 | 
11-07-2005, 03:27 AM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Monticello, In
Posts: 6,744
| | | Iaal or someone, can you explain
What is the name of your state? doesn't matter
I don't understand something. With all this stuff going on with nominations to the Supreme Court they keep mentioning reversing Roe vs. Wade. I don't think I understand how this is possible. Under what circumstances can this happen?
__________________
If it seems like you fell out of the stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down, be aware, I'm going to let you know.
|
11-07-2005, 06:30 AM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: "Harvey and Me"
Posts: 25,179
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by tigger22472 What is the name of your state? doesn't matter
I don't understand something. With all this stuff going on with nominations to the Supreme Court they keep mentioning reversing Roe vs. Wade. I don't think I understand how this is possible. Under what circumstances can this happen? | Of course it can happen. The key provisions of Roe v. Wade 'they' are talking about is parental and spousal notification which Aiela voted for in the past.
If such a case presents itself under the right framework, the conservative court could vote to overturn these provisions and require not only parental notification/consent to an abortion, but also spousal and third-party (for unmarried parents) notification.
That's what is so scarey about Bush.
(that last comment was brought to you by a 51 year democrat in the Harry Truman school.)
__________________
Just because I'm a miserable human being doesn't mean I'm not right... |
11-07-2005, 07:13 AM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Monticello, In
Posts: 6,744
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by BelizeBreeze Of course it can happen. The key provisions of Roe v. Wade 'they' are talking about is parental and spousal notification which Aiela voted for in the past.
If such a case presents itself under the right framework, the conservative court could vote to overturn these provisions and require not only parental notification/consent to an abortion, but also spousal and third-party (for unmarried parents) notification.
That's what is so scarey about Bush.
(that last comment was brought to you by a 51 year democrat in the Harry Truman school.) | Let's not go there about Bush right now because I'd spend this morning having too much fun bashing him... 
So, as far as Roe goes are they talking just reversing this part or as a whole? I just don't understand how these backwards people think reversing this as a whole will benefit this country. Do they not realize that they will STILL be done? Do they not understand that BUTCHER'S will take over the job that professionals (no matter your position on it) do now? I just don't get the thinking behind it I guess.
__________________
If it seems like you fell out of the stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down, be aware, I'm going to let you know.
|
11-07-2005, 10:14 AM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 28,318
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by BelizeBreeze Aiela | Who's Aiela? Say it with me, Beebs.... Alito. Ah-leee-to. Alito. 
__________________
Children aren't coloring books. You don't get to fill them in with your favorite colors.
The Kite Runner, Khaled Hosseini |
11-07-2005, 10:32 AM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: "Harvey and Me"
Posts: 25,179
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by stealth2 Who's Aiela? Say it with me, Beebs.... Alito. Ah-leee-to. Alito. | He's republican....I don't pay that much attention.
__________________
Just because I'm a miserable human being doesn't mean I'm not right... |
12-07-2005, 12:34 PM
| | Member | | Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Arizona
Posts: 368
| | | Legal experts, please correct me if I am wrong, but...
I thought that even if Roe v. Wade were overturned, wouldn't some state laws still allow abortion? It might be more difficult for women in states that ban abortion, but a woman could still get one in some states.
Am I incorrect? (It wouldn't be the first time!)
__________________
Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. |
12-07-2005, 12:37 PM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: "Harvey and Me"
Posts: 25,179
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by InsuranceLadyAZ Legal experts, please correct me if I am wrong, but...
I thought that even if Roe v. Wade were overturned, wouldn't some state laws still allow abortion? It might be more difficult for women in states that ban abortion, but a woman could still get one in some states.
Am I incorrect? (It wouldn't be the first time!) | The only provision of Roe v. Wade that is being discussed (with the confirmation of Roberts) is the parental notification provisions.
That would not invalidate the entire decision or the relevant case law on the subject in other areas.
__________________
Just because I'm a miserable human being doesn't mean I'm not right... |
12-07-2005, 06:15 PM
| | Member | | Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Arizona
Posts: 368
| | | Thanks for clearing that up, BB.
__________________
Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. |
12-13-2005, 09:39 PM
| | Member | | Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 843
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by InsuranceLadyAZ Legal experts, please correct me if I am wrong, but...
I thought that even if Roe v. Wade were overturned, wouldn't some state laws still allow abortion? It might be more difficult for women in states that ban abortion, but a woman could still get one in some states.
Am I incorrect? (It wouldn't be the first time!) | You're pretty much right. Before Roe, states were allowed to regulate abortion any way they wanted. Some severely restricted it, some didn't. Roe v. Wade set certain minimum parameters under which abortion HAD to be made available, EVERYWHERE. Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) trimmed this back a bit.
When people talk about 'overturning Roe' what they really mean is 'removing all federal constitutional parameters on abortion and leaving it to the states', which will send us back to the status quo before Roe. |
12-15-2005, 10:02 AM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,498
| | | I am pretty sure there is a push to completely overturn the decision by the Bush administration (piece by piece), and allow states to fully regulate (or ban) abortion. Congress may get involved and also pass abortion-related laws if that occurred because of people crossing borders to states that allowed abortion.
The problem that the administration has is you still don't have enough votes even with Alito's confirmation to do that.
Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito would vote to overturn Roe.
Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kennedy would vote to not overturn it.
So there is still one vote short. Then again, Stevens is getting pretty old -- he may kick off in the next 4 years.
__________________
The giving or taking of any advice given in this forum does not constitute an attorney-client relationship and any readers of any posts acknowledge that they are not in any type of attorney client relationship with the poster.
|
12-19-2005, 10:57 PM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Broom closet
Posts: 2,377
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by badapple40 I am pretty sure there is a push to completely overturn the decision by the Bush administration (piece by piece), and allow states to fully regulate (or ban) abortion. Congress may get involved and also pass abortion-related laws if that occurred because of people crossing borders to states that allowed abortion.
The problem that the administration has is you still don't have enough votes even with Alito's confirmation to do that.
Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito would vote to overturn Roe.
Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kennedy would vote to not overturn it.
So there is still one vote short. Then again, Stevens is getting pretty old -- he may kick off in the next 4 years. | You may be right about them trying and I hope to hell that it never happens.
My concern is: where will the line be drawn? Many forms of birth control can cause a fertilized egg not to implant, thereby making it a form of abortion.
It's sad to think about what will happen to all of these unwanted babies. Republicans are slashing medicaid, CS enforcement funds, etc. Some of these children will be destitute, or worse...unloved. There are too many kids in the system that never get adopted as it is.
You can't complain about abortions and then do nothing to help the mothers through thier pregnancies.  Seems like common sense to me.
__________________
"Don't worry. It only seems kinky the first time."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Instead of being born again, why not just grow up?"
| |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Rate This Thread |  Linear Mode | | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | |
|
