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

Skip to comments.

Dems Had Several Chances to Save Roe
https://www.newsmax.com/robertzapesochny/abortion-roe-v-wade-democrats/2024/08/22/id/1177515/ ^

Posted on 08/23/2024 7:06:43 AM PDT by DIRTYSECRET

Of the five justices who voted to overturn Roe and Casey, three of them would not have been in on the Supreme Court if the Democrats had not made a series of political errors.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS:
I find this quite interesting. Ginsberg chose to die in office. Thurgood Marshall died 1 week into Clinton's first term. He chose to quit too soon thinking Bush '41 had it in the bag(1992).

The big one was the filibuster-proof majority Obama had in his first year where they could have codified Roe. Interesting.

1 posted on 08/23/2024 7:06:43 AM PDT by DIRTYSECRET
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DIRTYSECRET
Roe should have never been. Every state had their own law on the books.

About 1900, abortion was illegal IN EVERY STATE.

Why???....cuz you can't kill a human being just because you want to. There is no such freedom.

2 posted on 08/23/2024 7:09:16 AM PDT by Sacajaweau (mY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DIRTYSECRET

As for codifying Roe there may have been political expediency involved. Obamacare was the big issue. Immigration could have been settled by running ruff-shod over the GOP minority. Too much too soon would have very well been a gamble they were not willing to take. They lost the house anyway 2 years later.


3 posted on 08/23/2024 7:10:35 AM PDT by DIRTYSECRET
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DIRTYSECRET

Ruth Bader Ginsburg thought she could Outlast Trump.

She chose poorly in that regard.

Remember puff pieces in the media ,,how Ginsburg,,in spite of being ill, she was lifting weights and had this great physical regimen that was keeping her healthy.

Clearly she was sicker than was publicly disclosed at the time.


4 posted on 08/23/2024 7:11:00 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DIRTYSECRET

True ,,the way the legislative process works ,,you can only take on so many big issues at any given time.

But I’ve heard some liberals say that they never believed Roe would ever be overturned. So in that case liberals would not have wanted to get into a legislative battle over abortion.


5 posted on 08/23/2024 7:12:28 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

Interesting that in 1900 abortion was just still legal everywhere in America.

I don’t know when or why that started changing. I know part of the women’s movement was agitating for abortion rights in the 1960s and climaxed in 1973 with Roe.

But what is the mindset involved that it is considered to be such an important civil right , for a woman to terminate a pregnancy without any restrictions?


6 posted on 08/23/2024 7:15:08 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DIRTYSECRET

“I’m afraid, so I want your babies to die!”


7 posted on 08/23/2024 7:16:36 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer” )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DIRTYSECRET

*Justice Ginsburg refused to take the hint and retire.*

Timing. Scalia died when the GOP had a senate majority.
I think Obama would have legalized abortion nationally on his way out if he had the chance. The issue is something that kept female voters engaged, a necessity. Same with the border. They wanted to keep the issue going.

If Trump wins the too-much-too-soon element needs be taken into account.He started with taxes last time and the balloon lost a lot of air due to rinos.


8 posted on 08/23/2024 7:19:25 AM PDT by DIRTYSECRET
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

*liberals would not have wanted to get into a legislative battle over abortion.*

Dilbert you are so right. That’s why they took it to the courts. Can we keep the lid on? It depends on how it’s framed. Kamala’s running with it. It’s on the ballot in Montana where it may save Tester.

A legislative battle in Obama’s final year would have been worth it no matter the election consequences. They could not count on it so they took what they could get.


9 posted on 08/23/2024 7:26:28 AM PDT by DIRTYSECRET
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DIRTYSECRET

Well of course they did. The Democrat party would fold in a second if they didn’t have drummed up racism and abortion.


10 posted on 08/23/2024 7:31:45 AM PDT by dhs12345
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

“But what is the mindset involved that it is considered to be such an important civil right , for a woman to terminate a pregnancy without any restrictions?”

Well, the birth control changed sex from something that ran a high risk of producing kids to just a recreational act. But the pill wasn’t 100% so they needed abortion to guarantee sex could be separated from procreation.


11 posted on 08/23/2024 7:38:33 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DIRTYSECRET

It’s their own damn fault (HT Jimmy Buffet).


12 posted on 08/23/2024 7:40:13 AM PDT by Lisbon1940 (I don’t see why they would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DIRTYSECRET

Can the federal government make a national law? Seriously.... I don’t think so. Lets look at something less controversial like speed limit. Can the feds vote the smax speed limit to 70? Or, can they pass a law which forces all states to have a death penalty. I think not.

The court has the ultimate power in these issues by ruling (for example): The death penalty is unconstitutional or that it is constitutional. The states then have to deal with that decision.

In Roe v Wade, the courts said it is unconstitutional to prevent a woman from getting an abortion. In felt like a law, but it wasn’t. It was a ruling. I might add that it was a very bad ruling. Now the courts have made the wise ruling that the constitution says nothing about abortion. This leaves the states to make their own laws....as it should be.

Again, I do not believe the Congress along with the President has the power to make a federal abortion law anymore than they have the power to make a federal speed limit.


13 posted on 08/23/2024 7:43:28 AM PDT by Mustangman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

Considering how badly Conservatives screwed this up after the decision I don’t think they ever thought it would be overturned either. Despite 50 years of raising $$$ on it.


14 posted on 08/23/2024 8:23:36 AM PDT by 3RIVRS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DIRTYSECRET

If Trump wins he needs to go scorched earth and nuke the filibuster. Chuckles will do it the day after the election if Kackles wins. Either way Trump only has 2 years to undo the damage before midterms. Make it count.


15 posted on 08/23/2024 8:25:36 AM PDT by 3RIVRS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 3RIVRS

Go scorched earth and then offer to leave office early provided the country leaves him with a majority in both houses after ‘26. Most presidencies are stale in years 7 and 8.

What does it buy him? Proof he doesn’t need the job like leftists who would rather do that than f—k. It would be like George Washington leaving when there were no term limits. He could appease those that are sick of him. “Here you go-I don’t like you either! I don’t even like me.” Heh heh.

Better yet quit in the summer of ‘27 just in case any SCOTUS quits. Vance will have a year to articulate GOP policies while Biden’s are still in the rear view mirror. Like Barry Goldwater once said the country may not want 3 presidents in one year. Set Vance up for 10 years or he could even quit after 5+ and be on the bacburner just in case. he’s young.


16 posted on 08/23/2024 9:49:10 AM PDT by DIRTYSECRET
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
Roe should have never been. Every state had their own law on the books.

That is not the reason Roe should never have been. It's an issue of states' rights. Our Constitution does not support the right to an abortion. That power is held by the states.

Similarly the power over education is not in our Constitution. It is left to the states to control it. Unfortunately the school boards and teachers sold their rights in return for federal dollars. States can do whatever they want in their schools as long as they don't break the law and as long as they stop selling themselves for money. When they take that money they are what we used to call who-ers.

17 posted on 08/23/2024 10:02:41 AM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane
That's what I said. It was a States Rights Issue and the proof is that every state had its own law I actually read the entire USSC ruling.

Education is still state by state...but when we ask for money, it comes with provisions.

18 posted on 08/23/2024 11:18:25 AM PDT by Sacajaweau (mY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

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