Abortion Protection in Red States

[Deleted User 9015]

Bill Burr sums up the abortion issue quite well.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Jj3cE-i27jc

Just let women decide for themselves.

[TC Talks]

Like I said, God's Will

[bmw]

Wait a minute. I thought the overturning of Roe v. Wade was going to lead to lead to back alley abortions with coat hangers in red states. You mean that's not what's happening?

(Joking aside, I was against making abortion a states' rights issue. I just don't understand why most Conservatives think it is a good idea to have 50 different definitions of when life begins. That is something we as a country need to figure out at the federal level. I'm not sure Roe was the way to do it, rather, on principle, I think it should be defined in the Constitution).

[audiophile]

Wait a minute. I thought the overturning of Roe v. Wade was going to lead to lead to back alley abortions with coat hangers in red states. You mean that's not what's happening?

(Joking aside, I was against making abortion a states' rights issue. I just don't understand why most Conservatives think it is a good idea to have 50 different definitions of when life begins. That is something we as a country need to figure out at the federal level. I'm not sure Roe was the way to do it, rather, on principle, I think it should be defined in the Constitution).

I agree. I think the next Supreme Court Case could answer that. All states have criminal laws that protect the unborn - that violates equal protection in states like Michigan.

[bmw]

I'm not sure what there is for the Supreme Court to answer. They just overturned Roe v. Wade, and my understanding of that ruling is not that they specifically made it a states' rights issue, but rather a legislative one as opposed to one that can be defined by a court. In other words, I think Congress could pass and the President could sign into law legislation today defining when life begins. Good luck finding a consensus that is neither conception nor birth.

[Round Six]

I'm not sure what there is for the Supreme Court to answer. They just overturned Roe v. Wade, and my understanding of that ruling is not that they specifically made it a states' rights issue, but rather a legislative one as opposed to one that can be defined by a court. In other words, I think Congress could pass and the President could sign into law legislation today defining when life begins. Good luck finding a consensus that is neither conception nor birth.

I feel the Supremes did the right thing. Flop it in the state's lap. And I hope they decline to hear it again. I also don't want any decrees from the president or US Congress on the matter.

Unfortunately this won't happen. A state decides one way. Those who didn't like it want to go to court.

It's done. Put the paddles down and quit playing ping pong with this. If a state legislature or voter referendum didn't go your way, too bad. The majority has spoke.

[TC Talks]

Wait a minute. I thought the overturning of Roe v. Wade was going to lead to lead to back alley abortions with coat hangers in red states. You mean that's not what's happening?

Are you sure we don't have unlicensed facilities? You guys are the deregulation crowd.

[teetoppz28]

MAGAts when tRump was able to place three justices on the SCOTUS: "YAY! Now we'll get Roe v Wade overturned and abortion banned!!"

MAGAts when the SCOTUS overturned R v W: "WOO HOO!! It's happening!!"

MAGAts when they realize their dumbasses are in the minority as state after state votes to keep abortion rights: *crickets*

So. Much. Winning!!!