Could the repeal of “roe v wade” be trumps real legacy

Click on that Dicks post and read the comments and you can disappear down a scary rabbit hole.

I don't often comment on the political situation over here, but I am embarrassed to call America my home today. I'm lucky to live in a state with a strong Democratic governor (for now anyway, elections later in the year could change that as, outside of Chicagoland there are plenty of right-leaning Conservative voters in rural Illinois. Hopefully any liberal voters who were on the fence will vote for Pritzker now to ensure that women's rights are not decimated in this state at least).

The sickest part of all this is reading about people "celebrating" the ruling. People who have absolutely NOTHING to do with any woman who may want/need an abortion in the US right now. What right does Karen from Baton Rouge or Scott from Green Bay have to decide the futures of other people? Add in the ****ed up attitude to guns and it baffles me.

The US is a vast and varied country, but (as someone further up the post said) the real differentiator isn't geography but politics. In strong Republican areas it is genuinely a different world and has parallels to the radical regimes that the US love to persecute for their ideals. It is time the Democrats to become a bit less democratic for the good of the country before it is too late (and yes, I am aware of the irony of that statement!)
 
To encourage debate - I’m not a monster or a lunatic but there is lots of real anger and revulsion being expressed at the loss of the rights of women on here but virtually nothing on the rights of the unborn child? At conception a life is created and in time a child will be born, this is undeniable. Allowed to grow this foetus will become a person. Elective abortion ends that life. That appears to be ok and acceptable to society irrespective of the fact that virtually all (apart from the horror of rape) conceptions are overwhelming down to consensual sex. If you have heterosexual sex you risk becoming pregnant. It is a responsibility both partners must accept. Termination ends that young life in which the child has no rights or say or representation? . Does anybody speak for the unborn child or are all rights singularly vested in the women? Sensible, well thought through and appropriately constructed responses are welcome.
 
Last edited:
Stop right there

This debate is complex enough but that is exactly the excuse these religious zealots want you to take.
Sensible, well thought through and appropriately constructed responses are welcome.
You missed that bit of the post then?
 
Last edited:
Stop right there

This debate is complex enough but that is exactly the excuse these religious zealots want you to take.
This should be no where near a football message board.


I have told you my view on it. I have never suggested my view should be government policy. That gives you no right to call me a zealot, I would suggest you are showing far too much zealotry.
 
Sensible, well though through and appropriately constructed responses are welcome.
You missed that bit of the post then?

No but i I think the people in the us driving this draconian agenda use this very argument to justify their warped ideology.

These same bastions of human rights of the unborn child are the same blocking gun laws that keep these sans sacred lives safe.

Don’t fall for their propaganda.
 
This should be no where near a football message board.


I have told you my view on it. I have never suggested my view should be government policy. That gives you no right to call me a zealot, I would suggest you are showing far too much zealotry.


I never called you or anyone else on this thread a zealot.

I said these zealots as in the driving this political agenda in the USA the dark forces on the republican right.

There is debate to be had but they are not interested in reason or debate medicine or science it’s dogma. Nothing less.
 
Roe v wade was a hard fought legal right. It was about choice and debate as you are advocating. It did not and never would mean abortions for all it was a process whereby that option was on the table but still there were stringent ethical conditions in place.

Thus removing this option altogether ends any opportunity for this debate and closes down these options.

Btw this is not just no abortion if… it’s no abortion of any kind period. Regardless of medical moral or personal circumstances.

None.

It’s a truly horrific decision.

So sorry if I was rather curt but I’m genuinely appalled at this move.
 
My faith teaches me of the sanctity of life. It also teaches me at conception a life exists. I am not a religious zealot, a nutter, a fruitcake who believes in fairies at the bottom of the garden that I have been called on here previously for identifying as a person of faith. The protection of the rights of the unborn child is a legitimate and important cause - you may not agree but that doesn’t entitle you to categorise and demean all people of faith who believe in such rights as ‘religious zealots’.
 
My faith teaches me of the sanctity of life. It also teaches me at conception a life exists. I am not a religious zealot, a nutter, a fruitcake who believes in fairies at the bottom of the garden that I have been called on here previously for identifying as a person of faith. The protection of the rights of the unborn child is a legitimate and important cause - you may not agree but that doesn’t entitle you to categorise and demean all people of faith who believe in such rights as ‘religious zealots’.

Ok you clearly are not getting my point so let’s me try again I am not calling you a zealot.

I’ve explained my position.
 
Roe v wade was a hard fought legal right. It was about choice and debate as you are advocating. It did not and never would mean abortions for all it was a process whereby that option was on the table but still there were stringent ethical conditions in place.

Thus removing this option altogether ends any opportunity for this debate and closes down these options.

Btw this is not just no abortion if… it’s no abortion of any kind period. Regardless of medical moral or personal circumstances.

None.

It’s a truly horrific decision.

So sorry if I was rather curt but I’m genuinely appalled at this move.
It's most likely unique that America has seen legal reform that actually erodes human rights.

I think this move is just a symptom of the deep divide within the US, with the hard right embedded in the South and Mid-West vs the rest of the more liberal states.

Creating and promoting division a familiar tactic for far right regimes and that's Trump's real legacy.
 
My faith teaches me of the sanctity of life. It also teaches me at conception a life exists.

That’s fine. You can choose not to have an abortion and I will respect your decision. Why do you (not you specifically but you get the point) get to choose for other people?
 
That appears to be ok and acceptable to society

I know where you're coming from, particularly in the way the media are portraying this, but I don't think this is the case.

Abortion is a massive decision for anyone to make, I doubt any woman takes it lightly. It must be a horrific dilemma. But it is their decision to make, that's the crux of the matter. They are the ones who have to live with consequences of it.

My understanding (and I'm happy to be corrected) is that most medical practitioners who undertake abortions are also effectively counsellors who will discuss the decision in an informed and impartial way with their patient. To ensure they understand the magnitude of their decision (either way), all other options available and go into it with eyes wide open.

I doubt they'll get the same from backstreet clinics and certainly not from home remedies they find out about on YouTube.
 
This is not about abortion whatever you think of it.

It’s about choice.

Removal of freedoms or choices or how ever you want to word it is never a good thing.
 
The man and women had a choice. They chose to have sex. They knew that having sex could have resulted in the women becoming pregnant and as such they could have chosen not to have sex. They went ahead and as a result a child was conceived. I am yet to hear anybody recognise or acknowledge the rights of the child they then chose to abort?
 
The man and women had a choice. They chose to have sex. They knew that having sex could have resulted in the women becoming pregnant and as such they could have chosen not to have sex. They went ahead and as a result a child was conceived. I am yet to hear anybody recognise or acknowledge the rights of the child they then chose to abort?
Ok you’ve gone down this road

So what about rape victims. ???

As I say it’s not a clear cut issue.
 
If the next move is to ban contraception (see Clarence Thomas's thoughts on what to go after next) then women's rights will be under even more attack. You can argue about the rights of an unborn foetus, but if you are going to do that while ignoring the rights of the woman to make a choice then you also need to make sure that the man responsible for the pregnancy is legally bound to care for the child whether he stays around as a father or not. That would include providing medical care amongst other things should that child require it.
 
I am yet to hear anybody recognise or acknowledge the rights of the child they then chose to abort?
OK I will have a stab at this one......it's your belief that a child is created at the moment the egg is fertilized. It isn't a everyone else's opinion and scientific debate hasn't come to a firm conclusion either (here is an article that demonstrates this https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5499222/).

As stated above, with your beliefs you are quite within your rights to make your choice not to abort an unplanned (or even an unwanted) pregnancy, but you would be acting on your beliefs, not on scientific fact. For someone who doesn't hold that belief to be made to act in the same way is to deny them their basic right to choose something that is lifechanging for them.

If science could prove definitively that an embryo/foetus was sentient from a certain point then the moral viewpoint of abortion after that point held by many would change (no one here is arguing for a woman's right to infanticide after all, or even that late term pregnancies should be aborted arbitrarily either).
 
Back
Top