Roe v. Wade FAQ: What if abortion rights law gets overturned?

[admin]

Here are answers to questions about what could happen if the landmark ruling is overturned.

Roe v. Wade FAQ: What if abortion rights law gets overturned? : Read more

 

[Hayseed]

The article answered that question in a very narrow context. The article answers if you, are the one seeking an abortion. But the headline question has far more important consequences for this country as a whole, not the group seeking an abortion.

First of all, just like a jury, be leery of anticipating the result. The draft was confirmed, but I don't believe the final decision was. One would think, the court would at least confirm or deny the final decision on this one case. The final result might be a little different. In any case, if they delay the real decision, and there is a change to it, then people will say that the leak, politically changed it. So, the only way to shred the potential political stain, is to release it quickly. It's a real cluster, politically. And this count wants to appear clean, above all. No matter any decision.

For me, as an American citizen, it means the court, has finally realized, that this court did not have the authority for such a 1973 decision. They just might follow the Constitution, which would be very refreshing. Our Constitution limits the court, limits the president and bureaucracy, and limits the congress from us. It protects us from these idiots. The problems that plague us do not come from the people. They ALL come from our government and experts. The liberal college degrees have been in charge of all aspects of our society for the last 50+ years. Not the common people. They just get to pay for all of it.

So, for me, if it's true, it's a start. Most of the courts rulings in it's history have been un-constitutional.

You don't have to be a lawyer to see it. And they all use various legal theories and mechanisms to do it. Look how much authority it has given to DC bureaucracy over all the states. This is against the 10th amendment. The court has a perverse history as far as the Constitution goes.

That's how I take it. Central government is always corrupt government. And it corrupts everything else. Look at the corruption of DC. The corruption of our institutions. The corruption of academia. The corruption of our media.

It has produced a mist of delusion and confusion.

 

[Snorrie]

What was proposed was that a court created constitutional right was in fact unconstitutional. The remedy is for the states to pass a constitutional amendment. With a divided country that's not feasible. Consider that humans have through religion, culture and economics separated themselves from the animal kingdom. We consider ourselves as specially created beings rather than as part of the planet's Nature, Environment and Evolution. Perhaps we should re-examine our role in the planet's biology of species existence using such as a basis for people deciding the morality of a contentious issue such as abortion, or the death penalty.

 

[Hayseed]

I don't believe that religion, culture and economics separated us for the animal kingdom. A reflection did. Just look in a mirror. We are not from this animal kingdom. We are completely out of place here. And we all remain very puzzled about it.

 

[Snorrie]

Actually our DNA tells the tale of exactly who we are, and our place in the Animal Kingdom. From a common ancestor, humans and Chimpanzees separated into separate species 7 to 5 million yo. There are four extant genera of hominids consisting of 7 or 8 species of which we are one genus with one species. I recommend the book "Who We Are and How We Got Here" by David Reich. For follow on reading, I suggest, "African Genisis" by Robert Ardrey and the "The Ascent of Man" by Jacob Bronowski. Both somewhat dated but salient to my contention.

 

[Hayseed]

I don't think life is just a collection of molecules. If it were, it would be all over the universe. Everybody says we have an EM force, gravity force, weak and strong nuclear force. What about a life force? There is a force on this planet, that for whatever reason, can manipulate elements, compounds and molecules into UN-natural configurations and combinations. No where else in the universe, only here. Living molecules have a totally different motion and movement from any natural material. It has to consume, grow and replicate. Life has to come from previous like, life. And it must die. The most unique cycle of all. An un-natural cycle. But no life force is recognized. It's much more than the ingredients or temperature of our soup. A wonder greater than physicality that no one wonders.

We wonder alone.

 

[Hayseed]

Wow, I guess I was really off target with my supreme court assessment. Apparently the chief justice wants to lobby to the very end of session, to preserve the 1973 decision. The court's integrity is secondary. Of course one could argue, that this is what a session is for, and this is nothing but N.O.P. The leak be damned. But the self exposure and the hudu about it, has had some interesting theories about the motive behind it. It seems very clear to both sides. How long does it take to trace internet, call usage and internal network logs, for a small group of people? At least he didn't call the FBI. Talk about leaks! The supreme court is suppose to be a separate power, I wonder how well they can investigate. And what data bases they have access to.

 

[Snorrie]

Actually Hayseed's post #5 alludes to the seminal issue about life, (and abortion in particular). I.E.: How did life start? Subsequently, how is human life uniquely different from other life? A bunch of chemicals subjected to primordial physical conditions which would indicate that human life is no different than any other life ? Or a "spark" from a supernatural source outside of science which would indicate a special position in life just for humans based upon revelations and possibly applicable to extinct human species. I don't know the answer; I'm agnostic as well as misanthropic. I want proof based upon our best so far scientific, repeatable, independently testable, subject to change evidence. Thus ,I subscribe to DNA and anthropological evidence. I prefer public debate with all of its emotion and characterizations, and letting the voters decide contentious issues via the legislative processes. Right now it appears that the current abortion issue is going to be marked example of such preference.