Posted on 11/20/2016 6:51:09 AM PST by pinochet
Eventually.
they shouldn’t decide cases based on predecessors, but by whether it’s constitutional or not - period. Leave their stupid feelings or ideas what is best out of it!
Judges past and present are human and have made mistakes and purposeful bad choices at times.
What about not killing?
Doesn’t anyone believe the Commandments anymore?
“Thou shalt not kill.”
Not very likely. It wasn’t illegal even before Roe v Wade. It was simply a state issue.
It is not a State matter anymore than Euthanasia is, but keep telling yourself that murder of an unborn is a right. Both are murder of the innocent.
The commandment is, “Though shall not murder”, not kill.
But abortion is murder, so you are correct.
Not everyone who becomes pregnant made a choice to become pregnant. It can happen even when precautions are taken.
The individual states are capable of making these decisions as to abortion laws. That is the Constitutional way.
No, Roe v Wade needs to be overturned. It declares that there is a constitutional right to an abortion. Whether one is pro-live or pro-abort, it is absurd to believe that aborting a child is a constitutional right. It was a ridiculous decision that needs to be overturned.
No, it would not make abortion illegal it would at most leave the decision to the states
.....and THAT’s the childs problem? How?
No. Roberts testified that he regards it as “settled law” and won’t entertain a case at SCOTUS that overturns it.
Said it during his confirmation hearing during a grilling by one of the lefties.
I had to pick myself off the floor when I heard it.
“Instead, the states could pass whatever laws they want.”
Exactly. At the state level is where abortion law should have remained.
IOM - Roe-v-Wade usurped states-rights, causing needless contention over the issue these many long years.
(not to mention the millions more children that lost their lives because of that decision, along with the erosion of human dignity, family cohesion, the mental health of those women who were lied to about the affects of abortion, etc, etc. ).
`
`
I always thought husband-slaying was something a woman must deal with on a personal level, too.
`
`
`
/s/
“Neither are narcotics, yet they managed to pull that off at the federal level.”
Nope. They aren’t so long as the narcotic is made, sold and consumed in a single state. Once they are sold across state lines, then Congress probably has the right to regulate that process under the interstate commerce clause.
Viability outside the womb is a measure of the NICU's technology, not of the baby's humanity.
Chooz Before You Skrooz.
Right now Clarence Thomas is the only conservative on the supreme court.
Alito, Roberts, and Rehnquist are various degrees of right of center to dead center.
Kennedy is left of center.
Meanwhile the rest are radical leftists - Ginsberg, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Breyer.
So you have 4 arch-leftists and one true conservative on the court. Trumps first pick would make it 2 conservatives, but replacing Scalia is just maintenance, not a pickup that moves the court to the right.
Fortunately for us, the 3 oldest justices are flaming libs.
Ginsberg is 83, Kennedy is 78, and Breyer is 76.
So replacing any or all of them with originalist constitutional conservatives moves the court to the right. We would need to replace ALL of them to have any hope of overturning Roe v. Wade. If Trump gets 8 years, he will have 5 or 6 years to place SCOTUS justices before the Dems start filibustering him at the end of his term.
Ginsberg would be 89, Kennedy 84, and Breyer 82. So it is not completely impossible that any or all of these commie libs could be replaced.
Prayers up all these cretins leave or die while Trump has the power to replace them, and hopefully with fairly young people. I mean, Kagan is 55. She is going to be on the court forever. I will be disappointed if Trump picks people in their 70s. Here is hoping he picks people under 60 so that are there for a long, long time.
So, in principle, you think a doctor has a right to kill one patient at the request of another?
Mind you, I doubt it's politically possible to outlaw abortion altogether, anytime soon.
Yet we have to work toward that horizon. In a civilized country, people do not have the right to murder their offspring.
No. The legality question goes back to the states where it belongs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.