Skip to comments.
Do you think it's time to reverse Roe v. Wade? [FR Straw Poll]
FR
| 10/12/05
| Us
Posted on 10/11/2005 10:21:13 PM PDT by nunya bidness
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-67 next last
To: nunya bidness
33 years past time my friend. It was an abhoration the day the Court created such a "right" out of thin air and then applied it to this murderous, horrific practise.
IMHO, our founders and original court members would have tarred and featherd those who voted for it, then removed them from the court and thrown them in jail.
41
posted on
10/12/2005 5:20:32 AM PDT
by
Jeff Head
(www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
To: nunya bidness
Yes reverse it, force it to the legislatures to vote. Then we can see who can stay elected after voting to murder children.
42
posted on
10/12/2005 5:29:19 AM PDT
by
Dominick
("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
To: nunya bidness
43
posted on
10/12/2005 5:36:17 AM PDT
by
Tax-chick
(When bad things happen, conservatives get over it!)
To: nunya bidness
"What say you?"
None of your business.:-)
44
posted on
10/12/2005 6:00:25 AM PDT
by
verity
(Don't let your children grow up to be mainstream media maggots.)
To: nyconse
I agree w/you about Roberts & Meiers. I don't think he'll vote to overturn Roe and I think she probably would.
To: nunya bidness
The bottom line is that the GOP political leadership is not at all inclined to seat judges who would reverse Roe. As it stands, they have the grievance to nurture at no political cost; if the court got out of the way, they'd have to do something about the issue, and whatever they did would offend a big chunk of their base.
46
posted on
10/12/2005 6:51:46 AM PDT
by
steve-b
(A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
To: Gondring
It's quite an insult to think that our Founding Fathers were unaware of a practice that was thousands of years old, especially when you consider Jefferson's Classical scholarship. They were aware of it, yet they did not make it a Federal offense. On the other hand, I don't see them writing a sweeping right to privacy as something to be protected (it's not explicit in Madison's Bill of Rights), but then again, perhaps they felt no need to do so, and assumed it was a given (ah, the Federalist/anti-Federalist debates again). The Founding Fathers never envisioned the Federal gov't having authority in mundane state matters like law and order. Homocide is simply not a federal issue.
SD
To: KDD; All
Poll still open, click above to vote
Free Republic Opinion Poll: I don't believe the liberal claims that the majority of Americans support abortion as a right. Would you favor laws making abortion illegal in your state?
Composite Opinion |
Yes |
40.1% |
  |
4,562 |
Yes, with exceptions |
35.7% |
  |
4,053 |
No |
21.1% |
  |
2,396 |
Undecided |
1.6% |
  |
181 |
Pass |
1.5% |
  |
173 |
|
100.0% |
|
11,365 |
|
Member Opinion |
Yes |
41.1% |
 |
2,557 |
Yes, with exceptions |
39.3% |
 |
2,443 |
No |
15.7% |
 |
979 |
Pass |
2.0% |
 |
127 |
Undecided |
1.8% |
 |
115 |
|
99.9% |
|
6,221 |
|
Non-Member Opinion |
Yes |
39.0% |
 |
2,005 |
Yes, with exceptions |
31.3% |
 |
1,610 |
No |
27.5% |
 |
1,417 |
Undecided |
1.3% |
 |
66 |
Pass |
0.9% |
 |
46 |
|
100.0% |
|
5,144 |
|
48
posted on
10/12/2005 7:48:53 AM PDT
by
deport
(Alberto Gonzales... Next up. LOL)
To: nunya bidness
Yes. It should be up to the states to decide.
49
posted on
10/12/2005 7:54:03 AM PDT
by
mosquitobite
(What we permit; we promote. ~ Mark Sanford for President!)
To: nunya bidness
50
posted on
10/12/2005 7:58:25 AM PDT
by
grellis
(Coming in September 2006! SURVIVOR: MORDOR)
To: Blurblogger
If males would be MEN and protect and provide for the young they procreate... It still takes two to tango.
If more WOMEN would keep their knees together, the whole issue would damn near disappear.
-old fashioned gal
51
posted on
10/12/2005 8:03:36 AM PDT
by
grellis
(Coming in September 2006! SURVIVOR: MORDOR)
To: nunya bidness
52
posted on
10/12/2005 8:16:34 AM PDT
by
day10
(Rules cannot substitute for character.)
To: GSlob
53
posted on
10/12/2005 8:17:42 AM PDT
by
pitinkie
(revenge will be sweet)
To: Gondring
It's quite an insult to think that our Founding Fathers were unaware of a practice that was thousands of years old, especially when you consider Jefferson's Classical scholarship. They were aware of it, yet they did not make it a Federal offense. They never mention murder either and did not make it a federal offense. That doesn't make it any less wrong, just that it is not in the federal jurisdiction and is left to the states to enforce.
54
posted on
10/12/2005 9:13:38 AM PDT
by
Spiff
(Robert Bork on the Miers Nomination: "I think it's a disaster on every level.")
To: Gondring
It's quite an insult to think that our Founding Fathers were unaware of a practice that was thousands of years old, especially when you consider Jefferson's Classical scholarship. They were aware of it, yet they did not make it a Federal offense. They never mention murder either and did not make it a federal offense. That doesn't make it any less wrong, just that it is not in the federal jurisdiction and is left to the states to enforce.
55
posted on
10/12/2005 9:15:21 AM PDT
by
Spiff
(Robert Bork on the Miers Nomination: "I think it's a disaster on every level.")
To: nunya bidness
It depends upon the case to be made. I think that, first, the ban on partial birth abortion should be upheld. The basis for upholding the PBA ban could lead to "settled precedence" which could give support to overturning Roe.
Personally, I believe that Roe will eventually be overturned because of its reliance upon the weak and subjective concept of "fetal viability." Medical science and technolgy have rendered Blackmun's concept of "viability" obsolete; we just need a court with the smarts and the guts to recognize this, and render a decision which will eviscerate the Roe precedence. In so doing, I believe the court would strike a blow for states rights on this and many other issues, and a blow against legislating from the bench.
56
posted on
10/12/2005 10:20:03 AM PDT
by
My2Cents
(The political battles of our day are battles over morality, between the haves and the have nots.)
To: nunya bidness
Yes, the decision should properly revert to the states. Roe v Wade was an overreach by the Federal court.
This is a far different question than asking if abortion should be illegal though. If Roe is overturned I expect many if not most states will continue things pretty much as they are, and we would have to deal with the implications of that.
57
posted on
10/12/2005 10:48:12 AM PDT
by
Randjuke
To: Howlin
58
posted on
10/12/2005 10:54:43 AM PDT
by
firewalk
To: Howlin
Pew Poll re: Miers Off topic per se, but the link is to a Pew Poll regarding the public opinion on the Miers nomination. Go to the bottom of the article and click on the link for some interesting subsets of the polling data.
59
posted on
10/12/2005 10:54:47 AM PDT
by
deport
(Alberto Gonzales... Next up. LOL)
To: nunya bidness
With all due regard for my personal opinion on the issue - and yours -
nunya bidness
Personal freedom requires personal responsibility.
On the one hand, the more we devolve onto the State responsibility for correcting negative personal outcomes (as in by making an unwanted pregnancy the responsibility of the State to correct by sanctioning abortion), the less we are required to accept personal responsibility for the cause of the negative outcomes (unprotected sex).
On the other hand, the more we devolve onto the State responsibility to correct negative collective outcomes (by making it the responsibility of the State to deny OTHER PEOPLES' access to a voluntary medical service), the less we are required to accept collective responsibility for the cause of the negative collective outcome (failure to lead others to behave as we believe they should behave).
I believe abortion is killing. I am not necessarily certain that I believe ipso facto that such killing is the responsibility of the State to regulate. We who believe abortion is killing generally believe we should be permitted to carry concealed handguns. They who believe abortion is the private right of one person to choose, would deny me the private right to carry a handgun (lest I might kill someone).
Get the State out of all of it.
Conserve Liberty.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-67 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson