What happens if Roe v. Wade is reversed?

[used2b 249]

Women by far bear the brunt of childcare in America, get paid less, have fewer job opportunities and suffer career/job setbacks when becoming parents. Forcing them to bear the 'consequence' of the actions of 2 people is both wrong and poor public policy especially when all other policies and structures in our society don't allow for universal Prek or childcare and health care access is shitty and expensive and I could go on.

So, yeah, millions of people 'think about abortion' or will be affected by the lack of the ability to get one. And they aren't affluent white males who unfortunately hold most of the power in America.

That said, I think we need stronger legislative protections on both the state and federal level and that will only happen when Roe is threatened or overturned. And Dems will being to take back these seats.

Edited June 29, 2018 by used2b

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

18 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

Spoken like a man

You should try it some time.

[David Dennison 18,659]

6 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

I can't and don't understand. I'll admit that. And I wouldn't judge someone that cannot come to a decision within 6 weeks. I wouldn't think they are a bad person. I am saying that after 6 weeks, I would oppose anyone having an abortion for any reasons other than the health of the mother is at risk or the baby has some condition that would cause it to live a horrible life. 

Some women don't even know they are pregnant after six weeks.

[Michael Knight 12,898]

7 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

You should try it some time.

You speak with the voice of a child

[seven 1,366]

Just wondering, what punishment should a raped woman receive for getting an abortion in week 7?

[RandomIdoit 655]

6 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Some women don't even know they are pregnant after six weeks.

I think if you were raped, you might have a good reason to get checked out within 6 weeks. I do agree with the posters that have said they might be too traumatized to deal with it and that could be a reason they don't get checked out. Or maybe they are too embarrassed to tell anyone. 

[RandomIdoit 655]

9 minutes ago, seven said:

Just wondering, what punishment should a raped woman receive for getting an abortion in week 7?

None. 

[Jhawk 1,075]

53 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

I could see the Alabama or Texas legislature passing a restrictive abortion law (for the sake of argument, let's say "no abortions after 8 weeks") and someone suing them who would have standing with the Court. The difficulty for the court would be 

a) they could rule that the State is within it's right to pass legislation

b) they could also rule that since it doesn't completely restrict abortion, Roe v. Wade isn't "harmed"

Or maybe I'm just tired and need a weekend off. 

I suppose this could be a route to attack it but the planned parenthood case help curtail restrictions didn’t it? I guess at the end of the day, the SC is probably only going to step in if someone legislates impactful law against their ruling. That is such a loser that I don’t know that this will happen because it is a loser politically no matter who wants it (state or fed level). 

54 minutes ago, relapse98 said:

To be fair, the state of Texas did take away rights from the LGBTQ community. 

Texas Supreme Court rules gay couples not guaranteed spousal benefits

 

So its not an entirely unfounded premise. Not to mention Texas Penal Code 21.06 is still on the books, in case that case ever gets overturned, because Texas.

I did not know this. That is tragic. Hopefully this is changed. 

[seven 1,366]

7 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

None. 

But it's murder at that point, isn't it? 

[Cheeseweasel 26,437]

7 minutes ago, Jhawk said:

I suppose this could be a route to attack it but the planned parenthood case help curtail restrictions didn’t it? I guess at the end of the day, the SC is probably only going to step in if someone legislates impactful law against their ruling. That is such a loser that I don’t know that this will happen because it is a loser politically no matter who wants it (state or fed level). 

My gut tells me that Roberts won't let it happen. SCOTUS doesn't exist in a vacuum and they know the implications of overturning Roe both economically and politically. They'll likely either punt anything that comes their way or strike it down based on precedence set by Roe.

[David Dennison 18,659]

10 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

I think if you were raped, you might have a good reason to get checked out within 6 weeks. I do agree with the posters that have said they might be too traumatized to deal with it and that could be a reason they don't get checked out. Or maybe they are too embarrassed to tell anyone. 

What about the women who aren't raped? Do you still judge them after 6 weeks if they had no way of knowing they were pregnant?

[seven 1,366]

5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

What about the women who aren't raped? Do you still judge them after 6 weeks if they had no way of knowing they were pregnant?

No no, abortion is already illegal for those sluts

[Jhawk 1,075]

..

Edited June 29, 2018 by Jhawk
Double post

[Jhawk 1,075]

7 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

My gut tells me that Roberts won't let it happen. SCOTUS doesn't exist in a vacuum and they know the implications of overturning Roe both economically and politically. They'll likely either punt anything that comes their way or strike it down based on precedence set by Roe.

Agree. For the record, I am pro choice. 

[RandomIdoit 655]

6 minutes ago, seven said:

But it's murder at that point, isn't it? 

I think that it is wrong and I would not support it. But I would understand because I would not want to have to give birth to my rapist's child if I was a woman.

I don't know how many people in this thread that respond to my posts thinking I am always against abortion no matter what. People who say it's never okay to have an abortion are extremists. The people who think late term abortions are okay are extremists also.  I am neither.

[Js1 85,110]

10 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

My gut tells me that Roberts won't let it happen. SCOTUS doesn't exist in a vacuum and they know the implications of overturning Roe both economically and politically. They'll likely either punt anything that comes their way or strike it down based on precedence set by Roe.

While I agree, Roberts can be unpredictable.  The Obamacare tax was unpredictable.

[used2b 249]

Your avatar makes you even more ridiculous in this thread.

[seven 1,366]

Restricting abortion to only raped women and only within 6 weeks is fairly extremist 

[RandomIdoit 655]

9 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

What about the women who aren't raped? Do you still judge them after 6 weeks if they had no way of knowing they were pregnant?

That is a different situation. They chose to risk getting pregnant. They chose to not educate themselves on contraceptives. They chose not to walk down to the HEB pharmacy and pay $20 for the Generic plan B pill. Any time you have sex, you take the risk of creating a baby, ask Steve Buechele.

[Cheeseweasel 26,437]

8 minutes ago, seven said:

Restricting abortion to only raped women and only within 6 weeks is fairly extremist 

I thought Republicans DIDN'T wan't Sharia law?

[RandomIdoit 655]

8 minutes ago, seven said:

Restricting abortion to only raped women and only within 6 weeks is fairly extremist 

Raped women, women who will die if the pregnancy continues, pregnancies where they baby has a condition that would lead to a horrible life or suffering would be acceptable reasons to have an abortion. Not wanting to use contraceptives or being too lazy to get a Plan B pill from the pharmacy for $20 is not a good reason. That's the risk you take when you have sex. 

[kevwun 15,653]

Do death panels get to judge if the condition warrants an abortion?

[RandomIdoit 655]

8 minutes ago, kevwun said:

Do death panels get to judge if the condition warrants an abortion?

More like life panels, AKA doctors. They should be able to determine if the mother's life is at risk. If they are shady and lie to skirt the rules, they will have consequences also.

[kevwun 15,653]

I prefer death panels since it's already part of the vernacular.

[wildcat09 29,257]

48 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

That's why I suggested that there should be more support and it should be made easier and less embarrassing for them to seek help to explain their options. 

You make it sound so easy! I can't believe we hadn't figured this out before now!

[RandomIdoit 655]

6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

You make it sound so easy! I can't believe we hadn't figured this out before now!

What is there to figure out? Saying it needs to be improved doesn't mean that it will be easy to be solved.

[Pods 7,530]

1 hour ago, RandomIdoit said:

I can't and don't understand. I'll admit that. And I wouldn't judge someone that cannot come to a decision within 6 weeks. I wouldn't think they are a bad person. I am saying that after 6 weeks, I would oppose anyone having an abortion for any reasons other than the health of the mother is at risk or the baby has some condition that would cause it to live a horrible life. 

You have picked an absolutely arbitrary number of times the earth spins about it's own axis and your time frame is ludicrously short.

If we were talking banning abortion after 6 months, except for those conditions, I would agree with you.

For me to agree to that though, it's also going to require a bunch of additional counseling, health care, welfare and education spending that I don't think the GOP is willing to back up. 

Edited June 29, 2018 by Pods

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Your avatar certainly doesn’t make you seem like someone who objectifies women.

[Cheeseweasel 26,437]

21 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Your avatar certainly doesn’t make you seem like someone who objectifies women.

Yours too.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!

 

I keeed. I keeed.

[RandomIdoit 655]

 

11 minutes ago, Pods said:

You have picked an absolutely arbitrary number of times the earth spins about it's own axis and your time frame is ludicrously short.

If we were talking banning abortion after 6 months, except for those conditions, I would agree with you.

For me to agree to that though, it's also going to require a bunch of additional counseling, health care, welfare and education spending that I don't think the GOP is willing to back up.

You must have just skipped over pages of posts yesterday when someone asked when a baby is a person. I said that when I saw my child's heartbeat I knew it was a person. Other's argue that it's not a person until it can survive outside the womb, which I don't agree with. If someone was a rape victim, they would have good cause to assume they could be pregnant. 

9 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Your avatar certainly doesn’t make you seem like someone who objectifies women.

I'm sorry, did I force this person to make a video and post it online for everyone to see? Nope, just searched google for Katee Life and this other girl came up. 

[kopp0e 1,135]

I don't think we will see a day of Row v Wade reversed, as there are so many that safely use the services provided at clinics opposed to the former back alley "shade tree doctors"...

(I am not saying that I condone the use of the system though), but I am only a man that is not carrying the responsibility of bearing a child, so I will leave that for women to decide...

[Pods 7,530]

24 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

You must have just skipped over pages of posts yesterday when someone asked when a baby is a person. I said that when I saw my child's heartbeat I knew it was a person. Other's argue that it's not a person until it can survive outside the womb, which I don't agree with. If someone was a rape victim, they would have good cause to assume they could be pregnant. 

You are making an arbitrary emotional decision that is not remotely based on biology. A heartbeat does not make something a person, all vertebrates have a heart. Sea slugs and all descendants of our common ancestor with them have a functional circulatory system. At six weeks, there is very little difference between a human fetus and any other vertebrate fetus. 

[RandomIdoit 655]

6 minutes ago, Pods said:

You are making an arbitrary emotional decision that is not remotely based on biology. A heartbeat does not make something a person, all vertebrates have a heart. Sea slugs and all descendants of our common ancestor with them have a functional circulatory system. At six weeks, there is very little difference between a human fetus and any other vertebrate fetus. 

The question that was asked was when does it stop being a group of cells and start being a person? And TO ME when I saw my children's heartbeat, I believed they were a person and not a group of cells.

[Pods 7,530]

I understand that and it's fair for you to think that about your own child. It's an emotional decision and it's not based on biology, but it's also not a situation that calls for biological precision.

It's not fair for you to force that view onto other people. At that point, science and biology take precedence over personal preference. Until a fetus is viable, it relies on the mother to gestate it to term. Who are any of us to tell another human being what she has to carry inside of her, regardless of how it got there?

[David Dennison 18,659]

1 hour ago, RandomIdoit said:

More like life panels, AKA doctors. They should be able to determine if the mother's life is at risk. If they are shady and lie to skirt the rules, they will have consequences also.

Or we can leave it up to the person who is pregnant.

#CommonSense

[JBJ 3,649]

8 minutes ago, Pods said:

I understand that and it's fair for you to think that about your own child. It's an emotional decision and it's not based on biology, but it's also not a situation that calls for biological precision.

It's not fair for you to force that view onto other people. At that point, science and biology take precedence over personal preference. Until a fetus is viable, it relies on the mother to gestate it to term. Who are any of us to tell another human being what she has to carry inside of her, regardless of how it got there?

How would you form a biological foundation for personhood? I've always seen it as a metaphysical topic or at the very least psychological.

[Bacon Gayfield 37]

2 hours ago, Michael Knight said:

Spoken like a man

I can guarantee this person has been mentally trained by a woman.

You've got to keep this bitch boy behavior under wraps please. All you do is make men, and women that like real men, cringe. And then we lose votes. How the fuck do you think Trump became President?? Because of embarrassments like you.

 

 

[Pods 7,530]

10 minutes ago, JBJ said:

How would you form a biological foundation for personhood? I've always seen it as a metaphysical topic or at the very least psychological.

I'm not the one arguing personhood as any sort of special thing. I was sticking up for rape victims and saying it's patently absurd to expect them to get an abortion in six weeks. 

To clarify though, my solution based on biology is very simple. If the fetus can survive outside the womb and doesn't have major birth defects, the birth should be induced and the fetus moved to an incubator. If not, the mom can do whatever she wants. Figure out where this is and set the law there with a buffer zone. It's probably somewhere around 6-7 months. 

You'd need to combine this with increased spending on counseling and healthcare to make sure all women have access to this decision well before 6-7 months have expired. We also need to increase spending on childcare and adoption programs to get any induced kids homes. 

All of that would have to be rolled into a Constitutional Amendment to protect it from being changed as part of a slippery slope argument later. 

[JBJ 3,649]

41 minutes ago, Pods said:

I'm not the one arguing personhood as any sort of special thing. I was sticking up for rape victims and saying it's patently absurd to expect them to get an abortion in six weeks. 

To clarify though, my solution based on biology is very simple. If the fetus can survive outside the womb and doesn't have major birth defects, the birth should be induced and the fetus moved to an incubator. If not, the mom can do whatever she wants. Figure out where this is and set the law there with a buffer zone. It's probably somewhere around 6-7 months. 

You'd need to combine this with increased spending on counseling and healthcare to make sure all women have access to this decision well before 6-7 months have expired. We also need to increase spending on childcare and adoption programs to get any induced kids homes. 

All of that would have to be rolled into a Constitutional Amendment to protect it from being changed as part of a slippery slope argument later. 

Medically, it's in the range of 24 weeks, and viability is a sudden jump - not a gradual slope.  A 22-week preterm has almost no chance.

It's not bad as a biological indicator, I just think it is side-stepping the philosophical basis of human rights.  After all, we grant rights to persons - a philosophical concept.  The majority ruled the way they did in Roe partly because the "any person" in the equal protection clause they decided did not apply to the unborn.

Edited June 29, 2018 by JBJ

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

I’d follow science.  Definition of life is a heartbeat and brain activity.  Only exception is life of the mother.  

[Pods 7,530]

I don't see how it's side stepping the issue of human rights. I'm saying the mother has human rights. Until the fetus is viable outside the womb, her right to do whatever she wants with her body supersedes any other. 

[JBJ 3,649]

25 minutes ago, Pods said:

I don't see how it's side stepping the issue of human rights. I'm saying the mother has human rights. Until the fetus is viable outside the womb, her right to do whatever she wants with her body supersedes any other. 

It's using a biological answer to a philosophical question.  That's not saying that the answer is invalidated, just incomplete.  The question is both how and why and your answer is how.

The equal-opposite would be saying blood moves through the body because a person is alive.  Maybe that answers why, it's just doesn't answer how until someone explains the heart.

Edited June 29, 2018 by JBJ

[Pods 7,530]

10 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I’d follow science.  Definition of life is a heartbeat and brain activity.  Only exception is life of the mother.  

If you are going to say you "follow science", using accurate terminology is a major part of that. Here are the definitions for life. Not one of them are anything close to your definition. 

a : the quality that distinguishes a vital and functional being from a dead body 

b : a principle or force that is considered to underlie the distinctive quality of animate beings 

c : an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism (see metabolism 1), growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction 

2a : the sequence of physical and mental experiences that make up the existence of an individual 

• children … are the joy of our lives
•  —Agnes S. Turnbull

b : one or more aspects of the process of living  

• sex life of the frog

3: biography 1  

• the life of George Washington

4: spiritual existence transcending (see transcend 1c) physical death 

• his craving … for the release into the life to come
•  —Rodney Gilbert

5a : the period from birth to death 

b : a specific phase of earthly existence  

• adult life

c : the period from an event until death  

• a judge appointed for life

d : a sentence of imprisonment for the remainder of a convict's life 

6: a way or manner of living  

• the life of the colonists

7: livelihood 

• The fishing village drew its life from the sea.

8: a vital or living being;  specifically : person 

• many lives were lost in the disaster

9: an animating and shaping force or principle 

• the life of the constitution … has been not logic but experience
•  —F. A. Ogg & Harold Zink

10: spirit, animation 

• saw no life in her dancing

11: the form or pattern of something existing in reality  

• painted from life

12: the period of duration, usefulness, or popularity of something  

• the expected life of the batteries

13: the period of existence (as of a subatomic particle) — compare half-life

14: a property (such as resilience (see resilience 1) or elasticity) of an inanimate (see inanimate 1) substance or object resembling the animate quality of a living being 

15: living beings (as of a particular kind or environment)  

• forest life

16a : human activities 

b : animate activity and movement  

• stirrings of life

c : the activities of a given sphere, area, or time  

• the political life of the country

17: one providing interest and vigor  

• life of the party

18: an opportunity for continued viability  

• gave the patient a new life

19capitalized,  Christian Science : god 1b 

20: something resembling animate life  

• a grant saved the project's life

 

The heart and brain evolved very early. The common ancestor of something called Craniata, which is hagfish, lampreys plus all vertebrates including humans had both a heart beat and a brain. All of their ancestors retain it.  

There's a biology maxim. Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. Loosely translated, the life history of an organism as it develops (ontogeny) shows the evolutionary history of the group (phylogeny). Just like with evolution, the heart starts beating VERY early in development. At this stage, a human embryo is virtually indistinguishable from any other vertebrate, especially mammalian, embryo. 

[Poolflood 845]

This is an obscenely horrible topic so why not take it to the nth degree.  

I'm generally pro-life.  Two kids I hope one day attend UT as I did.

Your wife is raped and becomes pregnant... 6-7 weeks later there is a heartbeat.... Is an abortion an option?

If it is an option at that point in the case of rape, are other instances precluded?

[Pods 7,530]

12 minutes ago, JBJ said:

It's using a biological answer to a philosophical question.  That's not saying that the answer is invalidated, just incomplete.

The equal-opposite would be saying blood moves through the body because a person is alive.  Maybe that's true, it's just not complete until someone explains how the heart works.

A heartbeat and brain function are necessary, but not sufficient for a fetus to be viable, so they are irrelevant to the discussion. 

[David Dennison 18,659]

39 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I’d follow science.  Definition of life is a heartbeat and brain activity.  Only exception is life of the mother.  

How many abortions have you paid for?

[Poolflood 845]

9 minutes ago, Pods said:

A heartbeat and brain function are necessary, but not sufficient for a fetus to be viable, so they are irrelevant to the discussion. 

So if you were in a coma with a heart beat and brain function but on life support... Can we extinct you?

Edited June 29, 2018 by Poolflood
Pun intended

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

11 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

How many abortions have you paid for?

Personally, none.  Condoms are cheap and work.  

I’m sure in the millions I’ve paid in taxes some has trickled down to planned parenthood and has butchered some kids. 

[Pods 7,530]

10 minutes ago, Poolflood said:

So if you were in a coma with a heart beat and brain function but on life support... Can we extinct you?

If I'm not coming out of it, yes. My family has been repeatedly instructed that they are to pull the plug. 

If i can be kept alive on a machine and get better, then do that. It's exactly the same position as putting a viable fetus into an incubator. 

[JBJ 3,649]

19 minutes ago, Pods said:

A heartbeat and brain function are necessary, but not sufficient for a fetus to be viable, so they are irrelevant to the discussion. 

I think you meant to quote Johnny.  He is defining medical death and not medical life, and certainly not personhood.

I'm asking why viability makes a fetus a person, or even does it?

Edited June 29, 2018 by JBJ