www.nbcnews.com
We’re where we should be. Each State determines their abortion law.
States shouldn't have the ability to make their own rules on it
This must be fake news. I have been REPEATEDLY, nay CONSTANTLY, reminded that the “GOP majority” on the Court are mere lapdogs for GOP policies and ALWAYS vote politics and ignore statutes and the Constitution to do so.Should make liberals happy.
Supreme Court rejects bid to restrict access to abortion pill
The court found that anti-abortion doctors who questioned the FDA’s easing of access to the pill did not have legal standing to sue.
If abortion is murder, that is not something that can be left to the states. I recognize this is the politically expedient position for Republicans currently since there isn't consensus that it is indeed murder.
says the guy who has apparently never read the Constitution or any case about substantive due process
Because choice up to determined amount of weeks should be a right for everyone and not dependent on some yahoo at the state level.
I would think the most ardent pro-lifers would be unhappy with leaving abortion entirely up to the states. This means some states will essentially allow abortion from conception to just before birth. I’m not an ardent pro-lifer, but I’m opposed to abortion in the 2nd and 3rd trimester with exceptions of death of the baby or danger to the physical health of the mother. I don’t approve of either Presidential candidate’s position on abortion.
I’d allow abortions up to six weeks with exception for “real” threat to life of the mother.
Allowed first 15 weeks, give or take, and banned after that with very rare exceptions.
They can remain unhappy. The objective should be saving as many human lives as possible and leaving it to the states currently accomplishes that. There is zero chance of a federal ban, because a majority of the country are for allowing human life to be killed.
At least 20-21 weeks. The 20-week appointment is important for looking at development.
I agree but I think Republicans should get creative with other legislation. As an example, require an ultrasound before the procedure or even better require a visit to a non profit like PreBorn. Ensure they are making an informed decision.
Not what the polls show:
www.forbes.com
Trying hard to keep losing the women’s vote. Why in the world should they need to have an ultrasound first?
I wasn’t clear. I meant a federal ban that eliminated all (or least a majority of abortions). It would need to be 6 weeks or less, which your data shows there isn’t any support for at the federal level. 99% of abortions happen before week 20 and 95% happen before week 15.Not what the polls show:
“The further into the pregnancy, with a June Gallup poll finding that while 69% support abortion in the first trimester of a pregnancy, that drops to 37% in the second trimester and 22% in the third trimester.”
How Americans Really Feel About Abortion: The Sometimes Surprising Poll Results One Year After Roe Overturned
America may be consistently divided in identifying as “pro-life” or “pro-choice”—but polls show consistent support through the years for abortion rights, though not in all cases.
My position is basically America’s position.
Really? You don't think they should see first what they are aborting? Do you frequently receive a wrapped gift and throw it in the trash without opening it?
Your better argument is “informed consent for any medical procedure requires as much actual medical info as technologically possible” - not “trying to shock them into a moral decision I prefer.”
We will eventually. We might settle on viability instead of conception, but there will be a federal ban.
“Theological morality” and law/government don’t mix well in our country. There is no way for law to satisfy everybody. And in this country, “religion REQUIRES the law to be XYZ” is not an option.
Ah, the “guilt trip.”
Why the aversion to, at the point a pregnant woman leans toward abortion, offering free pre natal, delivery, and post partem care? Includng free adoption services for parents who want to raise a child?
We have plenty of “theological morality” laws. For example it’s illegal to murder another person. Also, I don’t think someone needs to be religious to be against abortion.
This case isn't about abortion. It's about the courts second guessing the FDA. Glad they didn't fall for it.Should make liberals happy.
Supreme Court rejects bid to restrict access to abortion pill
The court found that anti-abortion doctors who questioned the FDA’s easing of access to the pill did not have legal standing to sue.
This is basically me. I know how I feel about it (against it) and how I want to manage how I conduct myself. Then on the other hand (if in a leadership role), I want to limit how I "push" my ideals onto others and how they conduct their own affairs.
The GOP could win the issue by banning, with rare exceptions, abortions after 21 weeks. Let the states do what they want prior to 21.
I wonder if they will ultrasound everyone before the DNC convention in Chicago? There's going to be blood shed there, for sure !
