How Quickly Should We Overturn Roe?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kkerwin1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Roe should be overturned as soon as possible. Lives literally hang in the balance.
 
LundyLund said:
Many legal scholars, even those of a liberal persuasion, believe Roe to be one of the worst pieces of jurisprudence in American history.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard this before, too. This leads me to think that—even though SCOTUS at present tends to issue more narrow decisions—it is possible that Roe v Wade would be overturned it one shot simply because it would be rectifying a decision that was not narrow but should have been.

As others have said, though, this isn’t something SCOTUS can just decide to do. The right kind of case would have to make it’s way through the courts. And even then, we’d have to wait and see if Kavanaugh is any different than Kennedy on this issue. That remains to be seen. I’m cautiously optimistic, but I’ll wait to break open the champagne.
 
Abortion is primarily being used as birth control in this country. Barring rape (obviously), if women waited to have sexual intercourse until they were ready in every way to bear and raise a child, abortion-on-demand wouldn’t even be occurring.
The real issue is fornication without regard to consequences. No civil law can fix that.
That said, I’m absolutely opposed to abortion-on-demand. Overturn Roe v. Wade? By any means possible.
 
Last edited:
Good luck. While I do not support convenient abortions, what options are you willing to provide if or ever abortion becomes illegal again?
  • Are you willing to support poor women who can’t properly care for the baby, especially if it means working or not?
  • How are you holding the men responsible?
  • How would you actually police this kind of thing? It will continue underground no matter what you will try and likely under much cruder and unsanitary conditions.
  • Are you willing to adopt or foster these children?
I’m afraid most of the pro-life movement only has has their eyes on abortion and no one seems to be able to propose answers to the above? We don’t live in a world prior to Roe vs Wade. Women where shamed and shunned and were the ones left holding the baby in most cases.
 
Yes. And then the fight needs to be taken there. But before any real gains can be made at the state level, Roe must be overturned.
 
TheLittleLady said:
The laws will then simply revert to the states.
Click to expand...
Depends on how sweeping the decision is, and on what basis it is overturned.

An overturning of Roe doesn’t necessarily mean returning to the pre-Roe status quo.
 
PJH_74 said:
How would you actually police this kind of thing? It will continue underground no matter what you will try and likely under much cruder and unsanitary conditions.
Click to expand...
Murder is certainly a lot safer for the murderer when its legal.
 
Arkansan said:
Murder is certainly a lot safer for the murderer when its legal.
Click to expand...
Clearly you fall into the I don’t know how to make it work category. Don’t fool yourself, it will likely fall into the crudest methods of abortion and tell me the child wouldn’t suffer more. You aren’t going to find the best and brightest doing this and their procedures will reflect this.
 
I think it’s unlikely that this will be the problem that some predict it will be. When Roe v Wade is overturned, it will kick it back to the states. Some states are very unlikely to criminalize abortion. You will get a number of people crossing state lines. I doubt very much there will be women getting abortions with coat hangers in back alleys. That’s more urban legend and fear-mongering than reality.
 
“coat hanger” abortions are a myth, a lie cooked up by the Anti-Life advocates in the 1960’s.

No one can testify they saw one, because it never happened
 
Exactly why I think abortion foes will be disappointed if Roe is simply overturned. But again what are the states will do in response to my questions.
 
Last edited:
Those are certainly questions that will need to be addressed. I don’t think the fact that there are questions that need to be answered should dissuade us from seeking to overturn Roe v Wade. And I think there are pro-life people out there that are already doing just that. None of the questions seem insurmountable.
 
Last edited:
The court has rules. They will have to wait for a case that test the law or part of the law. That will take time. But to your question it is immoral to deliberately compromise with immorality unless it is the lesser of two evils. Douglas MacArthur got fired because he argued that limited war was immoral. I think he was right.
 
If you can argue for it based solely on secular terms, then fine. But if you are arguing for your particular religious values and tenants to be the legal law of the land for everyone else to abide by, then no, sorry, that’s not a valid argument. Your club house rules are not to be forced on everyone else.
 
Ioana said:
You will likely simply have fewer abortions. I think measures to support poor women and make men more accountable should be taken though.
Click to expand...
I would say that is undoubtably true. Even though Capone made a fortune, drinking was still down sharply during the 1920’s and prohibition. They tell me that the number of stoned individuals on the Vegas strip has soared since grass was legalized out there.

There is no reason to think that the abortion industry wouldn’t take a knee to the groin if it was outlawed.
 
I would like to see it overturned right away, but it would probably be overturned bit by bit if it were to be overturned.
 
I honestly think that the “it will kill more babies than save them and it will kill more women too” is the best argument against banning abortion there is, but I just don’t think it stands because of the above. Yes, there would be some problems and some need of regulation and some support for women who would’ve otherwise had them, but it is not a mandatory nightmare.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top