Posted on 05/16/2022 9:15:19 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
See here:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/theres-no-gender-gap-on-abortion-as-a-constitutional-right-or-a-15-week-ban
“A woman’s right to have an abortion is established by the Constitution”
Men: 34% Women:35%
Federal courts should decide legality of abortion:
Men: 13%. Women: 8%
15-week ban:
Men: 63% Women: 65%
“She was, without question, a strong opponent of legalized abortion — but believed that Roe itself was “too sweeping and vulnerable to attacks,” as a New York Times piece put it last year.”
I am not following this writers thinking.
I’m thinking he meant “proponent”.
I think the editor was asleep should not ‘proponent’ be substituted for ‘opponent’ in that sentence?
I read Roe some thirty years ago. It is pure nonsense. Social justice in the smoke of judicial reasoning.
Our system took fifty years to come to the Dobbs conclusion, one which anyone with average reading comprehension could figure out on his own.
Thank the 17th Amendment for Roe.
The student body at Yale Law will demand his immediate dismissal, to be followed by disembowelment, drawing, and quartering.
They needed an editor to recognize the word should’ve been proponent, not opponent.
Back in the late 80s/early 90s, when Roe v Wade’s majority was fairly secure at 6-3 or even 7-2, it wasn’t too uncommon to find “honest” liberal lawyers who supported abortion (to varying extents) who would admit that Roe v Wade was bad case law.
It should’ve happened through legislation, and the court cases should’ve stuck to the law in question without overreaching.
But with W’s election and the possibility of more conservative justices, all such talk stopped.
Well sure, but only if you look at it legally based on the Constitution. Sheesh.
I’m thinking he meant “proponent”.
Headline is moronic.
You’re on a roll, troll.
Roe v. Wade (Roe) was a scandalous, “perfect crime” decision imo, the Constitution silent about abortion.
Morally bankrupt Democrats and RINOs ultimately used Roe to grab power by exploiting post-17th Amendment ratification, constitutionally low-information voters imo.
More specifically, in stark contrast to the protection that the 2nd Amendment has famously provided for pro-gun citizens for example, Democrats and RINOs have had to fight “tooth and nail” to maintain a majority of pro-abortion activist Supreme Court justices in order to keep the phony “constitutional right” to abortion alive.
Corrections, Insights welcome.
Next, patriots are reminded that they must vote twice this election year. Your first vote is to primary career RINO incumbents. Your second vote is to replace outgoing Democrats and RINOs with Trump-endorsed candidates.
Again, insights welcome.
Huh?🤔
Interesting
The 10th Amendment says that since Abortion was not mentioned in the Constitution, regulation of it belongs to the states or to the people. The 11th Amendment says one state shall not sue another state for equity in the law. Harry Blackmun said since New York had free access to abortion and one other state had partially free access, the other states had to go along.
Given these two Amendments to the Constitution, Roe vs Wade should never have been agreed to. It is unconstitutional!!!
lacks solid grounding in the Constitution itselfSo much for the Constitution.
RE: Headline is moronic.
Can you explain why?
RE: You’re on a roll, troll.
In what way?
SCOTUS does not make law, among prolific idiocies in the article.
On the other, I’m not rehashing your BS post from yesterday.
Figure it out and take off your sphincter hat.
Or don’t. IDGAF.
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.