Per. JD Vance: Trump will veto a federal law prohibiting abortions

[RileyG]

Compassion on tap. We give it to our pets but not ourselves.

Humans aren’t the same thing as animals. Life isn’t disposable.

 

[comana]

Humans aren’t the same thing as animals. Life isn’t disposable.

Forcing someone, against their will, to endure agony till their body finally gives in is not valuing life and is not compassionate.

 

[RileyG]

Forcing someone, against their will, to endure agony till their body finally gives in is not valuing life and is not compassionate.

Ok. So they should commit suicide then?

 

[comana]

Ok. So they should commit suicide then?

This is not my decision to make, but it should be their choice with the option to use prescribed medication for that purpose.

 

[Hazelelponi]

No. it wouldn't. A constitutional amendment is a possible solution but not necessary.

They decided that there is no existing constitutional right to abortion. Thus Federal or State law can regulate or ban abortion.

Likely it will be decided state by state. But a Federal law would also be a possibility. A Federal law is possible to ban abortions, regulate abortions, or allow abortions. Depending on that hypothetical law states might be able to or not able to restrict abortions. Biden, and now Harris, want a Federal law that forbids any state restrictions on abortion. Trump seems to want no Federal laws that would interfere with states deciding for themselves.

Nope. A Federal law, presuming it would likely pass constitutional muster, would be an adequate way of having a consistent nation-wide policy. One way or the other. We had a patchwork policy on slavery, with some states saying some human beings were not persons while others said they were. That compromise did not endure. One that denies personhood to persons based on location can't survive.

That's mostly because Trump decided he wanted states to decide and not the Federal government. That's his preference. It's not how it has to be. With a Trump presidency and Republican majority the states decide. With a Harris presidency and Democratic majority there will be a Federal law allowing all abortions and that restricts any states from deciding otherwise.

Some Republicans are happy with that. Trump is happy with that so he probably gets his way if he is elected. Democrats will not allow states to decide. They don't want any restrictions on abortion and will push for a Federal law ending all abortion restrictions, packing the Supreme Court with people who will overturn the overturning of Roe, and a constitutional amendment in favor of abortion.

I believe very strongly that we have to vote on the issue in our respective states.

I can't quickly find the opinion, but the Supreme Court did lead me to believe all I said.

Are you agreeing with the Democrats that we should fight to the death over abortion? Because you know court packing and making whatever you want happen regardless of right or wrong is civil war level moves....

All people want is a voice in their own government. Your post brings me to tears.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I believe very strongly that we have to vote on the issue in our respective states.

That's an opinion I'm not going to challenge you on. My opinion is human life ought to be protected in this country by state laws and/or Federal law and/or by state constitutions and/or by Federal constitution. Any or all of the above. Kamala disagrees with me at her very core.

I can't quickly find the opinion, but the Supreme Court did lead me to believe all I said.

Let me know when you find it.

Are you agreeing with the Democrats that we should fight to the death over abortion? Because you know court packing and making whatever you want happen regardless of right or wrong is civil war level moves....

I think a civil war is inevitable but I seldom agree with Democrats (This generation of Democrats any way. I was a Humphrey Democrat way back when.) I would see packing the Supreme Court as a prelude to war. Not a war I want nor one I would instigate. I just don't see, short of the Left getting religion, or the Right losing what religion they still have, how it can be avoided.

All people want is a voice in their own government. Your post brings me to tears.

That was what this Republic was founded on, that 'we the people' had a say in governance. Not the 'deep state', not all the votes Kamala and her Soros type friends can buy. It's supposed to be a country where 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' prevails in ordered liberty. We shouldn't even be contemplating which members of the human species are not people so we can freely do away with them.

 

[NxNW]

Are you agreeing with the Democrats that we should fight to the death over abortion? Because you know court packing and making whatever you want happen regardless of right or wrong is civil war level moves....

It was the Republicans who packed the court and manipulated the SCOTUS nomination process for the sole purpose of overturning Roe.

All people want is a voice in their own government.

The people wanted Roe to remain in place. The GOP overturned the will of the voters.

 

[RileyG]

This is not my decision to make, but it should be their choice with the option to use prescribed medication for that purpose.

Ok. That’s fair.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I think a civil war is inevitable but I seldom agree with Democrats (This generation of Democrats any way. I was a Humphrey Democrat way back when.) I would see packing the Supreme Court as a prelude to war. Not a war I want nor one I would instigate. I just don't see, short of the Left getting religion, or the Right losing what religion they still have, how it can be avoided.

Where do you get these notions about civil war? Who is going to fight whom and what army?

 

[Arcangl86]

Actually I believe your wrong here. It would take a constitutional amendment.

The Supreme Court has, in my opinion indicated they they would consider to uphold the federalism argument that abortion is not one of Congress enumerated powers.

Where did they indicate that?

 

[Pommer]

That's an opinion I'm not going to challenge you on. My opinion is human life ought to be protected in this country by state laws and/or Federal law and/or by state constitutions and/or by Federal constitution. Any or all of the above. Kamala disagrees with me at her very core.

Killing is bad?

I think a civil war is inevitable but I seldom agree with Democrats (This generation of Democrats any way. I was a Humphrey Democrat way back when.) I would see packing the Supreme Court as a prelude to war. Not a war I want nor one I would instigate. I just don't see, short of the Left getting religion, or the Right losing what religion they still have, how it can be avoided.

That was what this Republic was founded on, that 'we the people' had a say in governance. Not the 'deep state', not all the votes Kamala and her Soros type friends can buy. It's supposed to be a country where 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' prevails in ordered liberty. We shouldn't even be contemplating which members of the human species are not people so we can freely do away with them.

Killing is not bad?

 

[Pommer]

Where did they indicate that?

When they held in Dobbs that Federal Powers didn’t extend to “abortion rights”.

If ”abortion rights” cannot be given by the Federal Government, neither can they be restricted at the Federal level, but “states‘ rights”, which used to be a conservative issue.

 

[RileyG]

Killing is bad?




Killing is not bad?

I think he is stating killing innocent is bad but a civil war is inevitable.

 

[Hazelelponi]

When they held in Dobbs that Federal Powers didn’t extend to “abortion rights”.

If ”abortion rights” cannot be given by the Federal Government, neither can they be restricted at the Federal level, but “states‘ rights”, which used to be a conservative issue.

Yes...

I also think that we do have cultural differences in this country and abortion is a case in point.

I see life as life period and it begins at conception. I see abortion as either murder or self defense (life of the mother).

If the vote were up to me I would see it charged as murder, and not just the doctor either.

I'm also sure the world is fairly happy I don't have a say all alone... Lol.

But if God is going to start smiting people I want the lambs blood over my doorsill and a vote to say that what's happened here isn't on my head and has never been my choice.

Let the blood be on their hands alone.

 

[RileyG]

Yes...

I also think that we do have cultural differences in this country and abortion is a case in point.

I see life as life period and it begins at conception. I see abortion as either murder or self defense (life of the mother).

If the vote were up to me I would see it charged as murder, and not just the doctor either.

I'm also sure the world is fairly happy I don't have a say all alone... Lol.

But if God is going to start smiting people I want the lambs blood over my doorsill and a vote to say that what's happened here isn't on my head and has never been my choice.

Let the blood be on their hands alone.

Well said.

 

[Desk trauma]

a civil war is inevitable.

Because…?

 

[RileyG]

Because…?

between the left and right...if either candidate wins

 

[Desk trauma]

between the left and right...if either candidate wins

How do you imagine that’s going to happen?

 

[Arcangl86]

When they held in Dobbs that Federal Powers didn’t extend to “abortion rights”.

If ”abortion rights” cannot be given by the Federal Government, neither can they be restricted at the Federal level, but “states‘ rights”, which used to be a conservative issue.

That wasn't the holding of Dobbs though. The holding in Dobbs was that it wasn't a fundamental right and thus wasn't protected by the 14th Amendment. There was nothing about the ability of the federal government to legislate about them. In fact Alito repeated multiple times about how it was the responsibility of the "people's chosen representatives" to regulate abortion, without limiting it to state representatives. This is not to say that the federal government could mandate abortion protections because that would fall afoul of the 10th Amendment, but there is nothing in Dobbs preventing them from instituting a federal ban.

 

[RileyG]

How do you imagine that’s going to happen?

I don’t want to imagine that. That’s terrifying.