Posted on 08/02/2022 6:35:39 PM PDT by Trump20162020
Ballot measure to remove right to abortion from the Kansas state constitution is strongly rejected.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
And Alabama had a Democratic U.S. Senator (Doug Jones) too, and Massachusetts a Republican one with Scott Brown.
Sometimes a bad nominee leads to a loss in what should be an easy win.
100% correct, and that includes Republicans. I think there are a bunch of Republicans who focus on the principle that our government should stay out of people’s private lives, and apply that concept to abortion too.
The central debate on abortion is, and always has been, whether an unborn person is a “person” who is entitled to the same legal protections against harm as a person who has been born.
What the Supreme Court did is say, “the Constitution doesn’t answer this question, so this question goes to each state to decide for itself.”
It’s that simple. Some states will decide an unborn person is a “person,” while others will not.
Appreciate your response Laz, what is unbelievable is the constitution doesn’t guarantee the right to life or define what it begins. So at the end of the day, the court will have to create or answer that question. Just as the court “found” a right to privacy in Roe, it can establish when life begins. Sure congress can too but the SC could overrule that. I know we don’t want the SC to legislate, but neither do I want the states picking who lives and dies either. Yes, I agree and am happy that Roe is gone and many babies will live because of it, it’s just the precedent that scares the crop out of me. Roe wasn’t before the court in Dobb’s either, but Alito used it as a chance to dump Roe. He could have just as easily stated that any procedure that results in termination of human life without extenuating circumstances is unconstitutional. Sure 4 others would have to agree and we would spend the next 50 years arguing what those circumstances should be but at least we moved the ball way into our court.
Lastly, don’t know Robert’s motive, not a fan, but by upholding the 6 week ban in Dodd, and not overturning Roe, it would have continued to force the question of when does life begin, which had been the incremental strategy for a long time. 6 week ban, how about 5 weeks? Then 4, at some point our nation and SC would be forced to face the issue and end the lunacy. I think only the SC can do that, but now they have washed their hands of it. Hate Roberts, but I think he was on to something, knowingly or not.
“Incredibly sad. Expected in California or New York or Chicago (Illinois). But KANSAS???”
Incredibly evil ‘woke dopes’ live everywhere. May God protect the unborn.
What stops the states from deciding the same for born persons then. That is my concern. We are way past the what if stage as to the law applying to persons when they were born. 10 years ago, academians were advocating “abortion” up to 3 years old, for illnesses and defects that don’t show up until after birth. California recently passed a law absolving mothers of the responsibility for the death of their young child. Netherlands now has child euthanasia for children who don’t want to live for whatever reason. Some states allow you to cut off your boys pecker if you want, what if you think your boy is too defective to live, isn’t killing your child more humane? Where do you draw the line? If that is all states rights then states rights be damned. The constitution doesn’t answer a lot of things that civilized people didn’t need answered back then.
In our system, at the end of the day the Constitution means whatever the Supreme Court says it means. So theoretically any of the concerns you have could materialize.
That is such a disgusting picture. Can’t believe that socialist, baby-killing nation is the once devoutly religious Ireland where my ancestors came from.
Can this be changed or reversed somehow??
Thanks for your detailed reply, Dan.
Regarding your statement above: I'm definitely concerned about these voters as well.
the Irish got pretty mad about the Magdalene Laundries
As a principle, I am against referendums. Citizens do not have the time to become legislators. All of this should be debated in the legislature. What happened here was an example of direct democracy. California is huge on referendums. We know that it's not working in California, obviously.
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.