Decision Destroying Roe Threatens Legal Right To Interracial Marriage, Experts Warn
These news people sure like their scare tactics. They also said that there might be a ban on birth control
Top | Newest First | Oldest First
Subsumedpat · 36-40, M
Yes as the right to marry is also based on the 14th amendment and as they decoupled abortion from the protections of the 14th the same thing could happen to that. Expect a return of Women’s Health Protection Act of 2022 and for those who voted against it to face the voters in November.
View 4 more replies »
Subsumedpat · 36-40, M
SW-User
@Subsumedpat well to be fair Roe Vs Wade has been acknowelged as being on shaky legal ground constitutionally
If they were political hacks we may have seen a judgement finding the constitutional right of the unborn baby to life trumps any right of the mother
And seen the right to abortion in the US overturned. We don't see this here
By batting it directly back to elected officials they've protected the rights of states to both restrict abortion and take a woman's right to it beyond Roe versus Wade and Casey
If they were political hacks we may have seen a judgement finding the constitutional right of the unborn baby to life trumps any right of the mother
And seen the right to abortion in the US overturned. We don't see this here
By batting it directly back to elected officials they've protected the rights of states to both restrict abortion and take a woman's right to it beyond Roe versus Wade and Casey
DCarey · 46-50, M
@Subsumedpat So you believe Plessy v. Ferguson shouldn't have been overturned because stare decisis is so sacrosanct, right?
softspokenman · M
@DIABLISS We have learned that Justice Thomas' wife Genni had been calling GOP lawmakers telling them to 'back trump harder' etc, she is being subpoenaed. On Thursday the J6 committee exposed some devastating evidence about trump pressuring the DOJ to lie for him. Then on Friday Roe v wade was overturned and Justice Thomas commented that it was "Deeply Flawd". Coincidence?
softspokenman · M
@hippyjoe1955 I don't owe you anything ! I don't need to read your standard insults of "Do your own research and please try to keep up" now go away joe.
softspokenman · M
softspokenman · M
softspokenman · M
After 50 years it is considered 'deeply flawed'? With that being the reason, it sets a president that any constitutional rights or amendments can also be 'deeply flawed' depending on the SCOTUS at the time. Leaving it to the Governor of each state to decide can potentially have 50 different interpretations across the country. What is legal in one state may be illegal in another. And when a Governor leaves office the next one may have a different interpretation. "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." Chaos and confusion.
SW-User
@softspokenman yes it will mean a patchwork unless the federal government gets some legislation through. I don't know.
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@DIABLISS The only stupidity on this thread is posted by you. There was no ban of abortion in the courts ruling. There never was a right to abortion. That remains legal fiction. The demoncraps are only upset because they lost the ability to have the courts impose standards that they could not impose through the legislative process.
softspokenman · M
@hippyjoe1955 Women will die, underage girls will die, like they did before Roe v Wade and a lot of it wasn't pretty when it happened. Maybe some people need to see it.
thewindupbirdchronicles · 46-50, M
ChipmunkErnie · 70-79, M
Roundandroundwego · 61-69
@SW-User go for it
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Subsumedpat · 36-40, M
@Stereoguy And previously the court said and then re enumerated that some rights can not be voted away by the states this being one of them. So much for stare decisis.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment