How do you feel about the Supreme Court draft opinion over likely overturning Roe v. Wade?

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Legally its a good ruling, regardless of the merits of the policy which will now be decided by elected State legislators. Roe V. Wade was a posterchild of lawless Federal court edicts.

The court literally invented a complex system of rules out of whole cloth and imposed it upon the people and their states unilateral. You will not find a "Trimester" system in any law written by any legislator or ratified by the people, much less the Federal constitution.
A court that can unnaturally do such a thing could just as easily do anything and everything else.

Which is why this kind of behavior is banned in numerous areas of the Federal Constitution including, Article 3 and the 9th, and 10th amendments.

As for the policy of abortion if you look at a political map and how states have largely found ways to enact their policy regardless via a thousand cuts nothing really will change other than the fact that laws will be more direct and honest on the matter.

[NamerOfStars]

I'd need to actually read it; I've always been the "wait for the actual ruling" type. If it's a tenth amendment thing, I could agree with that.

In the meantime, the schadenfreude of people who screamed about others not wanting to take an untested gene therapy bemoaning the loss ability to make their own medical decisions is just dandy. Still schadenfreude, but dandy.

[Roxxy99]

Mixed feelings. On one hand, I have moral objections to abortion, especially late term procedures. On the other hand, this was tied to the right to privacy. Will the government now use this precedent to erode other privacy rights? What if the Bible Belt wants to ban contraception for instance. The legal argument would seemingly be the same. It’s making me a little nervous. Closing Pandora’s box is much more difficult than opening it.

[monorprise]

Why do you need the federal government to define and enforce a "right to privacy" and what does such a right to not be seen have to do with what you put in your own body?

The fact that they have already redefined such a right to impose their policy in unrelated areas as what you put in your own body demonstrates very clearly they can't be trusted with such undefined powers.

As for the southern states, why are you more concerned about what their people choose to permit and forbid than what your own state and people choose to permit and forbid?

Are Southern States colonies not entitled to make the same legal judgements on what goods & services are allowed as northerner States?

For example many northerner States tried to force people to take the COVID-19 vaccine the people of the Southern States found that abhorrent and refused to cooperate with such a mandate.

Should the southern states have impose their view on the Northerner States by force in that regard?

[abc3643]

@monorprise
Southern states shouldn't be states at all!
With the end of the Confederacy, each one of those states should have been wiped out or at least not permitted to fully rejoin the union for 300 years.
Frankly, Sherman and Grant and Lincoln showed way too much mercy.
The wonderful thing about a successful genocide is that there are no victims of it to complain about it.

Don't bother replying.
I am muting the question.

[SaoirseS]

I’ll wait until the final opinion is published. I’m the meantime, I’ll watch the four states that are cocked and locked with the most bizarre trigger laws continue to compete for the most stupid title.

[OlderAndWiser]

The MSM is intentionally misreporting the effect of the opinion. The opinion would leave it to each individual state to determine the circumstances under which abortions would be available in their state.

[monorprise]

Indeed if people can't trust their state legislator to make a reasonable compromise on this issue, then being born, i would suggest abortion policy is the least of their concerns.

The same State legislator after all already makes the policy on murder and countless other things far more likely to harm you than abortion.

[tartaarsaus]

Gonna be interesting when lawmakers cite “judeo-Christian values” as a reason to ban abortion. Meanwhile, Maimonides who is by far the single most important Jewish scholar, responsible for codifying much of Jewish law we know today, endorsed the right of abortion for women in the 12th century.


Ironically, a ban on abortion would violate some religious obligations under abortion and therefore mean Jewish women would not be able to exercise their religion.

[tartaarsaus]

More generally, retarded because abortion should be a general right across all states.

[tartaarsaus]

*under Jewish law

[tartaarsaus]

And to finish off this thought, for many this is mostly purely Christian objection to abortion based on their own religious ideas. So don’t drag Jews into this.

More importantly, why should anyone who is not Christian live their life according to Christian rules?

[Asker]

Well, I’m not religious and I’m pro-life.

For some reason, a lot of people like to think that the only people who are pro-life are religious, specifically of the Christian faith.

That bit about Jewish women not able to practice their religion due to a ban on abortion is unknown to me, but then again I’m not Jewish nor have extensive knowledge on this topic.

I listen to Ben Shapiro a lot and if you know who he is he’s Jewish. I haven’t heard him bring this up whenever he talks about abortion. I would be interested to know his thoughts on it if it is true.

From my understanding, Judaism has quite a wide variety of exercises or practices. In other words, there’s a lot
of ways that people practice this religion and they are all equally valid under Judaism. There is quite a diversity of thought in this community.

[tartaarsaus]

Oh sure, didn’t mean that all operate from religious ideas.

With respect to Judaism, sure, there are different perspectives. But the views of important scholars like Rashi and Maimonides are foundational to all groups under Judaism and most of our current understanding is based on them.

As such, people who diverge from this simply are very small groups. And well, people are of course free to form their own views. But if they ignore the main rabbinic, talmudic and Biblical sources on this (again interpreted by the rabbinic and talmudic sources), they aren’t really gonna be taken seriously and will be very fringe.

With respect to Shapiro, he simply doesn’t much align with these essential scholars. For example, under Jewish law, a fetus is not a person until he or she is born. And for the first 40 days, it is simply is regarded as ‘fluid’. Another unequivocal thing is that under any circumstance, the physical and mental health of the mother always takes precedence over any fetus. And again invoking the rabbinic sources that are critical today, abortion is mandated in some cases.

[Asker]

Well, I’m no expert.

I just feel like, many Jewish women, I’d probably say the majority of Jewish women in the US would align with the pro-life side.

[SolitarySolace]

Its the correct decision. It's also exposing all of the selfish women out there who want to play God while having a right they're attempting to keep for themselves when reproduction takes two in order to occur. If women want to go on a sex strike because of it, it's only benefiting men by preventing them from having to deal with child support as well as preventing men from having to be forever tied to a woman he doesn't need.

[NYCQuestions1976]

Nothing has been decided yet. However, if this leak is indeed the final decision from the Supreme Court, the "right to choose" won't become illegal. It just means that each state will have the right to have their own set of laws. The most populated states in the country, other than Texas and maybe a few populated "swing" states (like Florida and Ohio), will still have the right to choose in place. Also, I'm not sure how it will affect federal funding, if at all.

[monorprise]

Indeed if people can't trust their state legislator to make a reasonable compromise on this issue, having been born, I would suggest abortion policy should be the least of their concerns with their state legislator.

The same State legislator after all already decided what murder is, and a infinite domain of other far more dangerous issues.

[007kingifrit]

not in favor as i think some red states will go too far. i want abortions for rape, incest, and poverty. in general i think we are better with it than without it. but the left has become so irrational and spoiled and hypocritical with covid vax that i like seeing them lose also

[genericname85]

i think it's a huge planned distraction from other things that are currently quite important. just like the depp heard trial. fun and games for the masses, while the people in power continue their corruption behind the scenes.

[NathanDavis]

I don't know... I have not read the 98 pages leaked document

[ArtemisSilver]

Seems like there might be better things to do than re open old wounds. There are so many legitimate crisis in motion why create artificial drama.

[hi_it_is_me123]

These people have no right to say my body and choice when it comes to covid vax then

[BCRanger10]

I seriously hope it happens.

[NorthwestRider]

Abortions are here to stay

[shortster]

Someone should be fired for leaking it.

[Wade12345]

Thank God!

[fireforeffect]

I love it.