Supreme Court Overturns Roe v Wade

[DrivesAllDay]

Yesterday, on KDKA Talk radio, I heard something that made me think. They clarified to a woman that in cases of rape there is no waiting for a trial. You get raped, you get the abortion, no problem. Well, It made me wonder - How many women are gonna claim rape just for the abortion, then later take back their story? There is no real penalty for women lying about rape. Very few have ever been prosecuted for lying about it.

I'm sure there will be a few cases of this. People do stupid shit all the time.

[suspiciouscouch]

Originally Posted by DrivesAllDay

Yesterday, on KDKA Talk radio, I heard something that made me think. They clarified to a woman that in cases of rape there is no waiting for a trial. You get raped, you get the abortion, no problem. Well, It made me wonder - How many women are gonna claim rape just for the abortion, then later take back their story? There is no real penalty for women lying about rape. Very few have ever been prosecuted for lying about it.

I'm sure there will be a few cases of this. People do stupid shit all the time.

Agreed, and the other potential loophole I could see is "safety of the mother". What about "I'm going to kill myself if I have this baby" is that a safety of the mother consideration? Easy loophole there.

It'll be interesting to see how many abortions are actually stopped by the change in ruling.

[DrivesAllDay]

A friend of mine said this & he's right- The people who are upset over "womens rights" are the same ones who can't even define "woman" to begin with.

[Salty Again]

... Rasmussen poll... 50% say that the Supreme Court did the
right thing in sending it back to the states.

45% say that the Federal Government should make the rules.

... So much for the "Abortion Popularity" that the Dems
were hoping for.

60% of people are ok with any abortion during the
First trimester... But that number DROPS to 34% during
the Second trimester. ... And to 11% during the Last one.

#### Salty

[Devo]

Where the SCOTUS punted, was drawing a line in the sand for when life begins, that's the decision that should have been made.

However, just like on gun control, this decision is about incrementalism.

In the case of gun control, little incremental attacks, and refusals to acknowledge that they had gotten many of the goals they wanted, but, they kept pushing, so, you end up with a nuclear decision that's going to used to overturn LOTS of laws.

Now, in the case of abortion, some states kept pushing back by limiting abortions to a sane line in the sand, in this case, 15 weeks, a point which I felt was a good place between being a fetus and an actual living being.

But NOOOOO, once again, the Left wanted the whole thing, the right to shove a pair of scissors into the brain of a just delivered child, or worse, to allow a child to die after being born, by giving it no care.

I don't care where you stand, that's fucking murder, and it was too much, and should be illegal.

So, you end up with another nuclear decision that completely takes the abortion option off the table, for lots of people.

Just like gun control, you had background checks on all new guns sold, but the left wanted it all, universal checks and defacto gun registration.

The law just passed and signed, featuring a discriminatory law about under 21 year old gun sales, WILL be overturned, as it should be, and, they are left with Red flag laws, which again, are going to be ruled unconstitutional, because they violate due process.

The left can never have enough of what it wants, and, both of these decisions, as does the ruling today about the EPA in WVA, making law where it doesn't exist.

And, we are seeing a sane SCOTUS doing the right thing, and limiting the left AGAIN.

[Devo]

And, the pushback even happens locally, again, the flaunting of laws by the Wolf administation, just decide to do something, and ignore the laws already in place.

https://triblive.com/news/pennsylvan...-tolling-plan/

[El-mo]

Originally Posted by Devo

Where the SCOTUS punted, was drawing a line in the sand for when life begins, that's the decision that should have been made.

However, just like on gun control, this decision is about incrementalism.

In the case of gun control, little incremental attacks, and refusals to acknowledge that they had gotten many of the goals they wanted, but, they kept pushing, so, you end up with a nuclear decision that's going to used to overturn LOTS of laws.

Now, in the case of abortion, some states kept pushing back by limiting abortions to a sane line in the sand, in this case, 15 weeks, a point which I felt was a good place between being a fetus and an actual living being.

But NOOOOO, once again, the Left wanted the whole thing, the right to shove a pair of scissors into the brain of a just delivered child, or worse, to allow a child to die after being born, by giving it no care.

I don't care where you stand, that's fucking murder, and it was too much, and should be illegal.

So, you end up with another nuclear decision that completely takes the abortion option off the table, for lots of people.

Just like gun control, you had background checks on all new guns sold, but the left wanted it all, universal checks and defacto gun registration.

The law just passed and signed, featuring a discriminatory law about under 21 year old gun sales, WILL be overturned, as it should be, and, they are left with Red flag laws, which again, are going to be ruled unconstitutional, because they violate due process.

The left can never have enough of what it wants, and, both of these decisions, as does the ruling today about the EPA in WVA, making law where it doesn't exist.

And, we are seeing a sane SCOTUS doing the right thing, and limiting the left AGAIN.

Why should a woman’s access to healthcare be determined by what state she lives in?

[Devo]

Originally Posted by El-mo

Why should a woman’s access to healthcare be determined by what state she lives in?

Why should a womans access to a firearm be determined by what state she lives in?

See how that works?

Except your right to an abortion is not guaranteed in the Constitution, the right to keep and bear arms is.

And seeing that the government has no business ruling on topics that are not protected by the Constitution, hence, its rightful return to the states to decide.

The SCOTUS did NOT make abortion illegal, they returned to the states to decide.

To be clear, the vast majority of Americans find abortions after the 16 week period to be wrong, and, I'm one of them, further, they don't see abortion as a method of birth control, which, for many women, it is.

Frankly, if you want to pass a law mandating abortions for welfare recipients, I'd be in favor of it, seeing I'm paying their bills anyway.

I also had no issue with "Common sense" abortion laws, limiting it to just that 16 week window, but, as you quoted me, you'd understand that that wasn't enough for the left, it had to be pushed into the actual legal murder of a child, even after birth, and, that's not only wrong, its an abhorent act, and anyone supporting post birth abortion, is a sick individual, anyone who participates, is a murderer.

[suspiciouscouch]

…I …agree …with …Devo

I’m not smart enough to know if 16 weeks is right, or not. Maybe it’s 14 or 20 or something, but it feels like there’s an adequate window to determine if you want the child or not and it’s not considered a human life by most reasonable medical professionals.

With a potential late term exception for situations for true medical necessities.

[berryberry]

Originally Posted by El-mo

Why should a woman’s access to healthcare be determined by what state she lives in?

Ummm, this pesky little thing known as the Constitution and Bill or Rights. Try reading the 10th Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.