Why are pro choicers afraid to fight it out state by state?

That is a seriously misleading stat, because it ignores what those limitations should be.

80% of Democrats believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

That's consistent with your stat, because there are a lot of Dems who believe that late term abortions should be regulated - still meaning that "all or most cases" is the correct description.

https://www.pewresearch.org/politic...preme-courts-decision-to-overturn-roe-v-wade/

 

It gets more complicated when you try to define (on an individual basis) when exactly "late term" is considered to begin.

Most people are not experts on this so couldn't really give an exact opinion. They just know earlier is better than later.

Personally, I think it might help the debate if we came up with the concept of a "mid term" abortion (that begins at 12 weeks).

 

yeah that's my point. The later you go in the pregnancy of fewer people are agree with right to choose.

this is a misleading stat because I guarantee you if you ask at least 80% of Democrats based on the week that number will decline as the pregnancy nears birth.

even this is misleading. Late term could mean after 12 weeks can win after eight and a half months depends on who you ask.

That's why all of these stats are garbage if they're not giving you a week by week breakdown of the percentage of people who support it.

This is good news because now the states can elect people to make the discussion on the state basis.

I think this poll is misleading. Because of many places in the US nothing changed.

 

Asking what the cutoff should be is a different subject.

The survey asked for people to choose one off two answers. And, the results show a major divide.

80% of Dems are opposed to the SC ruling.

And, the "no change" thing is you just not knowing. There were a good number of states that have draconian laws that went into effect automatically, based on the SC decision.


I'd also point out that there is a very real rich v poor aspect to this direction.

Those who are wealthy can fly to some other state - or country.

Others can not. If they get raped, tough ****. They lose your job. They could lose their housing. Healthcare is limited. They're on the dole.

Today there are whole states that don't even have abortion clinics and/or where abortion is entirely illegal.

Do you think that stops those with plane fair in their bank account?

 

What the heck debate are YOU talking about?

Here on this board???

 

I just meant, maybe it would be more helpful in classifying what people's beliefs are if we asked them what they thought about "mid term" abortions, rather than only just drawing a distinction between "late term" and "not late term".

 

Well regulating on the basis of that is all repealing RvW has done.

That's why it's misleading. It creates a false dichotomy.

And in the next election cycle those might change. Isn't that better than just some supreme dictate?

That's just trying to make this into a class war issue.

I'm not interested in that.

 

Today we're seeing the effect of zero abortions being the law.

I don't know what it is that you're leading toward.

 

The SC decision is being used to end abortion entirely.

So, all this crap about dichotomy or local nuances is just BS.

As for the class warfare, that is just a FACT.

You may not like it, but there is absolutely no denying it.

 

BS.

prove it

I'm not interested in your communist clap trap. Let's eat the Rich nonsense news just Marxism and it's all about seeing division.

So sell that crazy to someone who is buying.

 

IT ISN'T A RIGHT!

 

Certain rights should not be subject to popular opinion. If the 14th Amendment was not used to guarantee access to contraception, interracial marriage or gay marriage some states would still have laws against them on the books. SCOTUS overturned settled law and 3 justices lied to get on the court. That makes the overturning of Roe v Wade an unjust act and the need to fight state to state unjust.

 

What do you call "settled law"? Just because you tired of debating it doesn't make it "settled law".

 

"Settled law" means Roe v Wade was used as a reference or basis for many other decisions the Supreme Court made since it was passed. If it is held unconstitutional then the subsequent rulings that used it can be called into question. Can you understand the concept?

 

If it was wrong then (and it was) then it is wrong now as is everything derived from it.

 

It wasn't wrong. A fetus should not have more rights than a woman.

 

Why not?

 

You've not thought about this much, have you.

 

Why do you want WOMEN to have less rights than anyone else including a fetus?

It looks like you hate women if you don't want them to have basic human rights.....and a mindless entity having more rights than women have....

 

Why are gun nuts afraid to battle it out state by state?

 

We shouldn't have to. The right to keep and bear arms is in the constitution. Black letter law. The right to an abortion most certainly is not.

 

Is a fetus really being given "more rights" than the woman? Is anyone trying to kill the woman? Is it her very life that is at stake?

 

The woman has different levels of bodily autonomy according to the age of the fetus, so her rights overrules the fetus' right to life up to a point. Those that live in a black or white world think the fetus' rights overrule the woman's at all ages of gestation.

 

Yes, if abortion is banned a fetus has more rights than anyone else....it has the right to use another person's body to sustain it's life without their consent....a right NO ONE else has..

 

Not actually true.