Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

will Republicans try to overthrow Roe vs. Wade
11/11/02 | Jared Skinner

Posted on 11/11/2002 8:24:06 PM PST by rightwingrevolutionist

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: toupsie
Let's start with an easier one for you, then. Let's ban late-term abortions. Even the liberal AMA sees no medical reason to allow them.

In any event, overturning abortion would not eliminate abortion but merely return the issue to the states, where it was prior to Roe v. Wade. Some states (e.g., Utah) already have populations the overwhelming majority of which is opposed to abortion. Why should Utahns not be allowed to place strict limits on the ghastly practice within their state?

California would never outlaw abortion and might even allow for post-birth infanticide as suggested by the infamous "ethicist" Pete Singer. I would avoid the state like the plague, but people who are comfortable murdering children for their personal convenience could always move to California.

21 posted on 11/11/2002 8:48:00 PM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
Notice the creator of this post hasn't replied to any of the posts. Also, notice the use of the word "overthrow."

Yes, the post has the smell of mischievous DU imp all over it.

22 posted on 11/11/2002 8:49:30 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
The issue of abortion was a state matter before Roe and should be after Roe is overturned. It is not a matter for the Federal government and was never one.
23 posted on 11/11/2002 8:49:36 PM PST by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
This is my position on this subject. This is a matter not authorized to the Federal Government, but to each individual State.

"Vote with your feet" was a basic principle of our Constitution, if you do not like what your individual State makes as law.

24 posted on 11/11/2002 8:51:16 PM PST by Hunble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
>>>... but people who are comfortable murdering children for their personal convenience could always move to California.

Is there room for 145 million people in California? =^)

25 posted on 11/11/2002 8:52:34 PM PST by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
I guess they have to come over here, what with the non-stop pity party going on over at DUDU.com.
26 posted on 11/11/2002 8:53:04 PM PST by Paul Atreides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rightwingrevolutionist
First, what you have posted is not a sourced document. Therefore, it should not be posted in "News/Activism." Instead, it should be posted in "General Interest."

Secondly, the Republicans cannot just overturn Roe vs. Wade by a vote in Congress. Congress can pass various resolutions saying that they think RvW was a bad decision. I believe they call it a "sense" of Congress. A few years ago, a similar resolution was passed expressing support for RvW. These resolutions make supporters feel good, but they have no legal substance.

As another poster has already commented, RvW can only be overturned with another Supreme Court decision or by a Constitutional Amendment. Congress could pass a law making abortion a federal crime. If President Bush signed it, there would likely be an immediate challenge that might go quickly to the Supreme Court. At this point, I don't believe we would win in the Supreme Court.

The best thing that the Republicans can do at this point is move the PBA ban through the Senate and let President Bush sign it into law. Personally, I would make this move without too much fanfare. While I'm happy at making a step in the right direction, it is still only a small step. We shouldn't act as if we've accomplished something big. The PBA ban is a wonderful step in the right direction, but it won't stop many abortions.

The other best thing that the Republicans can do is approve President Bush's judicial appointments. President Bush must appoint strong but savy anti-abortion judges to higher positions in the federal courts. These are going to be ugly nomination fights, and we must apply all of the pressure that we can to win them. Sending a check to Suzanne Haik Terrell, the conservative Senate candidate in Louisiana's runoff, would also help in this fight. She would be another consistent pro-life vote if she could win the runoff on December 7.

Those who are saying that we shouldn't work towards outlawing abortion are wrong. Abortion is the killing of a little person, and killing a little person should be illegal. The law won't stop all abortions. I'm not even certain that it would stop half of them. However, our laws against murder of people outside the womb don't stop all of these murders either. Just because the law doesn't stop everything it seeks to punish doesn't mean that it's a bad law.

WFTR
Bill

27 posted on 11/11/2002 8:54:57 PM PST by WFTR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Well, there's Hillary's Noo Yawk, too. Hillary says "It takes a village," and in her village the abortion clinic has place of prominence on the main square. Emblazoned on the facade above the door is the motto "We Do It for the Children."

The rest of New England would also vote to kill the kids. But the south, some of the midwest, and the Rockies are likely to be a different story.

28 posted on 11/11/2002 8:57:21 PM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
>>>The issue of abortion was a state matter before Roe and should be after Roe is overturned. It is not a matter for the Federal government and was never one.

I don't care what the law was before Roe v Wade. My concern is to stop the killing of unborn human life here and now! This is a moral issue that half the population opposes. And let's not forget, the government is "We The People". Some things in life are plain wrong and abortion on demand is one of those "things".

29 posted on 11/11/2002 8:57:26 PM PST by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Don't go for everything at once. Get a ban on partial birth abortion then go from there.
30 posted on 11/11/2002 8:58:56 PM PST by mark_interrupted
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WFTR
Any Federal law prohibiting abortion was be in violation of our Constitutions, just as Roe vs. Wade was.

This is a State issue, and the Federal Government was never granted this power.

We need strong Judges that can read our Constitution without hallucinating.

31 posted on 11/11/2002 8:59:25 PM PST by Hunble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rightwingrevolutionist
rightwingrevolutionist.

If you practiced doing the Ding, you could put you Bat abilities to use!!


32 posted on 11/11/2002 8:59:50 PM PST by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
What is needed is a right-to-life amendment. But liberals would kill it as easily and quickly as they do unborn children.
33 posted on 11/11/2002 9:01:27 PM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
>>>But the south, some of the midwest, and the Rockies are likely to be a different story.

When people are questioned extensively, on the issue of abortion on demand and when they're told 95% of all abortion decisions are based on social convenience, many pro-choice Americans have an immediate change of heart. 40 million killed since 1973! This can't go on forever. God or no God, this is morally repugnant.

34 posted on 11/11/2002 9:05:18 PM PST by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
I agree with you. But I would just as fiercely oppose any law from the Feds that made abortion illegal throughout this country and tried to stop popular will at the state level. I will say to you what I say to pro abortionists who insist on one policy on this issue throughout this country enforced by the Feds- if you believe so stongly in this issue then contribute money and time and resources to that state which you think has the incorrect view and defeat it through the process of elections! But don't bring issues that have no place at the federal level and demand they redress them for you for the entire country. We are a Republic-not an empire.
35 posted on 11/11/2002 9:06:18 PM PST by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
What to think of this fellow...

A post of his on another BB:

"Dear America,
I live in California and all I can see is demecrats screwing up, if it's either with selling power, affairs, scandals, or even murder. When will the people of California realize that are state is in the toilet. our gas is out of town, our power is in a crisses, and our politicians are murder suspects. I say the hell with the demecrats, "I will rather vote for a socialist" sincerly thegolffather "

"are state is in the toilet. our gas is out of town, our power is in a crisses, and our politicians are murder suspects. "
LOL! I kinda like that!

36 posted on 11/11/2002 9:06:59 PM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
Or- bring an amendment and get it passed as the constitution prescribes.
37 posted on 11/11/2002 9:07:26 PM PST by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
That's why it is unacceptable to keep silent. Americans must never be allowed to enjoy even a day's respite without being reminded of this gross evil. It is not a ho-hum issue. It is a vital issue.
38 posted on 11/11/2002 9:07:47 PM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: mark_interrupted
I agree with you.

Like I said, there are only three pro-life USSC justices... Scalia, Thomas and Reinquest. One step at a time. First, a ban on PBA, then a right to life amendment to the US Constitution would be in order, but that's easier said then done!

39 posted on 11/11/2002 9:08:43 PM PST by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
>>>What is needed is a right-to-life amendment. But liberals would kill it as easily and quickly as they do unborn children.

Like Reagan and Bush43 have said, first we need to change the hearts of people who are pro-choicers. It can be done. May be in a few years, but we'd have to hold onto a majority in the Coingress and get two more pro-lifers appointed to the SC. It can be done.

40 posted on 11/11/2002 9:11:23 PM PST by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson