No abortion allowed even after rape and/or incest. If they were attempting to get this to the Supreme Court to overturn RvW, this part of their law may not allow it to make it. I’m not a fan of infanticide, bit this seems a bit much.
Did Alabama go too far?
- Thread starter BreakingCane
- Start date
Yeah. Guess this is the response to the left’s infanticide extreme laws moving forward. Can’t stand either extremes
I think so.
Rape and/or incest should definitely be exceptions.
Rape and/or incest should definitely be exceptions.
It is just to get the case in front of the Supreme Court.
The left went one way so the right went the other.
I think when it is said and done the court will rule somewhere in the middle.
The left went one way so the right went the other.
I think when it is said and done the court will rule somewhere in the middle.
No excuses now to lose recruits to Alabama and Georgia. What player wants to have 10 kids roaming around the campuses because he doesnt like wearing a jimmy.
If your argument is that it is a human life, the fact that The parents didn’t have consensual sex does make it any less of a human life.
Honestly that’s kind of how I feel about it. I know that may sound crazy to some but there are tons of parents out there who cant physically have kids. Adopt the kid to a loving family.
Good question I’m pro life, this is an interesting debate,
The rape and incest make me feel uncomfortable, but it’s not the baby’s fault, it’s still innocent life.
The rape and incest make me feel uncomfortable, but it’s not the baby’s fault, it’s still innocent life.
I was always and probably still am conflicted when a murderer kills a pregnant women and is charged for the baby also. How in this case it’s a life but in abortion it’s not. Same legal system.
It is a very interesting debate. Hard to argue that if you’re pro life the circumstances shouldn’t matter how the baby came to be.
But, if I’m being honest with myself, and my precious daughter was God forbid raped, and she didn’t want to carry that baby I wouldn’t want her forced to do so.
But, if I’m being honest with myself, and my precious daughter was God forbid raped, and she didn’t want to carry that baby I wouldn’t want her forced to do so.
It’s a Tough topic but I’d be interested to see statistically speaking how often those circumstances are involved.
Why cant the person just go to a clinic show the police report and get the morning after pill long before there’s a heart beat etc? Why wait till it’s an actual life and not just a gathering of cells and tissue to say this wasn’t of their consent and they don’t want a baby?
Which both parties should do on a lot of issues but when you have a delusional left wing Moon Batt Liberal Society preaching STUPID shit to kids in Grade / High School and College .....this is where we end up.........The far Left doest even have Common Sense........
The law goes too far, both morally, and above all, constitutionally in my opinion. If that law goes to the SCOTUS, I think that it will be struck down.
R they doing this to try a get a different result down the road pertaining to Roe vs Wade 1973.......
Rape and incest is the determining factor in 1% of abortions.
Bingo! In fact I have heard it is less than 1%, but even 1% is a low number.
Food for thought.
The two most important holdings in the Roe v. Wade 1973 Supreme Court case were:
(1) a woman's right to an abortion is a fundamental right which cannot be abridged by law absent the government's showing of a compelling reason for the law and that the law is narrowly tailored to achieve that compelling reason; and
(2) a woman's right to an abortion is a fundament pregnancy, for purposes of constitutional law, is divided into three time periods: (a) the first trimester belongs to the woman, and any law which impairs the woman's right to an abortion will have the presumption of being unconstitutional; (b) the third trimester belongs to the government, and any law which impairs the woman's right to an abortion will have the presumption of being constitutional, because the government has a compelling reason to protect the viability/life of a fetus/baby; (c) the middle trimester belongs neither to the government nor the woman, and laws impairing a woman's right to an abortion will be held either constitutional or unconstitutional on a case-by-case basis.
That was all well and good for about 20 years, until Planned Parenthood v. Casey came along in the early 1990's. Sandra Day O'Conner blew up the Roe trimester framework and the Supreme Court instead implemented an "undue burden" standard to determine whether a law unconstitutionally impairs a woman's fundamental right to an abortion. In my opinion, the Planned Parenthood v. Casey actually created more confusion than clarity, because what we have now is conservative states taking a hard line extreme position on pro-life, and liberal states taking a hard line extreme position on pro-choice...
Lost amidst this interstate battle between states on the abortion issue is the fact that we do have black letter federal law that a woman's right to an abortion is still a fundamental right to this day... So, Alabama passing the law that it did undermines federal law, and in my opinion will be struct down under the Supremacy Clause. Federal law sets the "floor" regarding scope of a right, while state law sets the "ceiling" regarding the scope of a right. In other words, states can broaden the scope/applicability of a federal law in favor of the individual, but cannot abridge the scope/applicability of a federal law against the individual- such law will be struct down on Supremacy Clause grounds, and possibly the Substantive Due Process Clause which is embodied in the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. That is what I think will happen with the Alabama law.
(1) a woman's right to an abortion is a fundamental right which cannot be abridged by law absent the government's showing of a compelling reason for the law and that the law is narrowly tailored to achieve that compelling reason; and
(2) a woman's right to an abortion is a fundament pregnancy, for purposes of constitutional law, is divided into three time periods: (a) the first trimester belongs to the woman, and any law which impairs the woman's right to an abortion will have the presumption of being unconstitutional; (b) the third trimester belongs to the government, and any law which impairs the woman's right to an abortion will have the presumption of being constitutional, because the government has a compelling reason to protect the viability/life of a fetus/baby; (c) the middle trimester belongs neither to the government nor the woman, and laws impairing a woman's right to an abortion will be held either constitutional or unconstitutional on a case-by-case basis.
That was all well and good for about 20 years, until Planned Parenthood v. Casey came along in the early 1990's. Sandra Day O'Conner blew up the Roe trimester framework and the Supreme Court instead implemented an "undue burden" standard to determine whether a law unconstitutionally impairs a woman's fundamental right to an abortion. In my opinion, the Planned Parenthood v. Casey actually created more confusion than clarity, because what we have now is conservative states taking a hard line extreme position on pro-life, and liberal states taking a hard line extreme position on pro-choice...
Lost amidst this interstate battle between states on the abortion issue is the fact that we do have black letter federal law that a woman's right to an abortion is still a fundamental right to this day... So, Alabama passing the law that it did undermines federal law, and in my opinion will be struct down under the Supremacy Clause. Federal law sets the "floor" regarding scope of a right, while state law sets the "ceiling" regarding the scope of a right. In other words, states can broaden the scope/applicability of a federal law in favor of the individual, but cannot abridge the scope/applicability of a federal law against the individual- such law will be struct down on Supremacy Clause grounds, and possibly the Substantive Due Process Clause which is embodied in the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. That is what I think will happen with the Alabama law.
I think they did it to get Roe v. wade back in front of a conservative Supreme Court. That being said it’s entirely the fault of the left wing lunatics. They’ve pushed so far left with the late term abortion stuff they forced the republicans to say enough!
I agree, and for those who say this bill is fanatical . Should we be surprised we hear on a regular basis of the awful things being done to our youth, or condemn as heinous the acts of a Casey Anthony, when our government approves the killing of late term babies, and now in the ninth month, the cheapening of life abortion has done to our culture is immeasurable?
Last edited:
There will be women who along with their families will fall on economic hard times during one of their trimesters. Women should be permitted to make their own reproductive decisions without men making the rules.
These statements would make perfect sense, if an innocent baby wasn’t being killed.
The 1st order of business has to be the well being of pre teen girls. There needs to be funding & programs, emotional support for the victims of rape. I cant imagine the trauma girls go thru after being raped, then having to bring a newborn into this world. Are they mature enough to meet these challenges? Forget about throwing doctors in jail. Concentrate on the victims for goodness sake!!!
Yeah they went too far. Let the woman choose. No matter what side of this issue you’re on, this is not our call. It is a pregnant woman’s call.
Let God be the judge on this issue. Man has already weighed in and enacted law in Roe v. Wade. This law will not be overturned imo fellas. It is a waste of time, dollars, & effort. Roberts will not vote to overturn and I believe Kavanaugh too will affirm R v. W .
I will repeat my personal stance like I did before because half this board refused to acknowledge reading it in their attacks. Personally, I do not favor abortion. But I do strongly favor a woman’s right to decide. I would prefer no abortions after a heartbeat is detected, but again, it’s not my call. I would hope that women assume responsibility for their actions with their God or themselves if they’re atheists.
Let God be the judge on this issue. Man has already weighed in and enacted law in Roe v. Wade. This law will not be overturned imo fellas. It is a waste of time, dollars, & effort. Roberts will not vote to overturn and I believe Kavanaugh too will affirm R v. W .
I will repeat my personal stance like I did before because half this board refused to acknowledge reading it in their attacks. Personally, I do not favor abortion. But I do strongly favor a woman’s right to decide. I would prefer no abortions after a heartbeat is detected, but again, it’s not my call. I would hope that women assume responsibility for their actions with their God or themselves if they’re atheists.
Ok but let me ask this question then... why do men not have any say here? What if the prospective father wants to keep the baby? Then what?
Last edited:
Totally disagree with you on this. The left pushed too far left and whereas they may (probably) won’t overturn Roe v. Wade. Full term abortions is not only repulsive, it’s not consistent with any of the other laws out there that govern death of pre-born babies in domestic cases or assault cases.
If a mother is deemed to be pregnant and she loses a baby from assault or is killed and the unborn baby is killed also than the suspect is charged with the murder of the unborn baby.
There is a ton of Case law out there that supports this and honestly speaking I believe there is zero chance the Supreme Court would uphold any late term or full term abortion because of this.
It’s just sick and shameful!
It’s the women’s right to choose, another talking point based on very little thought, it sounds so sensible. When do we ever say it’s someone’s right to kill somebody. So, if I’m a dad, and I don’t want to deal with my one year old child, and I drown him, is it my choice? When A mom kills her toddler is it her choice?
And they won’t draw a line in the sand either. They have been brainwashed to follow orders.
Why do elderly white males make decisions for women when this is 2019? This is not the 1940s, 50s, 60s, 70s when women were instructed to be subservient, to be seen & not heard, expected to be barefoot, naked & in the boudaire?
Because you think it’s just elderly white males... and by the way the elderly white woman who championed planned parenthood was a racist and did only to control the minority population growth. Oh yeah and she was a democrat. Shocking!
Let’s be real, justify how when a pregnant mother is murdered, the killer is charged with two murders not one. Why is it a life then and not when mom wants to conveniently end a pregnancy. Also I saw the stats today for pregnancies that involved rape or incest and it was like .002% so spare me that crap!
This happened in the state of Alabama, the poorest state in the Union. If you think families that are strapped for $$$ will benefit from this decision, No possible way. When families fall upon hard times, life gets harder.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Poll: Who do you think is the best recruiter on the Miami Football Coaching Staff?
- Latest: BenjaminRivals
-
-
