Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: shrinkermd

The points in this article are hard to argue against. No matter WHO is elected president in 2008, it is somewhat unlikely that Roe v. Wade will be overturned, it is a near impossibility that abortion will be outlawed in California (the state under consideration in this article). And the reasoning Will applies to California will be applicable in many, possibly a majority, of states. Maybe even a large majority.

I’m not saying abortion isn’t an important issue. It is. But I agree with Will that it is an issue that is, to a very large extent, out of the hands of the President.


5 posted on 10/28/2007 7:49:55 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: samtheman
Prior to Roe, four states permitted unrestricted access to abortion. I'm pretty sure Colly-forrnia was one of them. No reason to believe that would change if Roe was overturned.
8 posted on 10/28/2007 7:57:37 AM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: samtheman

In theory, if the Supremes can find a constitutional right to abortion in the Constitution, they could equally well find a right to life for the fetus in there, which would make abortion illegal nationwide.

That ain’t gonna happen, of course, but it could. Which is the reason behind the suddenly enormous importance of each individual Supreme Court appointment. Who was on the Court didn’t use to be that big a deal, but if we’re going to allow them to make such important and final decisions for the rest of us, it IS a big deal.

Personally, I prefer the original constitutional way. If you want abortion to be either a constitutional right or constitutionally prohibited, get an amendment passed providing so. But nobody even talks about amendments anymore, since we’ve outsourced constitutional changes to the courts.


20 posted on 10/28/2007 11:14:05 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: samtheman; Tabi Katz; Coleus; firebrand; Raquel

Wrong! Dred Scott was a terrible decision and was eventually overturned. There is much a president can do regading abortion such as : back keeping preborn babies in the CHIPs program; sign the child custody protection act and appoint conservative FEDERAL JUDGES. Will has gone dopey in his old age - this is his way of backing Giuliani.


37 posted on 10/29/2007 12:30:15 PM PDT by juliej (Vote GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: samtheman

The importance about Roe v Wade being overturned, is that a lot of states have tried to put in place some restrictions over the years that kept getting shot down by the Supreme Court under the auspices of ‘Roe’. If that were not in place, and each state’s citizens were able to decide for themselves, there would be many states with restrictions that would go a long way toward lowering the total number of abortions in the country. Yes, there would be states in which abortion would still be legal, but I daresay that even in those states, there would be restrictions put in place. These would be easier to pass if citizens couldn’t be scared into thinking that any restrictions would be causing abortion to be outlawed.


39 posted on 10/29/2007 8:33:55 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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