US Supreme Court kills abortion rights , thoughts?

[AnnaTumbles]

I support the decision

I don't support the decision

[Staximus]

Abortions are still available in most states and the ones that outlaw them still have clauses that allow them in certain circumstances. This girl I have known since high school has had at least 10 abortions, just because she or one of her fuckboys are too stupid to stop fucking around for 5 minutes and go around the corner to 7-11 and buy some condoms. I think that's part of the problem. The pro life crowd thinks people are treating babies like they are disposable and like human life has no value, and sees that as evil. It's kind of like crazy vegans think all animal lives are sacred and we shouldn't eat animals. Animals die, people die. Death is part of life. Every life is like a leaf on a tree. Some leaves fall off before others, it's the natural order of things. For us to be able to decide when any life ends is a moral debate that never ends. My friend and his girlfriend decided to get her an abortion about 16 years ago. He said all he could think about after it was over was things like "who would that kid have grown up to be? The next Einstein or Hitler, who knows". He says he thought about how everyone is born an individual and that individual is now gone, and wanted to know his child that could have been born. It was a heavy weight on his mind for a long time. She ended up getting pregnant a couple years later and they had a son. He turned out to be the best kid ever and that made him think about it all over again. I support a woman or girl's right to get an abortion if her life is at risk, in cases of rape, etc. I also think that a woman shouldn't have an unwanted child that is going to be treated with resentment. Not every woman is a suitable mother and may treat the child as a burden instead of a blessing. I myself have not had any children or had them aborted. I thought I got a girl pregnant when I was 18. She ended up just having a late period. I was thinking about how the hell am I going to pay for an abortion and started investing in condoms. My mom would have been pissed because she herself got pregnant at 18 with my older sister and put her up for adoption, which is a whole other story. Now I wish I did get that girl pregnant because my mom would have had a grandkid for a couple of years before she died when I was 20, and it would have motivated me to not be such a lazy bum haha. I'm rambling now.
As far as people and abortions- If they want to live with that, that should be their choice. It's better than the ancient or old world alternative. When a woman didn't want a baby, she just left it out in the woods at night for the wolves to eat.

[Curmudgeon]

I support the decision, because it is time to hash this out in the state legislatures, *where the issue belongs*, rather than reading into the Constitution what *just is not there*. The 9th and 10th Amendments of the Constitution ARE blatantly there, and they are clear that where the constitution is ambiguous, state law prevails. And no, I am not anti-abortion or "pro life". I am not keen on compulsory birth, but this issue needs to be hashed out in the states, where it properly belongs.

That goes for you too, who demand that "gay marriage" be called the same as marriage, whatever status it may merit, it isn't that, and nor is there anything in the Constitution that upholds it. Go fight for domestic partnership laws in your state as needed.

That said, for most, nay the overwhelming majority of women, it really will not make much of a difference. Why not? The dirty little secret about this whole issue is that for all the rights rhetoric (whether “right to choose”, or “right to life”), abortion is not an abstract "rights" concept. It is (1) a medical procedure (2) requiring a doctor willing to perform it.

In states where abortion is frowned upon - the states likely to ban or at least restrict abortion if Roe *is* somehow overturned - abortion providers are already incredibly rare. Vast swaths of these United States simply DO NOT have abortion providers as it is. Women seeking in those regions already have to make the long car or Greyhound Bus trip as it is, crossing another state line will not really matter much. This is not in some hypothetical world where Roe v. Wade didn't happen, this is the "boots on the ground" (or tires on the road, or fetuses in the womb) reality, *right now* already.

Suppose a woman in Idaho or Utah wants an abortion. Do Idaho and Utah even HAVE abortion providers? Or do those women drive or ride the Greyhound Bus over to Spokane or down to "Sin City" Las Vegas as it is already? This also goes for the rural Midwest and South even more so. All an overturning of Roe Vs. Wade would do is cause some people to change the car or bus trips, that they already have to make, a bit longer. The rural Nebraskan seeking an abortion might no longer have a provider in Omaha (if there is even one there now?), so she drives or takes the bus to Des Monies, Minneapolis at the most. As it stands, it's already a long trip for rural women seeking abortions, crossing a state line doesn't matter much.

Most abortion providers, understandably, prefer to practice in states where people support them and where clients are more likely to be, i. e., states where abortion won’t and will never be banned.

This reality means that however much energy is spent on Supreme Court nominee battles, a Roe reversal wouldn’t change the country’s total number of abortion providers much. In fact, a year after Roe is overturned, it would be the rare woman who would notice any difference in her life at all.

In their zeal to fight over the Supreme Court, though, neither side of the abortion debate has absorbed these numbers. Few pro-life groups realize they’ve fought a 50-year battle to put just a handful of doctors out of business. Pro-choice forces haven’t grasped that the millions they’ll spend lobbying to block certain nominees could be better spent tipping a lot of state and local legislative races. Or, for that matter, to build abortion clinics in solidly pro-choice states that are near the borders of states likely to enact or keep abortion bans.

And where I live in California, it's "Abortion Today, Abortion Tomorrow, Abortion Forever!" You can say that in your best George Wallace voice if you want to.

[Wsx2wsx2ws]

Wow that was insanely informative. I have never seen this clear logical approach to the concrete issues of this debate.

[Daniela1982]

The Bible always refers to children as a blessing (Psalm 127:3, 5). For most of Christian history, children were treasured because so many were lost in childbirth or died in childhood from diseases we now can prevent or cure. It wasn’t until the 1960s brought the sexual revolution and various modern methods of birth control that abortion became a more widespread acceptable consideration.

Pro-choice advocates argue that abortion has always been a reality but, historically, a dangerous one. Women turned to untrained abortionists or made their own attempts to end their baby’s lives, often in unsanitary conditions causing infection and death. Pro-choice advocates also argue abortion saves women’s lives and that this is an “either/or” equation, where the death of the unborn must happen to save the lives of their mothers. This argument, however, is disingenuous and misleading.

Of course, some people will always seek what they want regardless of laws or morality. No one argues that overturning Roe v. Wade will end all abortions. But unborn children have no choice about their own survival. Pregnant mothers have choices. It’s dangerous to choose “back-alley” abortions or rely on untrained abortionists, which could lead to devastating consequences, but women can make other choices. They are hard choices, and women in any circumstances deserve compassion when they face an unwanted pregnancy, but the unborn deserve compassion and the right to survive their mother’s womb.

Since Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, medical technological advances have allowed us incredible views into the development of unborn children. Photos and ultrasound images in utero have convinced many women of the humanity of their unborn children. The age viability of premature infants is getting earlier due to advances in care. Pro-life advocate (and former Planned Parenthood employee) Dr. Patti Giebink argues in her book Unexpected Choice that other medical advances mean the odds of an abortion needing to happen to save a mother’s life are negligible.

But, even scientific evidence of life in the womb and the humanity of the fetus has become evident, pro-choice advocates have promoted abortion as the single solution, a right to end those lives. This attitude is frightening in what it says about modern culture.

This is why Christians continue to advocate for the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade. More than that, it’s why Christians speak out on behalf of these children. Other nations and cultures have turned to forced abortions for population management or allow selective abortion to reduce congenital disabilities. There are anecdotal reports of individuals seeking gender selection through abortion. These are inevitable practices once death becomes an acceptable solution. A mother’s womb should be a child’s safest place; not a minefield of politically, culturally, or selfishly motivated choices.

[Snsl153]

"Abortion is healthcare" - feminists
"What about MY health?" - child about to be aborted

[Daniela1982]

That is one of the things that is permissible for an abortion - if a mother's life would be in jeopardy if she carries the baby to term. In the old days of the old west, a lot of women died giving birth.

[MTC29]

It kills nothing. It shifts the issue back to the individual states, where it had been and where it belonged.

I have read that Massachusetts is welcoming women to come to the state to be scrapped and vacuumed (as I understand the procedure). I'm sure that there are several other blue states which will serve as abortion destination/vacations.

I don't care how many times a woman aborts- ladies, put your feet in the stirrups, but Roe v. Wade was a bad decision and long overdue to be overturned.

[Goforit1010]

I agree WITH that decision.

Abortion was NEVER a "right". It's NEVER been codified into law at the Federal level even though Democrats have had MULTIPLE opportunities to do so. Currently, several states allow it now BUT nearly EVERY state outlawed it prior to Roe v. Wade.

That decision was wrongful from the start! The decision that came down yesterday is EXACTLY what should have been in 1973 - leave it up to the individual states to decide. (Unfortunately) Abortion has NOT been outlawed. I have no idea why the left is wailing over this SCOTUS decision.

[Danny_dan92]

I’m actually both pro gun and pro choice.


Which is apparently rare since people who are pro gun are pro life and the other way around for the other type of people.


That being said, what bothers me about this. Is that people who like me, are pro gun and all that. Have no issue with the government restricting women’s medical decisions.


But if I recall correctly… they like myself said “my body my choice” when it came to the vaccine mandates. Saying they refuse to let the government control their medical choices.


This is no different

[bolverk]

The US Supreme Court has not 'killed' abortion rights, control has been returned the individual States level, all of the serious needs are still in place, abortion of a pregnancy due to Rape, Due to medical need (foetus threatening the life of the mother, foetal complications, etc).
I have noticed that it is only women from one social class who is raving about the repeal of Roe v Wade. abortion will no longer be the first line of contraception, this may persuade women to take other birth control methods more seriously, they have over 30 to choose from.

[TheFlak38]

Ah yes. Lost their right to murder their unborn babies and continue to whore themselves into oblivion without responsibilities. Then we have stupid bitches like this one here telling us that women don't avoid responsibilities: Why do so many men (particularly among the MGTOW crowd) believe that women don't like to take responsibility for their own actions? Not so long ago you all forced people to inject experimental gene therapy into their bodies.

[MrPickles13]

I disagree with the decision. It's not fair to make someone have to go through with pregnancy and that when they don't want to for many reasons. Assault, financial, not wanting to be a parent. The fact is it can be better for some to not have children as some shouldn't. And well accidents can happen.

I fully think it's the woman's full right to make the decision but I feel like if in a relationship with someone there should at the least be a discussion about it as well a relationship is a partnership. While the man shouldn't have any overall say in the decision I also think the parties should be able to have a discussion about it and share thoughts and feelings. If that makes sense. That is obviously circumstance dependent.

[NamerOfStars]

That people really ought to READ the damn decision before commenting on it. They didn't kill anything; they ENFORCED the rights the Constitution guarantees.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf

[Panzer21]

Pretty sure all the states where it was legal, its still legal. And where it was illegal, its still illegal.

Nothing has really changed.

Going to have to accept that in some places people prioritze the rights of the fetus, and some people prioritize the rights of the mother. Go to the place that you agree with, and practice safe sex no matter where you are.

[Waldoe]

It was Never a "Constitutional" issue, so the Federal Courts Never had Jurisdiction in the 1st place... There is NOTHING in the US Constitution about abortion, now it goes back the lower courts and Local laws, where it should be. If it comes up in my area, I will vote for a Woman's right to decide... because I support that... BUT it is NOT a Constitutional Right. Change the "US Constitution" if you wish, that should be pretty simple.

[WindAtMyBack]

They didn't kill abortion rights. All they did was say it's not the federal government's jurisdiction. Overturning Roe makes the federal government completely neutral.

[Guy__]

I support education, and morality. Not indoctrination and obedience, which is clearly demonstarted when people only attempt to choose one of two lesser evils.

[Guy__]

Someone asked "would you rather have a pedophile or a murderer babysitting your child?"

[RolandCuthbert]

I am just amazed that women don't seem to understand, this argument is not about life.

It is about control.

[genericname85]

Are there exceptions? Or are people just oversimplifying it? Cause i agree that you should not have the right to buy an abortion like you buy a condom or a birth control pill.

[Cubus]

It doesn't kill abortion rights. It just leaves the decision for states to decide, just how Xth amendment says. Roe vs Wade was unconstitutional, so it's good it was repelled.

[Agape93]

I don't support it or anyone who does. Fuck em all.

[BillyBalls]

Abortion on demand is not health care... it is birth control of the last result.

Don't want a kid... don't get pregnant.

Problem solved!

Everyone is happy!!

[TallAnon]

If a woman wants to abort within a reasonable timeframe, it's her body to do so with. In many cases I would like the man to have some say in it too, but this is the direct opposite direction of that.

[crmoore]

Less power needs to be with the federal government, and more power needs to be allocated to the states. So I support it.

[loveslongnails]

A giant step backwards for all women. You can thank Trump for that. And you can not thank Biden for failing to expand the Supreme Court.

[Anonymous]

I think it’s showing that the government is trying to control womens bodies even more now, they don’t have a say in reproduction apparently, prepare for overpopulation and more kids left at door steps or mutilation