek.com/articles/781891/what-does-anthony-kennedys-retirement-mean-roe-v-wade

Don't support the decision; and really it's pretty weak if you break down what they said - right to have an abortion, but that this right must be balanced against the state's interests in regulating abortions?

That's convoluted^^

As Judge White wrote:

I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court's judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant women and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes.
​

Rehnquist:
The fact that a majority of the States reflecting, after all, the majority sentiment in those States, have had restrictions on abortions for at least a century is a strong indication, it seems to me, that the asserted right to an abortion is not "so rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people as to be ranked as fundamental," Snyder v. Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97, 105 (1934).

To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. Conn. Stat., Tit. 22, 14, 16. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth [410 U.S. 113,175] Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

I support the decision of Roe v Wade.

People need to remember that this isn't President Trump's Supreme Court. It's the Supreme Court of the United States. This Court shouldn't be a political animal. It's supposed to be an impartial interpretation of the law. SCOTUS is bigger than any Presidential Administration, and FDR kind of had to learn that one the hard way.

The court has found ways over the years to find what they want to find in the constitution - I believe that includes Roe - when it clearly wasn't there.

 

[Roaming East]

Im for Roe v Wade because i hate people in general and anything that reduces the amount of surplus shitbags sucking air and surrounding me is a good thing.

 

[Happy Man]

Norma McCarvey hates it, and so should you. By default

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

Exactly. 20% that's not "a lot"

If I had $100 and I gave you 20, was that "a lot" of my money?

 

[SammyPops]

To my understanding if they go that route they destroy USA. Because how long until a certain state only becomes for white non catholics and a state only for mostly mexicans etc. I do find the American system interesting though.

A tad dramatic but alos maybe a long time over due. Maybe the USA was alwyas meant to be two different nations.

 

[SMillard]

The swinging of the pendulum is definitely a problem. I just don't think that many people have a realistic viewpoint on what it means to address a problem. What people imagine is that you're going to have sunshine and rainbows when you solve a problem, and things are objectively fixed. This is incorrect. What you are effectively doing is trading one set of problems for a different set of problems, using judgment to weigh the merits of the points and counterpoints. As such, not every problem is even worth trying to fix because we tried that in the past and are reasonably sure that the same thing will happen again if we try it in the future. But around and around we go, trying old concepts and expecting new results. For those that are capable of being solved, we should really think about the second and third-order effects of what we are doing. There are no shortage of calls to action these days, but there are very few people thinking through the effects of their decisions. Radicals, in particular, are generally very bad at thinking through long-term consequences of things. Oh well.

very good points, but it also comes down as much to attitudes as resolving issues. It happens with everything; fashion, spending habits and unfortunately racial relations. I agree that there is no end game, just a perpetuation that creates new problems. Kind of like medicine, we find something that cures one virus only for that virus to mutate into something else. Now the real problem was we went from parents overly protecting their kids from germs and viruses by vaccinating the hell out of them, giving antibiotics at the first sign of a sniffle and hand sanitizing the crap out of ourselves to now the complete opposite where people think the vaccinations are evil and causing autism. People seem to have a hard time finding that happy medium, which we all talk about "we need moderation" but tend not to practice what we preach.

Again, you are right that people don't have a realistic viewpoint, especially in the US, we have the memory of goldfish, the attention span of a toddler in a room full of toys and we have structured all our entertainment and goal orientation to perpetuate it. I also agree about the long term consequences, that was one thing I did give Obama some credit for, he did at least give the perception that he was acting with long term consequences in mind although it didn't always play out that way. Trump tends to just have a "run it up the flagpole and lets see who salutes" attitude with little thought about what will be the long term effects.

 

[waiguoren]

 

[waiguoren]

To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. Conn. Stat., Tit. 22, 14, 16. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth [410 U.S. 113,175] Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion.

In light of this, I would like to see someone try to defend Roe without using "ends justify the means" reasoning.

 

[MayhemMonkey]

I think late term abortions are wrong. But, I don't think my opinion should be forced on anyone else. If you want to have an abortion that is your right, even if I think it's wrong.

this is the most honest answer Ive seen yet

 

[MayhemMonkey]

I disagree with you on this. I think that abortion needs to be stopped first. There are millions of babies murdered each year. This is evil.

so you want to take away a womens right to have control over her body, but freak out as soon as any gun control is mentioned?

so your rights are more important than womens rights?

 

[Witchhunt]

Let states sort it out...

 

[PainIsLIfe]

A lot fewer people would be getting abortions if the poor and lower middle class had safety net programs worth a damn. No one gets up wanting an abortion. They look at their paycheck and realize this doesn't work.

It's been a couple years since I looked at the numbers, but last I checked most women that get abortions are middle class, educated, and have had multiple abortions.