Abortion. Roe vs Wade for or against?

[USLegionary]

For

Against

[nightdrot]

It is not quite clear if the question is asking about the reasoning of Roe or the impact of its' outcome. In terms of the former, even the late - and quite liberal - Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, although she favored the outcome, believed that Roe was, as she said, poorly reasoned and poorly written and destined to be overturned.

Of course, that has proven to be the case. Roe, in effect, rooted a right to abortion - which appears nowhere in the Constitution, in a right to privacy, which appears nowhere in the Constitution, but it was argued was, rather, found in the "prenumbra" of the Constitution. Suffice to say, that proved too convoluted and too arcane to endure and it was gradually whittled down until it was, finally, abolished.

As to abortion itself, the British statesman and political philosopher Edmund Burke wrote, "The effect of liberty to individuals is that they may do as they please. We ought see what it will please them to do before we risk congratulations." Therein lay the problem with laws that permit abortion on demand.

A society that premises its law as "Choice"- to use the locution of abortion rights advocates - effectively leaves open the question of the value of human life. It becomes not a standing principle, but a subjective judgment to each individual. In such a society, human life becomes not an end in itself, but mere instrument. Life becomes not an object whose preservation is the highest standard, but rather a convenience to be maintained or not according to the satisfaction of another's will.

We shape our laws and then our laws shape us - see also the civil rights laws of the 1960s which have effected a revolution in race relations. (The idea that a black man and a white man cannot sit together at the same lunch counter is as alien to this generation as Neptune. Yet in 1965 it was pretty much the norm.)

Inherent then in the pro-choice argument is the idea that life has no value save that which each person chooses to attach to it. It denies society any authority to make a collective judgment on such questions. Therefore, in this view, the law may not afford protection to life except at some arbitrarily defined (and inherently subjective) point.

This then conduces to an assertion of power over rights. Life is maintained not as its own end, but according to the will of the person who, effectively, controls it because they can. An ethic of convenience is established and it is a slippery slope on which to build a culture and a legal edifice.

Such a society will not value life that sees life as not an end, but as a means to some other end. Indeed, that is why at about the same time as the culture began to shift on the abortion question we also saw a rise in child abuse, spousal abuse, divorce, out of wedlock births and other social pathologies. These were not unrelated phenomena.

Aristotle said that the first questions of politics are, "How ought we to live? What kind of a people do we wish to be?" The implicit answer of those who support abortion on demand is, in effect, that it is nobody's business. Predictable results follow. One cannot expect the society to absent itself from collective moral judgments on the value of life and then expect an ethical social order to result.

[FunkyMonkee]

As far as I know, the case has something to do with rape or abuse; NOT just abortions, in general

In any case, I do NOT think abortion should be illegal!!

There are incidents where a girl/woman gets pregnant from a rape or incest, there are cases when she's only 10 to 15 years old, there are cases where, even if she's a consenting adult and originally WANTED the baby but then, found out that, the way her particular body works, if she has the baby, either she or the baby, or both will die!! Girls/women in these situations SHOULD HAVE ACCESS to SAFE, PROFESSIONALLY DONE abortions!! HOW is it ANYBODY ELSE'S BUSINESS what she chooses to have done in this situation?

[USLegionary]

Who pays for it?

[FunkyMonkee]

She does, of course, unless she's got medical insurance that'll cover it.

[Anonymous]

There is nothing to argue. It’s unconstitutional so it goes back to the states. If you want an abortion, there are plenty of states that allow abortion up to 2nd trimester and some that allow 3rd trimester. Just move to a state that has the values you find most important. That’s the beauty of America.

[Yurvurst_Knightmer]

The government has no right to force women to go through with unwanted pregnancies and have children they never asked for. Not to mention the rape victims who have to raise their rapists child.

[USLegionary]

Who is forcing them?

[LimitedBenefits101]

Roe vs Wade is the best thing thats has happened so far in 2022

A lot of women are finally gonna stop being horse and take RESPONSIBILITY.

[Nadim171]

Well, I'd rather have republicans win. I don't care about abortion. It's not a big deal. Spread your legs less often and you wouldn't have a problem.

[Massageman]

Against murder.

[MzAsh]

Pro.

[anylolone]

Against roe v. wade, not necessarily abortion.

[hostboy__fastestlaps]

Neither. True answer: NADIA Act

[LordOfThePines]

I am wholly in favor of it.

[SmokinAces2000]

For.