Should we overturn Roe v. Wade?

[Natalie]

//

 

[Working Poor]

I don't care one way or another personally it won't stop abortion if it gets over turned so what is the point?

If you don't agree with abortion for gosh sakes don't have one...

 

[werdd]

Yes, because a decision like rvw should be decided on the state level.

 

[Bman]

What do you expect will happen if it gets overturned?

I just ask because out of all the issues I cannot stand hearing about every election. It is this one. It is a waste of time and resources IMHO.

1. When the Republicans just had control of all three offices from around 2000-06. If there ever was a chance politically to try and overturn it... well long story short, you've been duped.
   
2. With the 9th and 14th admendments in the Supreme Courts hand how do you expect this issue to ever survive at the state level?
   
3. What are the terms of punishment for violators of anti-abortion laws?

 

[silverhawks]

Yes, because a decision like rvw should be decided on the state level.

Ideally, it should be a matter for states to resolve for themselves...however, I'm guessing currently less than half the states would vote for state-level legislation along the lines of Roe vs Wade granting women the right to choose, so we'd be back to the era of young women trekking to other states, going to sub-standard medical facilities for backroom abortions, or god forbid, trying to do it themselves.

I agree with Working Poor; it wouldn't stop abortions, it just would make it much more traumatic/dangerous for women to have one.

Personally, I don't believe I have the right to dictate to women how they should treat their bodies. That's their right, which I cannot, and should not, ever take away.

 

[MRoCkEd]

they can treat their bodies how they want, but not the body of their child

 

[pcosmar]

Who is this WE. I don't ever remember that WE had a choice in the matter.
It was decided and done.
I voted yes. It was a bad decision.
But I agree with this. It has already become "acceptable". even if made illegal it will still be done and be accepted.

I don't care one way or another personally it won't stop abortion if it gets over turned so what is the point?

If you don't agree with abortion for gosh sakes don't have one...

Educate young people so the "choice"is not even considered.

 

[TurtleBurger]

Yes.

An issue that big shouldn't be unilaterally determined by nine bureaucrats.

 

[MrNick]

I think people should be allowed to do what they want, but when it harms or infringes upon another humans life and/or rights it should not be legal.

 

[Mesogen]

My problem with Roe v Wade is that they determined that women have a right to abortion based on a right to privacy. That's absurd. Maybe women have the right to kill their fetuses, I don't know. But their right to privacy has nothing to do with it.

"Hi Janet, where is your son? I haven't seen him in weeks."

"Oh, I aborted him."

"That's horrible!"

"Hey, it's my right. I have a right to privacy!"

"But he was 7."

 

[priest_of_syrinx]

If you don't agree with abortion for gosh sakes don't have one...

If you don't agree with murder, for gosh sakes don't commit one...

 

[Bman]

If you don't agree with murder, for gosh sakes don't commit one...

I love our Vegan membership.

 

[tremendoustie]

I love our Vegan membership.

A good many people consider near term infants people, but don't consider cows people. This is not an unreasonable position.

 

[priest_of_syrinx]

I love our Vegan membership.

Ethics = diet.

Okay...

 

[ForLiberty-RonPaul]

when the Supreme Court ruled on the matter they obscured the fact they shouldn't be ruling on the matter.

This is not about abortion, but about Liberty and the lack thereof when government grows beyond its initial mandate.

 

[Truth Warrior]

Only if 40+ million dead babies is enough for you.

 

[phill4paul]

No. However, there should be no government financing.

 

[slothman]

My problem with Roe v Wade is that they determined that women have a right to abortion based on a right to privacy.
That's absurd.
Maybe women have the right to kill their fetuses, I don't know.
But their right to privacy has nothing to do with it.

That's how I feel.

Overturning R vs W would make things worse.
Unfortunatally they won't do it my way, and yours also, so keeping it is better.

 

[nate895]

In 2007 in the United States, there were 15,872 acts of homicide. The deaths of many of these victims included long, painful, deaths by murder agents in order to prevent investigators from finding the correct killer. The painful ends from these thousands of victims could largely be averted if we legalized the commission of the act of homicide. Instead of having to avoid responsibility for their actions by hiding evidence, murderers can cleanly and painlessly take care of the individuals who they wish to kill. Not only will the victims experience much less pain, but the taxpayer will no longer have to pay homicide detectives or prisons to house murderers. Our opposition are just tragic reactionaries to a barbaric era when murderers had to hide their acts in back allies and cause pain to their victims.

 

[Bradley in DC]

My problem with Roe v Wade is that they determined that women have a right to abortion based on a right to privacy. That's absurd.

How Roe destroyed privacy.
The Washington Times, January 22nd, 2006