Should The US Be Geographically Divided (One Half Pro-Abortion, One Half Pro-Life)

[Hvizsgyak]

Abortion has been legal now for almost 50 years. Many laws been passed restricting abortions but there are still too many performed each day. We, on the Pro-life side are sickened by all these abortions but with all the liberal minded politicians in our country preventing even common sense procedures against abortion, the US seems like its going nowhere on this issue. So if pro-abortionists want to feel like they have control of there body, then they can live in the left side of the US and if pro-lifers want to feel like they don't live in a country that supports the killing of the unborn, then they can live in the right side of the US.

I've also stated companies can do the same. So how will this all happen is the question. Since we we're able to afford almost two years of paying people to stay home because of Covid-19, we'll give each family a year (or possibly more) to decide what side they want to live on and where on that side they want to locate to. The move will be free, everything: the vehicles involved, the food involved, the medical needs involved, and so on. Real Estate agents will help families decide a house (we'll think through that one for now as to whether that will be free too).

Most of the people who believe that the founding fathers made a good Constitution will stay on the right side of the country. Those who want to live in a more socially controlled environment will live on the left side of the country. Once everyone is settled, you determine your fate. Maybe we'll all be able to sleep better at night then.

 

[Sword of the Lord]

 

[PloverWing]

I suppose you could divide the country in half by gender: men aren't allowed to get abortions, and women get to choose.

More seriously, if Roe v Wade is overturned, then we'll get something like what you propose. The choice will be returned to the states, and laws regarding abortions will vary from state to state. That won't be a strict east-west divide; rather, I'm guessing that abortion before viability would become legal in the northeast and west coast and illegal in the midwest and southeast, broadly speaking.

 

[spiritfilledjm]

I suppose you could divide the country in half by gender: men aren't allowed to get abortions, and women get to choose.

More seriously, if Roe v Wade is overturned, then we'll get something like what you propose. The choice will be returned to the states, and laws regarding abortions will vary from state to state. That won't be a strict east-west divide; rather, I'm guessing that abortion before viability would become legal in the northeast and west coast and illegal in the midwest and southeast, broadly speaking.

As much as it shouldn't even be a question as to whether ending life for the inconvenience of having a child is ok or not, I can stand with that solution.

 

[Salvadore]

Maybe California and New York will secede.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I'm not sure what the point of this post was. Given the roughly even breakdown for/against in the underlying issue, relocation would require roughly half of the people to move. What do we do about the other, and I would argue bigger, political issues, religious questions, favorite sports teams, etc.

A much bigger problem is the underlying notion that we have to sort ourselves because we can't tolerate existing with people of different views. This country needs a lot more emotional maturity.

So if pro-abortionists want to feel like they have control of there body, then they can live in the left side of the US and if pro-lifers want to feel like they don't live in a country that supports the killing of the newborn, then they can live in the right side of the US.

I should note that abortion is not killing newborns. Killing a newborn is infanticide and most decidedly illegal in every jurisdiction in the country with fairly severe penalties. Whether you favor it or oppose it, abortion occurs before birth, not after.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Abortion has been legal now for almost 50 years. Many laws been passed restricting abortions but there are still too many performed each day. We, on the Pro-life side are sickened by all these abortions but with all the liberal minded politicians in our country preventing even common sense procedures against abortion, the US seems like its going nowhere on this issue. So if pro-abortionists want to feel like they have control of there body, then they can live in the left side of the US and if pro-lifers want to feel like they don't live in a country that supports the killing of the newborn, then they can live in the right side of the US.

I've also stated companies can do the same. So how will this all happen is the question. Since we we're able to afford almost two years of paying people to stay home because of Covid-19, we'll give each family a year (or possibly more) to decide what side they want to live on and where on that side they want to locate to. The move will be free, everything: the vehicles involved, the food involved, the medical needs involved, and so on. Real Estate agents will help families decide a house (we'll think through that one for now as to whether that will be free too).

Most of the people who believe that the founding fathers made a good Constitution will stay on the right side of the country. Those who want to live in a more socially controlled environment will live on the left side of the country. Once everyone is settled, you determine your fate. Maybe we'll all be able to sleep better at night then.

This is unnecessary! The state's of the union were already set up to be "laboratories of Democracy" by the Founding Fathers. Where the laws of one state could vary a lot per state. So we already have the mechanism of having anti-abortion states, and proabortion states according to local politics of the region and that is allowed by the Constitution. We simply need to have blue state liberals be willing to let the reds have their due in their states and not try to pack the Supreme Court or do other kinds of maneuvers to have their way.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

I'm not sure what the point of this post was. Given the roughly even breakdown for/against in the underlying issue, relocation would require roughly half of the people to move. What do we do about the other, and I would argue bigger, political issues, religious questions, favorite sports teams, etc.

A much bigger problem is the underlying notion that we have to sort ourselves because we can't tolerate existing with people of different views. This country needs a lot more emotional maturity.



I should note that abortion is not killing newborns. Killing a newborn is infanticide and most decidedly illegal in every jurisdiction in the country with fairly severe penalties. Whether you favor it or oppose it, abortion occurs before birth, not after.

Sorry, I meant the unborn, don't know how I missed that one. 50 years has been a long time to mature and believe it or not I feel we are regressing. Yes there may have been some nice laws created to curve some of the abortions but listening to the other side, there is no relenting even a millimeter. It can be done too. Look at the former Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and I'm sure there are a few more examples. If abortion really means alot to Christians, a day more with a proabortion nation is a day too many.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

I suppose you could divide the country in half by gender: men aren't allowed to get abortions, and women get to choose.

More seriously, if Roe v Wade is overturned, then we'll get something like what you propose. The choice will be returned to the states, and laws regarding abortions will vary from state to state. That won't be a strict east-west divide; rather, I'm guessing that abortion before viability would become legal in the northeast and west coast and illegal in the midwest and southeast, broadly speaking.

I too want Roe v Wade over turned but at the rate our country is going, it will be another 50 years with approximately another 60 million unborn dead. Thats alot of people. Serious times take serious actions.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

This is unnecessary! The state's of the union were already set up to be "laboratories of Democracy" by the Founding Fathers. Where the laws of one state could vary a lot per state. So we already have the mechanism of having anti-abortion states, and proabortion states according to local politics of the region and that is allowed by the Constitution. We simply need to have blue state liberals be willing to let the reds have their due in their states and not try to pack the Supreme Court or do other kinds of maneuvers to have their way.

So you think preserving the United States as a whole is more important than saving millions of unborn children. I don't. The eastern part of the US that would ban all abortions can continue the Constitution. Preserving the union sounds good on paper but look where we have gotten. I think everyone would be happy (of course except for the victims of abortions performed on the western part of the US). And that doesn't mean, we on the eastern side give up pronouncing the evils of abortion but we can say to Our God we are doing our best to stop abortion overall. Eventually, life will become very corrupted over on the western side that they will finally want to change their views. That I can wait for.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I too want Roe v Wade over turned but at the rate our country is going, it will be another 50 years with approximately another 60 million unborn dead. Thats alot of people. Serious times take serious actions.

If you want serious action, there are some things that could be easily and quickly done that would reduce abortions without even worrying about the "kills a baby" versus "her body, her choice" debate.

1. Free contraception. Nearly all of the popular birth control methods used by women are contraceptive such that when successful no conception (and if you accept the Papal view of things - no new life ) occurs. I'm sure the Dems would be glad to insert a Medicaid provision for free contraceptive for women into their big "infrastructure" bill.

2. Regularize surgical measures. Both vasectomies and tubal ligations are effective and reversible. Both should be widely covered under insurance, including Medicaid. Particularly, tubal ligations can be easily performed after delivering the baby in a C-section with virtually no additional risks from surgery or recovery. It should be a standard question asked by their surgeons: "Ma'am. Are you considering having additional children? If you are not we can do a tubal ligation at the end of your C-section very easily."

3. Sex ed in HS. (This one might take a little longer to proceed...) No matter what the basic premise of a sex education program is (including abstinence) all HS students should be taught: "if you do have sex, use a condom". It prevents pregnancy and disease.

These measures would reduce the number of pregnancies, particularly among those who do not want them. All without any embryo destruction.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

So you think preserving the United States as a whole is more important than saving millions of unborn children. I don't. The eastern part of the US that would ban all abortions can continue the Constitution. Preserving the union sounds good on paper but look where we have gotten. I think everyone would be happy (of course except for the victims of abortions performed on the western part of the US). And that doesn't mean, we on the eastern side give up pronouncing the evils of abortion but we can say to Our God we are doing our best to stop abortion overall. Eventually, life will become very corrupted over on the western side that they will finally want to change their views. That I can wait for.

If I could kick all the liberals out of California I would gladly move back to my home state from the east coast. But that ain't going to happen!! Do you have any idea how hard it is to have a Constitutional Convention to make something like this actually happen?

Just something simply like having a state leave the union is extremely difficult bordering on impossible (getting the buy in of the other 49 to approve it, besides voting it in locally). But this is off the charts worse than that since you are dealing with property etc. That is if you want to do this without civil war.... Yes we could do something like this at gun point....

 

[Blade]

Hmm I think its like that old saying if you knew how they made that hamburger you would never have it again. No one gets to see just how that abortion happens as if there are not sounds what so ever. You hear that just once.. that left should have had a voice.. that life didn't belong to anyone. And we all know MAN has something to do with that baby so.. WHY he still never gets a choice.. HAHA right there caught myself. A choice? There is no choice here.

All this sin will reach Gods ears... God help the earth then. This age of grace will not last much longer. ANYTIME you wonder about GOD .. go back read the OT! That GOD has not changed.. praise GOD for Yeshua/Jesus Christ. He which is holding the lawless one back.. will be taken out of the way soon.

They should have stopped this at the start.. but take GOD out.. this is what happens.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

If you want serious action, there are some things that could be easily and quickly done that would reduce abortions without even worrying about the "kills a baby" versus "her body, her choice" debate.

1. Free contraception. Nearly all of the popular birth control methods used by women are contraceptive such that when successful no conception (and if you accept the Papal view of things - no new life ) occurs. I'm sure the Dems would be glad to insert a Medicaid provision for free contraceptive for women into their big "infrastructure" bill.

2. Regularize surgical measures. Both vasectomies and tubal ligations are effective and reversible. Both should be widely covered under insurance, including Medicaid. Particularly, tubal ligations can be easily performed after delivering the baby in a C-section with virtually no additional risks from surgery or recovery. It should be a standard question asked by their surgeons: "Ma'am. Are you considering having additional children? If you are not we can do a tubal ligation at the end of your C-section very easily."

3. Sex ed in HS. (This one might take a little longer to proceed...) No matter what the basic premise of a sex education program is (including abstinence) all HS students should be taught: "if you do have sex, use a condom". It prevents pregnancy and disease.

These measures would reduce the number of pregnancies, particularly among those who do not want them. All without any embryo destruction.

Decent recommendations but we want zero abortions in the country.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Decent recommendations but we want zero abortions in the country.

In your post you were concerned about how many abortions would occur during the time it might take to come to the solution you want. These things I mentioned would reduce that number given the same duration of an ultimate abortion resolution.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

If I could kick all the liberals out of California I would gladly move back to my home state from the east coast. But that ain't going to happen!! Do you have any idea how hard it is to have a Constitutional Convention to make something like this actually happen?

Just something simply like having a state leave the union is extremely difficult bordering on impossible (getting the buy in of the other 49 to approve it, besides voting it in locally). But this is off the charts worse than that since you are dealing with property etc. That is if you want to do this without civil war.... Yes we could do something like this at gun point....

How many more years will Christians put up with this though before something positive happens. I'd prefer to avoid civil war. Why add more killing to the situation. This is a simple solution and every body goes to their new home or stays where their at and abides by the ne country's laws.

 

[chad kincham]

No.

Abortion is a state issue, not a federal issue- the constitution does not authorize the federal government to regulate abortion in any way, thus defaults to state regulation.

When the bogus Roe v Wade ruling is overturned, each state will decide the issue.

I’m guessing at least thirty states will ban abortion on demand, once that happens.

 

[chad kincham]

Decent recommendations but we want zero abortions in the country.

Contraception is dirt cheap. Availability of it is not the issue.

 

[hedrick]

It may happen anyway. Companies may find it increasingly difficult to get employees to work in red states. Two-Thirds of Employees Won’t Move to Texas After Abortion Law: Survey

also, remember that conservative laws don’t always reflect the opinions of the people in the state. Texas voters' views shifting on abortion, pot, gambling and Confederate monuments, poll finds It might be easier to get the Texas legislature to move.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

It may happen anyway. Companies may find it increasingly difficult to get employees to work in red states. Two-Thirds of Employees Won’t Move to Texas After Abortion Law: Survey

also, remember that conservative laws don’t always reflect the opinions of the people in the state. Texas voters' views shifting on abortion, pot, gambling and Confederate monuments, poll finds It might be easier to get the Texas legislature to move.

I was thinking ahead on the companies moving to the states that their views aligned with. Alot of the people that support abortion are the same people who would defund the police. Once quality of life breaks down on that side people and companies may want to go to the side that protects their interests best. Thus a dystopian society will form and I would hope that the Pro-Life side would protect their country better - less crime, cleaner environment, better quality of life.

Then again, it could be the opposite but I would think the faithful would take care of their country and their people.