Posted on 09/03/2021 8:57:15 AM PDT by BlackAdderess
I’m in favor of saving as many as can be saved, but with only 8% of the voting public being against abortion in all cases, and 34% saying it should be illegal with exceptions, I’m looking at the math and realizing that you aren’t going to win an election with 42% of the voters on your side, and there is no guarantee that all the 34% would be on the side of this law since it makes no exception for rape or incest.
Your blood lust for abortion is:
1. Not Christian
2. Not Conservative
Setting up a codified avenue for discouraging behavior that is not criminal but is instead disapproved of will be the difference between suing someone where there are no or limited precedents and suing someone where it is written in the code that if you can prove something at the far lower civil threshold you can collect $10,000 plus lawyers fees. Its a slam dunk, which means that if the Left set up similar laws for hate speech and liability for gun injuries/death they would have every ambulance chaser in the country on the case instead of having to deal with cases that they have to take on pro bono or else are financed by someone. It becomes a money-maker.
If you’ve got some poor schmuck Uber driver getting sued for $10,000 plus legal fees for a $15 fare, I think that would be taken up.
The only way you win by taking a hard Left or Right stance is if the moderates can be convinced that your extreme is less extreme than the other side. You get lesser evil elections then and its down to which side looks the less insane. I’m not so sure I’d take that bet, its how we got 8 years if Obama.
“Apparently, the Supreme Court believes it is completely constitutional to have this new law.”
Not true.
They simply declined to issue an emergency injunction and made no ruling on the merits.
So if a majority of voters favored partial birth abortion we should support what they want?
And what part of the Constitution does this bill fall under?
No he is not.
Re: 66 - Once suit is brought against someone, I would predict that the Federal courts will intervene once they are brought into the mix.
AGREE!
The part that has allowed this mess of precedent law to be visited upon us to begin with. Unless they overturn Roe it is illegal on that point according to the article. From my own perspective it doesn’t sit right that this avoids the burden of proof for criminal law and the protections of the accused by throwing this into the civil court for enforcement.
They don’t
I’m sorry you are so upset by this law.
We’ll worry about your proposed scenerio when it becomes an issue.
Personally, I’m happy that for now, children are protected in Texas.
As usual, “moderate” Republicans just don’t get it.
Just in general, to all of you, abortion will always be here. Early abortion (1st trimester) is only a D&C procedure. Doctors perform them for any number of reasons. They performed them due to unwanted pregnancies before they were legal and they will again.
(The newer seaweed and hormone self expelling abortions might be harder for a doctor to explain away but D&Cs are performed all the time for many innocent reasons. )
“ I wonder if the Texas AG IS a proggy plant?”
He is not. Next question?
Indeed. True colors are often revealed when it comes to social issues like abortion.
Things will change once people get sued. This particular law will not last.
But in the meantime, you have everyone, including the slaughterhouses, acting like abortion is prohibited in Texas after six weeks. And that’s important, because if you are a Supreme Court justice that wants to severely limit or even overrule Casey and see that as something that is likely on the horizon, but are concerned about the political fallout, you want want the abortion supporters’ anger to be spread out over time. Let people get used to the idea that constitutional law is about change.
It’s similar to what the Leftists on the court did with the same-sex marriage issue in the years leading up to Obergefell.
But the small minds in the GOP establishment either don’t get that, or, much more likely, they don’t want it to happen. True colors.
If we consider the “end” of a person when their heart stops beating, why can’t we consider the “start” of a person when their heart starts?
And, it’s not six-weeks; it’s when a fetal heartbeat is detected. Whenever that is.
I stand for government of the people, by the people, and not turning society into sue-happy perdition
**********************************
The irony of the day award goes to somebody talking about Perdition while they complain about a law that tries to prevent abortion.
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.