+OverSword Posted November 6 #1 Share Posted November 6 (edited) With a Trump victory, Republican dominance of the Senate, and the fate of the House looming, there is a real danger that abortion in most cases could be outlawed at a federal level. Let's hope that if such a bill is introduced the President will live by his words that this is a subject best left to the states. I personally think that abortion is sad and a tragedy any time it happens and for whatever reason but if men gave birth I would want it to be my legal right. Thoughts? Edited November 6 by OverSword 6 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebra3 Posted November 6 #2 Share Posted November 6 He's got other things to do first before even thinking about that. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Razman Posted November 6 #3 Share Posted November 6 4 minutes ago, Zebra3 said: He's got other things to do first before even thinking about that. Like? Mass migrant deportation? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebra3 Posted November 6 #4 Share Posted November 6 For starters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+HerNibs Posted November 6 #5 Share Posted November 6 This terrifies me. Our state just added body autonomy/reproductive rights to our constitution. Nibs 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted November 6 Author #6 Share Posted November 6 6 minutes ago, Zebra3 said: He's got other things to do first before even thinking about that. He does, but there are any number of Congress persons that would like to push that through. If it got to his desk he may decide it a good idea to sign it depending on what else is going on politically. Regardless IMO that is the main subject that could really divide America as it's never been before. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glorybebe Posted November 6 #7 Share Posted November 6 Let's hope he knows his voters. A lot of people who believe it is a woman's choice still supported him because of the other issues in Harriss's non-existent policies. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted November 6 #8 Share Posted November 6 It was on the ballot in 10 states. The results... Results of state-level abortion ballot measures in the US election | Reuters Abortion on the Ballot: Results by State 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eight bits Posted November 6 #9 Share Posted November 6 6 minutes ago, OverSword said: With a Trump victory, Republican dominance of the Senate, and the fate of the House looming, there is a real danger that abortion in most cases could be outlawed at a federal level. Let's hope that if such a bill is introduced the President will live by his words that this is a subject best left to the states. Although the Supreme Court left the door open (I think) to federal regulation of abortion, I really doubt the "median voter" is too far away from the "trimester" system that prevailed under Roe v. Wade: only during the last three months could states be draconian, and there was no obligation for a state ever to do anything anti-choice. Assuming that that estimate is even approximately correct, Congress usually lacks the political will to wander far from the median voter's preferences. There's other stuff to worry about this morning. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted November 6 Author #10 Share Posted November 6 1 minute ago, eight bits said: There's other stuff to worry about this morning. Like what? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+HerNibs Posted November 6 #11 Share Posted November 6 4 minutes ago, eight bits said: Although the Supreme Court left the door open (I think) to federal regulation of abortion, I really doubt the "median voter" is too far away from the "trimester" system that prevailed under Roe v. Wade: only during the last three months could states be draconian, and there was no obligation for a state ever to do anything anti-choice. Assuming that that estimate is even approximately correct, Congress usually lacks the political will to wander far from the median voter's preferences. There's other stuff to worry about this morning. Oh yeah, I’m worried about A LOT of other things. Nibs 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DayoOlabisi Posted November 6 #12 Share Posted November 6 11 minutes ago, OverSword said: He does, but there are any number of Congress persons that would like to push that through. If it got to his desk he may decide it a good idea to sign it depending on what else is going on politically. Regardless IMO that is the main subject that could really divide America as it's never been before. almost all of Congress doesn't want a national solution. some just want to leave it to states, the rest don't want an actual solution because they fundraise and campaign on the problem, in either direction. meanwhile states have been and are in hyperdrive to address the issue more locally because of the federal status of the issue. this will de-prioritize the issue sufficiently that talk about the issue on the federal level, in either direction, will be just that. over time, the issue will be seen as a state issue by almost everyone. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eight bits Posted November 6 #13 Share Posted November 6 3 minutes ago, OverSword said: Like what? I wasn't sure whether to react with a haha ... I don't see the political will in DC to take this on. They will find other things to keep themselves busy. I think we have a federal government shutdown coming on December 20th unless the lame ducks kick the can to the next Congress. There's always something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted November 6 Author #14 Share Posted November 6 8 minutes ago, DayoOlabisi said: almost all of Congress doesn't want a national solution. some just want to leave it to states, the rest don't want an actual solution because they fundraise and campaign on the problem, in either direction. meanwhile states have been and are in hyperdrive to address the issue more locally because of the federal status of the issue. this will de-prioritize the issue sufficiently that talk about the issue on the federal level, in either direction, will be just that. over time, the issue will be seen as a state issue by almost everyone. So you think if it comes up for a vote to have federal standards and limitations up to a total ban applied to abortion that republicans won't want to vote for it? I think they overwhelmingly will. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted November 6 #15 Share Posted November 6 12 minutes ago, OverSword said: Like what? Raskin already stated that if they retake the House they will immediately start working on Impeachment #3. As for Abortion, I believe him when he says he wouldn't sign it. It would kindle an unnecessary fire and he won't want to be remembered for that. It wasn't right, IMO, for it to be made a one size fits all issue via Roe and it wouldn't be right to return it to one size fits all at the Federal level. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted November 6 Author #16 Share Posted November 6 1 minute ago, eight bits said: I don't see the political will in DC to take this on. I agree with that right up until a supermajority occurs on either side. We are about to have that supermajority on the republican side. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted November 6 Author #17 Share Posted November 6 1 minute ago, and-then said: It wasn't right, IMO, for it to be made a one size fits all issue via Roe and it wouldn't be right to return it to one size fits all at the Federal level. Can't agree with that. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DayoOlabisi Posted November 6 #18 Share Posted November 6 15 minutes ago, OverSword said: So you think if it comes up for a vote to have federal standards and limitations up to a total ban applied to abortion that republicans won't want to vote for it? I think they overwhelmingly will. i don't think it will make it to the floor for the reasons i mentioned. after another 8-12 years, it won't even make it to any committee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted November 6 Author #19 Share Posted November 6 Bet you a dollar 🤑 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted November 6 #20 Share Posted November 6 37 minutes ago, OverSword said: I agree with that right up until a supermajority occurs on either side. We are about to have that supermajority on the republican side. I think Trump may be a lot less of a grudgeholder, revenge seeker than the Left thinks he'll be. Granted, if they come out of the blocks repeating what they did in 2017, then all bets are off. He WILL fight that, but if they make even a moderate effort to meet him half way it could be the Republicans who are angry at him for what they may see as a "betrayal". I think he's going to be all about carving out a legacy and for him that means making the best deals possible in many areas. I just hope he doesn't try to force Netanyahu to prematurely stop fighting before they have secured their land in the north and south. I also hope he'll tread carefully on Ukraine's aid. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted November 6 #21 Share Posted November 6 The outright banning of abortions at the Federal level will never occur, not even under a Republican supermajority. Those guys like being re-elected and there aren't enough outright ban supporters in any state to get you another term. Harte 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted November 6 Author #22 Share Posted November 6 33 minutes ago, Harte said: The outright banning of abortions at the Federal level will never occur, not even under a Republican supermajority. Those guys like being re-elected and there aren't enough outright ban supporters in any state to get you another term. Harte Generally I agree with you. It's not likely under current conditions. It may become politically expedient at some point in the next couple of years to support it as conditions here and overseas change and people need to cut deals. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fraust Posted November 6 #23 Share Posted November 6 Can someone explain to me why the right to kill a healthy fetus is something we're fighting over? And if that fetus is a female, isn't aborting it taking away that woman's bodily autonomy? This argument is so stupid. People literally want to kill a living thing just because birth is inconvenient and they refuse to just accept abstinence. Why do people want to be allowed to take risks like that and make an innocent bystander pay the price. It's nuts lol there is no logic at all. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Wearer of Hats Posted November 6 #24 Share Posted November 6 1 minute ago, Fraust said: Can someone explain to me why the right to kill a healthy fetus is something we're fighting over? And if that fetus is a female, isn't aborting it taking away that woman's bodily autonomy? This argument is so stupid. People literally want to kill a living thing just because birth is inconvenient and they refuse to just accept abstinence. Why do people want to be allowed to take risks like that and make an innocent bystander pay the price. It's nuts lol there is no logic at all. It’s is far more complex than your summation suggests, Faust. Firstly, many of the abortions that occur are due to rape. So without a law allowing for abortion due to rape, you’re forcing women (and children) to give birth (potentially lethal, especially (again)if they’re children) for a baby they had no consent in creating or even consent in the actions leading up to the creation of the baby. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glorybebe Posted November 6 #25 Share Posted November 6 1 hour ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said: It’s is far more complex than your summation suggests, Faust. Firstly, many of the abortions that occur are due to rape. So without a law allowing for abortion due to rape, you’re forcing women (and children) to give birth (potentially lethal, especially (again)if they’re children) for a baby they had no consent in creating or even consent in the actions leading up to the creation of the baby. This is where the use of abortion is needing to be ironed out. There are instances like rape and incest. There are too many times it is used as birth control. One girl i knew in my younger years had three abortions before she was 20. While I believe in prochoice, there are some restrictions needed. A full term abortion is not an abortion IMO. Women AND men need to take responsibility that each time they engage in sex there will be a chance of a pregnancy. Preventative measures would drastically lower the need for abortions. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now