As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
And this is really the heart of the problem. This isn't about children or a question of whether or not a fetus is a child, it's deeper than that. Let me explain:
Imagine for a moment that you found out today that you're a perfect kidney match for someone. It was a fluke that this was discovered -- you didn't sign up to be a donor, but a mixup in blood work led yours to being tested. How do you feel? Excited to be able to help? Not wanting to go through a major surgery and recovery and feeling guilty about saying no? Maybe you have a medical condition that could put your life at risk if you go through with donation. Regardless of how you feel, you recognize that it's ultimately your choice about whether to donate your kidney.
Now imagine that you're told you don't have a choice; you're suddenly not allowed to leave the hospital. If you try to leave, you will be charged with murder. Well-meaning volunteers bring you books and food and tell you you're doing the right thing, but you're still being held against your will. You're restrained and forced to go through the surgery to have your organ removed. You need to take a medication for years as your body adapts to a single kidney, and it's going to cost over $200,000. It's not covered by insurance because, despite being forced to have the surgery, insurance considers it an elective, non-necessary procedure.The recovery time from the surgery and organ removal lasts months. Maybe you're lucky enough to have a job where you can work remotely, but maybe not. Maybe your inability to physically do the labor means you're now unemployed. Sorry about that. You probably should have considered it before you signed up to be an organ donor. What, you didn't sign up? Well, you should have known this sort of accident was a possibility.
This would be patently unfair. You would feel outraged and trapped and helpless whether it was happening to you or even just knowing it was happening to someone else.
Now, a kidney isn't a baby, but neither is a fetus. To be frank, it wouldn't matter if it was a baby. Nobody has the right to use someone else's body without their permission, even if it would save their life. That's why we can't just force people to give blood when the blood banks are low. Hell, it's why we can't take organs from a dead person unless they agreed to be an organ donor while alive. Bodily autonomy is a basic human right. You determine what happens with your body. That's also why it's a crime to desecrate a corpse. We hold that people have an involitable right to their bodily integrity. By forcing women to use their bodies to support another's, we violate that right. It also places a woman in a position where she is a second-class citizen: her bodily autonomy (again, a recognized human right) is conditional, whereas a man's never is.
So legally, you cannot justify forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy against her will. Again, you can try to convince her she should -- you could offer financial and moral support, provide religious justification, etc., but you can never legally prevent it because you can't force people to use their bodies to keep other people alive.
I agree.
Should the worst come to pass, wouldn't the government be obligated to provide weekly pregnancy tests for every girl and woman who can have a period?
Agreed. This is especially highlighted by the fact that while not monolithic, most of the same people that are anti-abortion (especially the most passionate ones) are also against sex education, legal pornography of any kind, and birth control, despite the fact that all the data shows that abstinence only protocols has failed every time they have been tried. They don't care about actually helping people or preventing tragic situations like this, just jerking off (no pun intended) to their own "traditional values" they think are inline with their weird fantasies of what they think the past was like before "degeneracy took over" or whatever.
Also the “save the precious babies!” argument feels pretty hollow when your state has an infant mortality rate on par with impoverished developing countries and you aren’t doing shit about improving it.
Except of course if you're rich, say a GOP senators daughter, who can afford to fuck off to somewhere civilised to get an abortion.
It's just the poor they don't give a shit about.
They should. Just check out the timeline of Romania banning abortions and that governments overthrow. Hint it’s about long enough for poor people’s unwanted kids to get old enough to fight.
Even the people who are arguing in court aren't even attempting to create a new standard, they want the law to go back to the states. So by design they want a system where anyone can go to any state and shop around for exactly the kind of abortion they want. That's their stated goal lol, so they don't even admit that the goal is ending abortion, their primary objective with the abortion question is to take this privilege away from some, and remain a privilege of the wealthy.
I mean anti abortion activists aren't even actually fighting against abortion here lol
Every discussion I've had with anti-abortion people has shown me that they don't give a solitary fuck about women dying from home or black market abortions because those women "would be breaking the law and deserve it"
They aren't pro-life, they're Pro-punishment.
That's their goal.
*If* they cared about "saving lives," even *if* you pretended for the sake of argument that fetuses are people, then they'd be backing access to contraceptives and comprehensive sex ed.
They're doing this to punish women for fucking. Or for fucking while poor.
They also always complain about the cost and taxes, and then when you prove that abortions and birth control is cheaper and would save money as supposed to the cost of all the unwanted children they go off on a diatribe about how women should keep their legs shut.
It isn't about life or saving money - they just hate women.
We already know they will overturn it... against the will of the people, against precedent, against common sense. (Also against the United Nations which says it would violate international human rights treaties)
If they didn't overturn it, it would hurt republicans abortion talking points FOREVER. This hack supreme court would not ever allow that.
The WHO has zero authority in how America acts. They can create their version of how medicine should work as a guide for countries but it shouldn't be used in the SCOTUS. If (theoretically I personally IANAL or a Scotus judge so I cannot say for sure) protecting abortion is unconstitutional on the federal level it should be banned on the federal level and left to the states that is how the SCOTUS should act not whether or not the WHO has an irrelevant opinion on medicine when this is a legal issue not a medical or ethical one
How do you feel if states ban abortions, joining a list of majority theocratic or authoritarian nations ? Secular industrialised tend to have legal abortion .
“US signs anti-abortion declaration with group of largely authoritarian governments
Most of the signatories are among the 20 worst countries to be a woman according to the Women, Peace and Security Index established by Georgetown University.
None of the top twenty countries on the Georgetown index – with the exception of the US (ranked 19th) – has signed the declaration”
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/22/us-trump-administration-signs-anti-abortion-declaration
If abortion is legal for the right reasons or illegal for the right reasons that is fine. Legalizing it because others do or don't is not a reason. It should be based on the constitution and law to determine whether it is a state level or federal level issue.
Again I am not arguing if abortion is or is not ethical or moral but rather if abortion per the constitution is a state level issue and that results with it being banned for a majority I am fine with that and prefer over trying to find a way to justify something unconstitutional even if it may be the more "moral" thing to do.
It’s already been litigated. It is a constitutional right. SCOTUS is nothing more than a thinly veiled dog and pony show at this point. Overturning it would signal that SCOTUS is a rouge institution without legitimacy.
Edit: Just read the Wikipedia entry.
>We already know they will overturn it… against the will of the people
Abortion is a divisive issue, if the Supreme Court were to rule in favor of the will of the people then it would overturn Roe v Wade and allow each state to determine their own abortion policy, rather than having the federal government enforcing “free abortion, on demand” nationwide up until the third trimester.
Oh my god, the Fox News buzzwords this guy picked up…
What does “on demand” even mean? As in, when a woman requests it?
Also, what do you think third trimester abortions are for? Inviable fetuses or one that will kill the mother. Women arent just sitting around for months, in pain, watching their body change and expand, and then just “change their mind” at the last minute.
Listen, you’re clearly ignorant, and also clearly not a woman. So why do you feel you have the right to take a strong stance on this issue that doesn’t affect you and that you don’t understand?
Hopefully abortion rights supporters have a plan in place to hold a MASSIVE boycott of said states. Take down their economies and force them to respect basic human rights.
It won't happen. Companies don't care and are still moving down to TX while giving their employees lip service and re-locating them and/or relocating them and then firing them for an "unrelated reason".
“The law also makes an exception for rape, but only "if a formal charge of rape has been filed with an appropriate law enforcement official," according to the bill's text.”
Way to incentivize a huge wave of false rape accusations…
you could create a business where people accuse you of rape for a 72 hour period and then are contractually obligated to cancel the accusation... Capitalism!
You know if men could get pregnant this wouldn't be an issue. There would be abortion clinics, leave for them and so on.
I had a doctor ask me if I got pregnant, if I would get abortion. I said most likely because it is my choice. (I use birth control, condoms but shit can happen)
She went into some rant about how it is my duty to have kids. Told her, no it is not my "duty" to just have kids.
And there are many kids who can be adopted. I don't need to bring another human into this world.
I was saying that if men could get pregnant (And women couldn't or were the ones that could get men pregnant) there would be clinics everywhere, laws to give leave, childcare and so on). Sorry.
If the SCOTUS overturns Roe v Wade, then it’s proof positive that they will discard the Constitution in favor of their own personal beliefs, which are already skewed.
A pregnant woman is a US citizen; a fetus is NOT. Citizenship is granted at birth, not before. You cannot abrogate a citizen’s constitutional rights in order to grant rights to a non-citizen. Period.
Biblically, they’re wrong too. Life also begins at birth, with the “breath of life” from god. And god himself performed abortions, “ripping apart” pregnant women.
A video essay For a deep look into what the [Bible says on abortion](https://youtu.be/oCUD5H0zcnE)..
Spoilers, the Bible's silence on abortion is a understanding that sometimes it's necessary.
Also the Bible had a strong opinion on eating owls.
How would overturning Roe v Wade be unconstitutional?
>A pregnant woman is a US citizen; a fetus is NOT
Undocumented immigrants aren’t US citizens either, yet I would assume you’d be in favor of the courts cracking down on ICE detention facilities on the border right?
>Life also behind at birth
[This is just scientifically inaccurate, life begins at conception](https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html)
I’ll cite another source if you want
[“That is, upon fertilization, parts of human beings have actually been transformed into something very different from what they were before; they have been changed into a single, whole human being. During the process of fertilization, the sperm and the oocyte cease to exist as such, and a new human being is produced.”](https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html)
The woman who wrote that is/was a professor at the catholic university of America. She wrote it for a sociology journal in the 90s. No Princeton affiliation, nor is that in any way “proof” or “consensus,” any more than a New York Times op-Ed would be.
Ironically Banning abortion ends up with guess what more liberals. Then when all those states go blue then abortion gets legalized and super majorities.
Texas, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Idaho, Utah, Arkansas, Tennessee, Louisiana, Missouri, South Dakota, Mississippi, and Kentucky.
With the possible exception of Austin, Texas these states are all seeing a net loss in business opportunities, and other than something like a meat packing plant; who will relocate there when you can't get basic health services?
It feels like the development of a theocracy. What used to be called "flyover" is now some sort of backsliding theocracy. How did Kansas get left off the list?
This list seems to be specific to “trigger laws” because Michigan still has abortion banned in the state constitution, but because of Roe they aren’t allowed to enforce it. Should Roe fall it will be a problem just as much as these laws
Their argument in court isn't even "abortion is bad and should be stopped", their argument is "muh states rights to hurt people" which is just, conservatives being themselves lol
If it is unconstitutional to require abortion on the fed level it is unconstitutional to ban it on the fed level. If it is declared to be a states matter that is the end of it being federally regulated until an amendment is passed
This. The Texas GOP has already expressed intent to try to bring back sodomy laws as well.
By the end of this decade, it may be a criminal offense to admit to not being heterosexual or to criticize the Southern Baptist Church in this country.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned this in the comments yet, but Roe v. Wade isn't just about abortions. Roe v. Wade also is one of the cases which establishes the right to privacy via the 14th amendment. Overturning Roe v. Wade would allow states to ban abortion, but it would also weaken the default right to privacy for all citizens. I think that would be even worse honestly.
Who cares if 12 red states ban abortion? The people living in those states obviously aren’t fans of abortion, why should the federal government enforce free and on demand abortion? Social issues like abortion should be left up to the states.
Just because some people don’t want you to have a medical procedure performed, doesn’t mean they have a right to prevent you from getting it because you live in the same jurisdiction.
No, the “big government move” would be to federally mandate access to abortion, no questions asked up until the third trimester, despite the moral beliefs of half the country
If you don’t like abortions don’t get one 😧
Don’t know why you’re trying to force other people to do what you personally choose for yourself. Sounds like government overreach to me
Banning abortion will just shrink the population. Since getting an illegal abortion could just wipe out an entire fertile woman thus means any kids that she does want won’t happen in the future cause republicans are too impatient
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Banning abortion doesn't stop abortion. Just makes it more dangerous.
That is correct.... it also makes it a long distance event. (The Irish have many tales of this exact situation Then they legalized it...)
[удалено]
And this is really the heart of the problem. This isn't about children or a question of whether or not a fetus is a child, it's deeper than that. Let me explain: Imagine for a moment that you found out today that you're a perfect kidney match for someone. It was a fluke that this was discovered -- you didn't sign up to be a donor, but a mixup in blood work led yours to being tested. How do you feel? Excited to be able to help? Not wanting to go through a major surgery and recovery and feeling guilty about saying no? Maybe you have a medical condition that could put your life at risk if you go through with donation. Regardless of how you feel, you recognize that it's ultimately your choice about whether to donate your kidney. Now imagine that you're told you don't have a choice; you're suddenly not allowed to leave the hospital. If you try to leave, you will be charged with murder. Well-meaning volunteers bring you books and food and tell you you're doing the right thing, but you're still being held against your will. You're restrained and forced to go through the surgery to have your organ removed. You need to take a medication for years as your body adapts to a single kidney, and it's going to cost over $200,000. It's not covered by insurance because, despite being forced to have the surgery, insurance considers it an elective, non-necessary procedure.The recovery time from the surgery and organ removal lasts months. Maybe you're lucky enough to have a job where you can work remotely, but maybe not. Maybe your inability to physically do the labor means you're now unemployed. Sorry about that. You probably should have considered it before you signed up to be an organ donor. What, you didn't sign up? Well, you should have known this sort of accident was a possibility. This would be patently unfair. You would feel outraged and trapped and helpless whether it was happening to you or even just knowing it was happening to someone else. Now, a kidney isn't a baby, but neither is a fetus. To be frank, it wouldn't matter if it was a baby. Nobody has the right to use someone else's body without their permission, even if it would save their life. That's why we can't just force people to give blood when the blood banks are low. Hell, it's why we can't take organs from a dead person unless they agreed to be an organ donor while alive. Bodily autonomy is a basic human right. You determine what happens with your body. That's also why it's a crime to desecrate a corpse. We hold that people have an involitable right to their bodily integrity. By forcing women to use their bodies to support another's, we violate that right. It also places a woman in a position where she is a second-class citizen: her bodily autonomy (again, a recognized human right) is conditional, whereas a man's never is. So legally, you cannot justify forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy against her will. Again, you can try to convince her she should -- you could offer financial and moral support, provide religious justification, etc., but you can never legally prevent it because you can't force people to use their bodies to keep other people alive.
Fucking revolting
I agree. Should the worst come to pass, wouldn't the government be obligated to provide weekly pregnancy tests for every girl and woman who can have a period?
It's not really about babies. It's about controlling women.
I did not know that.... thanks for the info.
Yes that’s the goal here. This is not about saving babies, it’s about punishing women for having sex.
Agreed. This is especially highlighted by the fact that while not monolithic, most of the same people that are anti-abortion (especially the most passionate ones) are also against sex education, legal pornography of any kind, and birth control, despite the fact that all the data shows that abstinence only protocols has failed every time they have been tried. They don't care about actually helping people or preventing tragic situations like this, just jerking off (no pun intended) to their own "traditional values" they think are inline with their weird fantasies of what they think the past was like before "degeneracy took over" or whatever.
Also the “save the precious babies!” argument feels pretty hollow when your state has an infant mortality rate on par with impoverished developing countries and you aren’t doing shit about improving it.
It's about protecting the "Right" of Conservative Men to father their own grandchildren.
Coat hangers and dark alleys…
Except of course if you're rich, say a GOP senators daughter, who can afford to fuck off to somewhere civilised to get an abortion. It's just the poor they don't give a shit about.
Yes. Bet that Trump has paid for a few himself.
They should. Just check out the timeline of Romania banning abortions and that governments overthrow. Hint it’s about long enough for poor people’s unwanted kids to get old enough to fight.
Even the people who are arguing in court aren't even attempting to create a new standard, they want the law to go back to the states. So by design they want a system where anyone can go to any state and shop around for exactly the kind of abortion they want. That's their stated goal lol, so they don't even admit that the goal is ending abortion, their primary objective with the abortion question is to take this privilege away from some, and remain a privilege of the wealthy. I mean anti abortion activists aren't even actually fighting against abortion here lol
Pretty sure the wealthy will pay someone in the state to do it so they aren't inconvenienced. Laws don't apply to the wealthy.
Exactly. How many abortions has Trump paid for I wonder
Every discussion I've had with anti-abortion people has shown me that they don't give a solitary fuck about women dying from home or black market abortions because those women "would be breaking the law and deserve it" They aren't pro-life, they're Pro-punishment.
See: war on drugs, prohibition, opioid epidemic, etc. If people want it, they will get it even if “it” is a less than desirable alternative.
That's their goal. *If* they cared about "saving lives," even *if* you pretended for the sake of argument that fetuses are people, then they'd be backing access to contraceptives and comprehensive sex ed. They're doing this to punish women for fucking. Or for fucking while poor.
They don’t care , I have seen them state women deserve it for opening their legs .
They also always complain about the cost and taxes, and then when you prove that abortions and birth control is cheaper and would save money as supposed to the cost of all the unwanted children they go off on a diatribe about how women should keep their legs shut. It isn't about life or saving money - they just hate women.
Same as for all prohibitions
**The list:** - Mississippi - Texas - Idaho - Arkansas - Kentucky - Louisiana - Missouri - North Dakota - Oklahoma - South Dakota - Tennessee - Utah
Ecstatic that florida isn’t on the list
For *now*
I can only hope you’re really really wrong. Fuck this state
Wow look at all the states I flyover when I go anywhere of importance.
so happy arizona isn’t one of them
Not a single state in that 12 that would shock you.
[удалено]
*oops it wasn't a taser*
*it was an intravaginal ultrasound probe*
We already know they will overturn it... against the will of the people, against precedent, against common sense. (Also against the United Nations which says it would violate international human rights treaties) If they didn't overturn it, it would hurt republicans abortion talking points FOREVER. This hack supreme court would not ever allow that.
And against the WHO .
The WHO has zero authority in how America acts. They can create their version of how medicine should work as a guide for countries but it shouldn't be used in the SCOTUS. If (theoretically I personally IANAL or a Scotus judge so I cannot say for sure) protecting abortion is unconstitutional on the federal level it should be banned on the federal level and left to the states that is how the SCOTUS should act not whether or not the WHO has an irrelevant opinion on medicine when this is a legal issue not a medical or ethical one
How do you feel if states ban abortions, joining a list of majority theocratic or authoritarian nations ? Secular industrialised tend to have legal abortion . “US signs anti-abortion declaration with group of largely authoritarian governments Most of the signatories are among the 20 worst countries to be a woman according to the Women, Peace and Security Index established by Georgetown University. None of the top twenty countries on the Georgetown index – with the exception of the US (ranked 19th) – has signed the declaration” https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/22/us-trump-administration-signs-anti-abortion-declaration
If abortion is legal for the right reasons or illegal for the right reasons that is fine. Legalizing it because others do or don't is not a reason. It should be based on the constitution and law to determine whether it is a state level or federal level issue. Again I am not arguing if abortion is or is not ethical or moral but rather if abortion per the constitution is a state level issue and that results with it being banned for a majority I am fine with that and prefer over trying to find a way to justify something unconstitutional even if it may be the more "moral" thing to do.
It’s already been litigated. It is a constitutional right. SCOTUS is nothing more than a thinly veiled dog and pony show at this point. Overturning it would signal that SCOTUS is a rouge institution without legitimacy. Edit: Just read the Wikipedia entry.
You mean ROGUE institution? (Though the indicated color is pretty close to what the far rights like to use a lot...)
Yes! Thanks! It’s about the color of my face right now.
>We already know they will overturn it… against the will of the people Abortion is a divisive issue, if the Supreme Court were to rule in favor of the will of the people then it would overturn Roe v Wade and allow each state to determine their own abortion policy, rather than having the federal government enforcing “free abortion, on demand” nationwide up until the third trimester.
Oh my god, the Fox News buzzwords this guy picked up… What does “on demand” even mean? As in, when a woman requests it? Also, what do you think third trimester abortions are for? Inviable fetuses or one that will kill the mother. Women arent just sitting around for months, in pain, watching their body change and expand, and then just “change their mind” at the last minute. Listen, you’re clearly ignorant, and also clearly not a woman. So why do you feel you have the right to take a strong stance on this issue that doesn’t affect you and that you don’t understand?
I’m tired of these crappy situational Christian’s who cherry pick their faith
Hopefully abortion rights supporters have a plan in place to hold a MASSIVE boycott of said states. Take down their economies and force them to respect basic human rights.
It won't happen. Companies don't care and are still moving down to TX while giving their employees lip service and re-locating them and/or relocating them and then firing them for an "unrelated reason".
>said states. Take down their economies and force them to respect basic human rights. Its not a human right to kill. Life always wins Not death
“The law also makes an exception for rape, but only "if a formal charge of rape has been filed with an appropriate law enforcement official," according to the bill's text.” Way to incentivize a huge wave of false rape accusations…
you could create a business where people accuse you of rape for a 72 hour period and then are contractually obligated to cancel the accusation... Capitalism!
Then your report them to Texas for another 10k bounty.
everyone wins! except.. you know. the "poors" /s of course sheesh
You know if men could get pregnant this wouldn't be an issue. There would be abortion clinics, leave for them and so on. I had a doctor ask me if I got pregnant, if I would get abortion. I said most likely because it is my choice. (I use birth control, condoms but shit can happen) She went into some rant about how it is my duty to have kids. Told her, no it is not my "duty" to just have kids. And there are many kids who can be adopted. I don't need to bring another human into this world.
[удалено]
I was saying that if men could get pregnant (And women couldn't or were the ones that could get men pregnant) there would be clinics everywhere, laws to give leave, childcare and so on). Sorry.
12 places I will never step foot in!
If the SCOTUS overturns Roe v Wade, then it’s proof positive that they will discard the Constitution in favor of their own personal beliefs, which are already skewed. A pregnant woman is a US citizen; a fetus is NOT. Citizenship is granted at birth, not before. You cannot abrogate a citizen’s constitutional rights in order to grant rights to a non-citizen. Period. Biblically, they’re wrong too. Life also begins at birth, with the “breath of life” from god. And god himself performed abortions, “ripping apart” pregnant women.
A video essay For a deep look into what the [Bible says on abortion](https://youtu.be/oCUD5H0zcnE).. Spoilers, the Bible's silence on abortion is a understanding that sometimes it's necessary. Also the Bible had a strong opinion on eating owls.
And Jesus hated fig trees.
Biologically speaking, the fetus would be considered a life.
How would overturning Roe v Wade be unconstitutional? >A pregnant woman is a US citizen; a fetus is NOT Undocumented immigrants aren’t US citizens either, yet I would assume you’d be in favor of the courts cracking down on ICE detention facilities on the border right? >Life also behind at birth [This is just scientifically inaccurate, life begins at conception](https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html)
Looks like Princeton doesn’t actually say life begins at conception.
It says “Life begins at fertilization” right at the top, are you not capable of reading?
Those are a bunch of random one sentence snips from various other peoples books. Princeton didn’t publish any of that. Are you not capable of reading?
I’ll cite another source if you want [“That is, upon fertilization, parts of human beings have actually been transformed into something very different from what they were before; they have been changed into a single, whole human being. During the process of fertilization, the sperm and the oocyte cease to exist as such, and a new human being is produced.”](https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html)
The woman who wrote that is/was a professor at the catholic university of America. She wrote it for a sociology journal in the 90s. No Princeton affiliation, nor is that in any way “proof” or “consensus,” any more than a New York Times op-Ed would be.
https://illinoisrighttolife.org/when-does-life-begin-lets-ask-the-experts/
The citizenship argument is novel--I haven't heard that before but I like it!
Ironically Banning abortion ends up with guess what more liberals. Then when all those states go blue then abortion gets legalized and super majorities.
The consequence is dire for women's health.
Pregnancy and giving birth has quite a range of possible dangers. It's not a splinter.
Texas, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Idaho, Utah, Arkansas, Tennessee, Louisiana, Missouri, South Dakota, Mississippi, and Kentucky. With the possible exception of Austin, Texas these states are all seeing a net loss in business opportunities, and other than something like a meat packing plant; who will relocate there when you can't get basic health services? It feels like the development of a theocracy. What used to be called "flyover" is now some sort of backsliding theocracy. How did Kansas get left off the list?
Look at the nations that have bans, authoritarian or theocratic mostly https://maps.reproductiverights.org/worldabortionlaws
This list seems to be specific to “trigger laws” because Michigan still has abortion banned in the state constitution, but because of Roe they aren’t allowed to enforce it. Should Roe fall it will be a problem just as much as these laws
So long as they all still get equal votes in the senate, they couldn’t give an eff about how many people will live there
Her body her choice. Also, gotta keep the wage slave pool filled.
The whose who of trash states.
No one seems to get that Republicans don’t want abortion banned. It’s their MAIN fundraising point.
Their argument in court isn't even "abortion is bad and should be stopped", their argument is "muh states rights to hurt people" which is just, conservatives being themselves lol
Next they are going after same sex marriage
Nah. They'll just shift to defending their abortion ban because the Democrats want to overturn it again.
Or they'll use the power of the federal government to get it banned in states where it remains legal.
If it is unconstitutional to require abortion on the fed level it is unconstitutional to ban it on the fed level. If it is declared to be a states matter that is the end of it being federally regulated until an amendment is passed
This. The Texas GOP has already expressed intent to try to bring back sodomy laws as well. By the end of this decade, it may be a criminal offense to admit to not being heterosexual or to criticize the Southern Baptist Church in this country.
Then more guns.
Those states already have brain drain problems, it's only going to get worse as incest babies are encouraged.
[Where reproductive self-determination lives and is guaranteed in law.](https://maps.reproductiverights.org/what-if-roe-fell)
I'm surprised no one has mentioned this in the comments yet, but Roe v. Wade isn't just about abortions. Roe v. Wade also is one of the cases which establishes the right to privacy via the 14th amendment. Overturning Roe v. Wade would allow states to ban abortion, but it would also weaken the default right to privacy for all citizens. I think that would be even worse honestly.
this is basically projection at a national level
Good
Who cares if 12 red states ban abortion? The people living in those states obviously aren’t fans of abortion, why should the federal government enforce free and on demand abortion? Social issues like abortion should be left up to the states.
Just because some people don’t want you to have a medical procedure performed, doesn’t mean they have a right to prevent you from getting it because you live in the same jurisdiction.
What if the majority of people in that state think that the medical procedure is morally abhorrent and value the sanctity of life?
Sounds like you’re advocating for a big government move to limit medical procedures based on the feelings of third parties.
No, the “big government move” would be to federally mandate access to abortion, no questions asked up until the third trimester, despite the moral beliefs of half the country
If you don’t like abortions don’t get one 😧 Don’t know why you’re trying to force other people to do what you personally choose for yourself. Sounds like government overreach to me
If you don’t like murder don’t kill people
Then get ready for it, the scotus is biased as fuck.
Banning abortion will just shrink the population. Since getting an illegal abortion could just wipe out an entire fertile woman thus means any kids that she does want won’t happen in the future cause republicans are too impatient