You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Whose body? Whose choice?

in #government3 years ago

All this clammer about the overturn of RVW is very amusing since the people causing the clammer don't even understand WHAT the SCOTUS is deciding on. RVW is not being abolished it is being removed from FEDERAL status and being put back into the hands of the individual sovereign states where it should always have been. It has always been a question of overreach by the federal government. I live in a state where the majority of people are pro-life then we should not be forced to comply with a law we opposed to. Likewise, if I live in a state like California where the majority is pro-choice I should not be denied the right to a service I feel I should be able to have.

People live in different states for reasons, some are political, some are due to religious beliefs (being around others that believe the same) and some are for social-economical reasons. The problem we are having here in the United States today is with each group trying to force what it wants and believes in on those that don't think the same.

Texas recently came under fire for passing what some called an anti-abortion law. Texas did not abolish abortion, there were two main changes. One it prohibited the use of state and federal tax dollars from being used to fund abortions and secondly, it banned abortions during the third trimester of pregnancy. Personally, I can think of no reason for needing an abortion after the first six months other than procrastination on the mother's part. Many premature babies survive that are born during the last trimester.

Texas has always been in the heart of what we call the Bible belt here and the majority of people have deep religious convictions. If you want to live a life that is contrary to those beliefs feel free but don't try to make that majority conform to your lifestyle, that is not what freedom and America are about. Each one of us, whatever we believe, has a God-given right, as stated in the constitution, to the pursuit of happiness.

So I support the decision in the Supreme court in putting this power back into the hands of each individual state to decide as they may how to govern themselves. There are a number of areas the federal government should be put in check, this is just one of them. It is time we return to "government FOR the people, BY the people" and I think SCOTUS will make the decision to do just that.

Hopefully, we will see the issue of federal power over the education of our children being restricted and returned to the states next. Another area of overreach that needs to be dealt with.

Just my 2 cents.

Sort:  

Thank you for explaining that a little better! I admit I was not aware that's what it meant (the whole state autonomy thing has always been a bit tricky to follow for me, as a European). While I find your comment extremely thoughtful and well put together, I have a question:

I live in a state where the majority of people are pro-life then we should not be forced to comply with a law we opposed to.

But supposing the law in your state was that women were allowed to have abortions up to, I don't know, 12 weeks? How would that be harmful for the pro-life majority? I mean, wouldn't the people who are pro-life keep their baby anyway, regardless of the law? That's where the issue gets murky for me, because having abortion laws in place doesn't impose on the people who want to keep their babies...

That being said, I agree completely that abortion past six months is absurd and vicious. I mean, I looked over US abortion laws by state while writing this, and was astonished to find the very liberal abortion laws over there. In my own country, it's apparently 14 weeks. Personally, I think the heartbeat law is more than fair. While it can be tricky to detect pregnancy, six weeks is ample time to realize something's off, and nip to the chemist for a pregnancy test.

It affects pro-lifers in that the tax dollars they pay are used to fund these abortions by the federal government. Planned Parenthood, basically an abortion chain found in almost all states, receives millions of dollars from the government every year. My pro-life stance is based on my religious convictions that abortion is wrong in the sight of God so it is offensive to me that my tax dollars are used to fund something I am against (I don't approve much of anything they spend my tax money on these days though). Also, teenagers can get abortions at these places without parental consent. You also never hear about "botched" abortions that happen where women die or come close to it. These are not hospitals, they are abortion clinics, I would never let my daughter have a procedure there and it would break my heart to get a phone call from one of them informing me something had gone wrong after the fact. These are the ways it affects pro-lifers.

Why states? Why not county or even city level?

Only the states are sovereign with the right to self-govern, counties and cities do not hold that privilege.

oh goodie. That means I don't have to obey city or county ordanences, speed limits, or zoneing codes and I can ignore that pesky home owners assosication.

If the state chooses to hand down the abortion law to counties and cities then they can regulate them but it is not likely to happen, they can still "attempt" to pass their own laws but if challenged in court it most likely will not be upheld. And yes you still have to abide by your local laws since your state has allowed them to govern over those issues.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Correct, the "people" could take up the issue or the state could delegate it to counties and municipalities.