What do you think would result from a repeal of Roe v Wade?

[3RA1N1AC]

Are you free to kill children? Is that a liberty that should be protected?

more importantly, when can we start arresting women who miscarry, for criminal neglect and manslaughter? they've been getting away with it for far too long.

[Busyman]

Are you free to kill children? Is that a liberty that should be protected?

more importantly, when can we start arresting women who miscarry, for criminal neglect and manslaughter? they've been getting away with it for far too long.

...and there are tons of ways to purposely miscarry.

"You stand there and I will lightly.....kick you down the steps."

[vidcc]

That is the crux of the argument.

Are you free to kill children? Is that a liberty that should be protected?

Then also, under what circumstances? In all circumstances?

That's another debate as to when an egg becomes a living child

[Busyman]

That is the crux of the argument.

Are you free to kill children? Is that a liberty that should be protected?

Then also, under what circumstances? In all circumstances?

That's another debate as to when an egg becomes a living child

.......that is linked to what liberties one has.....

[vidcc]

That's another debate as to when an egg becomes a living child

.......that is linked to what liberties one has.....

my point is it's a different debate as to what will happen socially in the usa if roe was repealed to the debate about when life begins...and ends.

[vidcc]

As a citizen of Michigan, for example, I don't feel I have a right to dictate to the citizens of Wisconsin; my rights as a U.S. citizen do not trump theirs as citizens of their fair state.

Could you tell me who is obliged to get an abortion under R.V.W? This bit confuses me.

If the people of those states are all against abortion why are abortions taking place there?

[3RA1N1AC]

If the debate were effectively limited to the state where you live, you would, in relatively short order, arrive at the salient factology, rather than default to the myriad concerns of the country-at-large; easier, no?

One is left to ponder, as the citizen of one state, the efficacy, or entree, a citizen has to argue what particular circumstances should reign in neighboring states...

As a citizen of Michigan, for example, I don't feel I have a right to dictate to the citizens of Wisconsin; my rights as a U.S. citizen do not trump theirs as citizens of their fair state.

i reckon that if it came down to this, then we'd see a fair number of "women of minority opinion" (so to speak) promptly move to states that have voted to allow abortions.

that's in response to "what would the effects be, socially?" a sudden decrease in the female populations of anti-abortion states. impossible to say for sure, how much of a decrease it would be... but it makes sense to me, that SOME would feel strongly enough about the issue to move to a different state.

or, well... how does this work, as far as one state's treatment of another state's fetus? can people just drive across the state line, get an abortion, and come home? will they be arrested upon returning, because the fetus was under the jurisdiction of the state where the woman claims residence? or will the abortionist need to check and make sure the fetus isn't from an anti-abortion state?

if states don't claim jurisdiction over resident fetuses, then it wouldn't seem there's very much being dictated to anyone, aside from "sorry, you can't do that in this state, but you can go to Nevada and do it..."

[RioDeLeo]

i reckon that if it came down to this, then we'd see a fair number of "women of minority opinion" (so to speak) promptly move to states that have voted to allow abortions.

Maybe an abortion "Las Vegas" will spring up in some God-forsaken desert somewhere, with hotels, casinos, wedding chapels and abortion clinics?

[vidcc]

If the people of those states are all against abortion why are abortions taking place there?

How utterly disingenuous of you, vid.

Okay.

Two can play that game.

Abortions are sought in places where the majority of the populace are against the practice because the Supreme Court usurped their societal (not INDIVIDUAL) right and obligation to self-determination.

Your move.

I wasn't being disingenuous I was posing simplistic argument. I am well aware you believe roe was wrongly decided and that you think it should be up to a "local vote" as to how people run their private lives.

It appears your answer is that abortions take place because they are "allowed" and not because there is a "demand".

you conveniently removed the bit that went with it

Could you tell me who is obliged to get an abortion under R.V.W? This bit confuses me.

A woman getting an abortion in your state is not infringing on your liberties, in fact you wouldn't even know it happened unless you stand outside the clinic taking names and medical records. So to me your disapproval should be only that. If people were being forced to have abortions it would be a different matter.

Its a medical matter and as such no business of anyone but the patient and doctor.
I realise you may raise the issue of state laws protecting unborn children but then that will be a different debate as I already pointed out about when life begins and ends.

Your opinion is that roe was wrongly (by 7-2) decided.... my opinion is that it was correct.

[Busyman]

How utterly disingenuous of you, vid.

Okay.

Two can play that game.

Abortions are sought in places where the majority of the populace are against the practice because the Supreme Court usurped their societal (not INDIVIDUAL) right and obligation to self-determination.

Your move.

A woman getting an abortion in your state is not infringing on your liberties, in fact you wouldn't even know it happened unless you stand outside the clinic taking names and medical records. So to me your disapproval should be only that. If people were being forced to have abortions it would be a different matter.

Checkmate.