Does the Public Understand Roe v Wade?
 

I would estimate that well over 95% of people in this country do not even understand Roe v Wade. If Roe v Wade was overturned, that does not outlaw abortion.

For those of you that don't know what a reversal of the Roe v Wade decision would mean, it would simply leave the decision up to each individual state. So it is quite possible that some of the really conservative states might ban abortion. But it would remain legal throughout the vast majority of the country.

I don't really have a strong opinion on the issue. But if Roe v Wade was overturned and abortion was made illegal in a few conservative states, I don't think that would be the end of the world.

Good point. I agree that it would revert to a state's rights issue, like anywhere else that Federal involvement is not present.

Not sure that the general public automatically factors in state issue vs. federal right away on support or opposition on major issues.

I'm just glad Rupert is back to educate us all. We're so lucky.

yeah, too bad i won't be partaking of that gift.

individuals should not have the right to tell others what to do with their bodies and their reproductive organs. if you dont like abortion, dont have one. it should not be left up to voters or state goverments. the supreme court has already made a decision on this years ago. in my opinion, Ryan was a big turnoff when the abortion question came up.. biden schooled him there. then again, why people vote soley on the issue of abortion is beyond me.

Because there are people out there that will vote for this guy BECUASE of his views.

http://www.cnn.com/video/standard.ht...ms-science.cnn

Does the executed individual get a vote?

its crazy, isnt it?

I spoke to a young girl at work who is very very religious. She is all for Romney. I asked her why. She said that she believes Romney would put us in Gods good graces. Apparently God only judges america based on our president.. :zz:.. anways.

I explained to her that Romney is not a Christian, and that the Morman religion is different than Christianity. I let her know that being a Morman compared to a Christian is like being Jewish, or Muslim, compared to being a Christian. I dont think she understood.

you arent alive when you cannot support your own life, breath.

I do not think abortions should be allowed after the first trimester. If it gets to the point where the fetus can thrive outside the room.. that is no good.

You really want 16 year old girls who get pregnant nowadays to not be able to choose to have a first trimester abortion? so they dont get that chance to grow up and will most likely live off taxpayers?

abortions should also not be on the public dime. exceptions for rape, etc.

choosing to have an abortion because you dont use proper birth control is not an honorable thing. I have no idea how people, in this day in age where birth control is available pretty much everywhere, have unwanted pregnancies. I dont like it, I dont respect it... but I am certainly not going to tell someone what they can do with their own body, own life. I have my own life to worry about, and I dont want others to tell me what to do with my own body either.

Joey is the king of inflamatory language. He is trying to engage you into calling him a name at which point he will declare victory :zz:

joey and i have always had civil debates. I respect him.

abortion is a sensitive subject. I'm my opinion, Roe vs wade is law, lets all move on. Though i certainly understand where pro-lifers come from.

You're confusing life with viability - which was an arbitrary constructed argument in Roe V. Wade to decide in favor of allowing abortion.

The baby is growing. Only living things grow. If left alone, you will have a baby in 9 months. That is the whole purpose for the abortion, right? To not have a baby. But, to not have the baby, you need to kill it, or else it will grow and be born.

How is it that the 16 year old girl you refer to, if typical, can run rings around her parents in operating her computer or smartphone, knows enough not to smoke, and is supposedly from our smartest generation yet, but will become pregnant without considering the consequences?

Anyway - I thought Biden's abortion comments were his weakest part. He said "I don't want to impose my view" on the American people. Well, supporting Roe V. Wade is sure as hell imposing it on those whose lives will be summarily ended without a shred of due process of law.

I respect you too Antitrust. And I enjoy the debate. Yes - I am passionate about this subject, and I hope to change minds of those who disagree.

Yes - let's move on. I responded above - the tie in is to the debate.

Because most people don't walk around like programmed robots. When you're 16, you're dumb. You make poor decisions. You act in the moment and don't think about the consequences of your actions.

Of course, not everyone is like that, but I think most of us non robots can think back to when we were 16 and I'm sure we all made a lot of really bad decisions. That's life man.

The real irony here is the same people who oppose abortion, are also the same who complain about government handouts. So, we don't want these dumb 16 year olds to have an abortion, and then are outraged that they cannot support themselves and their children because they are ill prepared. Makes sense.

Ayn Rand on abortion:

"If any among you are confused or taken in by the argument that the cells of an embryo are living human cells, remember that so are all the cells of your body, including the cells of your skin, your tonsils, or your ruptured appendix—and that cutting them is murder, according to the notions of that proposed law. Remember also that a potentiality is not the equivalent of an actuality—and that a human being’s life begins at birth.

The question of abortion involves much more than the termination of a pregnancy: it is a question of the entire life of the parents. As I have said before, parenthood is an enormous responsibility; it is an impossible responsibility for young people who are ambitious and struggling, but poor; particularly if they are intelligent and conscientious enough not to abandon their child on a doorstep nor to surrender it to adoption. For such young people, pregnancy is a death sentence: parenthood would force them to give up their future, and condemn them to a life of hopeless drudgery, of slavery to a child’s physical and financial needs. The situation of an unwed mother, abandoned by her lover, is even worse.

I cannot quite imagine the state of mind of a person who would wish to condemn a fellow human being to such a horror. I cannot project the degree of hatred required to make those women run around in crusades against abortion. Hatred is what they certainly project, not love for the embryos, which is a piece of nonsense no one could experience, but hatred, a virulent hatred for an unnamed object. Judging by the degree of those women’s intensity, I would say that it is an issue of self-esteem and that their fear is metaphysical. Their hatred is directed against human beings as such, against the mind, against reason, against ambition, against success, against love, against any value that brings happiness to human life. In compliance with the dishonesty that dominates today’s intellectual field, they call themselves “pro-life.”

By what right does anyone claim the power to dispose of the lives of others and to dictate their personal choices?"

who's words are these? ayn rand? they sound very unintelligent. adoption is not a terrible thing at all. there are many people who would be loving parents who cannot have babies.

That is a shameful statement... the majority of that statment is quite ridiculous actually.

Interesting post.

"For such young people, pregnancy is a death sentence" This is obviously figurative.

Abortion is always a death sentence for the aborted. This is quite literal.

So, if we must choose between the figurative death sentence and the real one, ummm.... I'm thinking we avoid the real one.

the first paragraph was plain stupid. i'm sorry, but abortion is not equal to cutting your fingernails or having your appendix removed.

2nd paragraph is the best of the three

the 3rd paragraph has the word "hate" in it way too much, and makes Ayn Rand look like a looney.

and the adoption line is just stupid.

yep...before he made his choice to commit a crime. that's an absurd analogy.

Ayn Rand was right. You're wrong. The "life" you claim exists immediately due to the mistake of a living being is really none of your business.

You complain about liberals wanting too much control of our lives while talking out the other side of your mouth that you want control over others.

Stop being a dic.khead.

most abortions are performed in the first eight weeks of the pregnancy. the vast majority are within the first 12-16. very, very few after that, and usually in an attempt to save the mothers' life. and virtually zero after the time period in which a fetus could concievably live if born.

and there's no way of knowing just how many are performed due to not using bc, as compared to bc failure. and it certainly can fail. as for public dime, laws have been in place since roe v wade to prevent public moneys being used, except for just what you said.

Only because the criminal sentenced to capital punishment gets due process of law and is found guilty, where the fetus is innocent by definition and gets no due process whatsoever.

Yep. It's absurd alright but not in the way you intended.

The first paragraph was a mockery of the religious pro-life nutter belief. And it was funny to me.

no one gets sentenced to death unless they first choose to commit a heinous crime.
and you're right, fetuses don't get due process, because they aren't a human being and can't present themselves in court.

banning abortion would be imposing a view. supporting roe v wade gives the individual the right to decide. so, joey, you have the right to decide never to have one.

So Ayn Rand is right about a figurative "death sentence", but in citing the real death caused by abortion I am wrong? Brilliant point - really.

I don't want to control anybody. I want there to be less murder of innocent babies - we call that abortion. I want people to think before they take risks, if they decide to take the risk anyway to realize they have the responsibility for what comes next, and that murdering an innocent person (their child) is not an option. Oh yeah - I'm a real control freak for that.

Your last statement is meaningless except as an admission that you have lost the argument by reverting to personal insults. You have nothing left to offer. Your well has run dry.

How about the person(s) who commit this murder called abortion? Have any special insults for them? I didn't kill anybody, so your words for them must be even more severe.

Does the baby have the right to decide to live?

then it should please you to know that the number of abortions performed annually has seen a steady decline over the last 20 years or so. that's without reversing roe v wade.
since birth rates are also down, it would indicate that the moves to educate more people about bc is working, and that people are mitigating risk.

a baby is protected under the laws of the land.

You're offended over my insult yet are calling anyone who has an abortion a murderer.

You're a class A dic.khead and a punk. Everything that's wrong with this country.

Absolutely. It would be great if people didn't seek out abortion, abandoning the practice like they have abandoned smoking. And education should continue in that vein and hopefully more and more people will come to respect life, plan their family expansion according to their situation and what they can accommodate and take precautions.

I would not be as forceful on this subject except for the fact that I really do believe that life begins at conception. It's about the kids. We reserve our worst punishments for those who commit crimes against children - except if they are killed in utero. Very strange set of values our society has conglomerated.

The person making the "choice" is not the same person who is dying. That's a big problem.

"Murderer" is not an insult. It is the accurate technical description for someone who chooses to act to take a life of someone else without justification.

You cannot "insult" someone by calling them a murderer if they have not killed anyone. A fetus is a living thing until aborted. Sounds like murder to me.

Those at PETA think it's murder to slay a steer to make filet mignon. Some of those same people don't see it that way with abortion.

So perspective is important.

Your vocabulary hasn't improved much since your last post.

and many, including myself, don't think life begins at conception. i know others are like yourself, and believe otherwise. i have no issue with your beliefs at all. however, much like you said above about biden, i also think people should decide for themselves, which is why the law should be left alone. that way, people can do just that.

one concern i do have tho, is many of the same who want roe v wade changed, also advocate getting rid of birth control. imo that is absolutely ludicrous as a viable suggestion, and is another example of people trying to force their beliefs on others. if people want to use the rhythm method, hey, more power to them. but i'd rather stick to tried and true methods. they say god will provide, i say he already has-he's given us the mental ability to learn how to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

sure it is. a murder is committed against a person. a living being. a fetus isn't a person, or a living being. it could eventually become one. your opinion on when life begins doesn't make you judge and jury. i think the world would be a lot better place if people would all mind their own business, and just treat each other with common courtesy, rather than worry about what somone might be doing that doesn't involve you at all. it's none of your business.

I agree with you there. There is no issue with birth control the way I see it. It's not a singular living thing until both sperm and egg join, creating a unique new DNA series and a singular, growing organism. Keeping these two things apart is perfectly fine since you will not start the process of DNA definition and subsequent growth.

I see this strictly from a science point of view of defining where human life must begin. To be a human you have to have 46 chromosomes, not just 23 like reproductive cells do. And you have to be in one piece - whether that's a zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus, etc.

If someone is subsidized thru the new Obamacare exchanges and abortion coverage is included in that policy, public money is used. Henry Hyde be damned.

That said I'm all for abortions, especially for those unable to raise kids on their own and relying on me. It's far cheaper to abort than house, feed and educate.

i tell you what, go take out a life insurance policy on your zygote when your wife gets pregnant. get a ss number for that little cluster of cells as well. and let us all know how that turns out for you. should be a piece of cake.

In retrospect this was a great call.