To think that US states who want to ban abortion should be able to?

[allsorts1]

Abortion is such a fraught topic in the US. Would it really be so bad to just let the states who want to ban abortion do so, and leave it in the hands of the states themselves to decide? It seems that the Roe v Wade decision has caused a lot of tension in the context of the USA and the feeling that states should be independent and able to choose their own laws (e.g different laws on capital punishment).

Would it be a completely terrible thing for each state to decide on this, and then live with the consequences (as presumably many young people/liberals would relocate to different states where abortion is legal?). Maybe if they experience brain drain they will change their tune. People aren’t forced to live in a certain state.

Obviously I am completely aware this will have a huge negative impact on women in poverty as they have less options. So this is a key consideration and concern.

But I’m just really thinking out loud. I am very much pro-choice, but interested in views from people who understand US law and politics… could the overturning of Roe v Wade potentially be positive in that it settles the issues, states can decide, and everyone can talk about something else?

Or would it just mean that there is a gradual encroachment on women rights and then the pro-lifers start lobbying in pro-choice states and abortion rights are even further reduced. Another risk could be that abortion becomes a political issue every election in every state, and switches back and forth from being legal to illegal - causing massive headaches….

Interested to hear everyone’s thoughts!

Women die when abortion is illegal. I would have died if abortion was illegal. Abortion is necessary health care.

No, no, no,no. This is not Gilead.

@allsorts1 I think you're getting a lot more abuse here than you deserve.

I think if you'd framed it as a question about process rather than topic you might have fared better!

If I understand your questions correctly, they are based on the (seemingly innocuous) argument that decisions on abortion (or other significant policy decisions) should rightly sit with democratically elected representatives (the legislature) and not (largely politically) appointed judges (the judiciary).

On the face of it, no bad thing.

But you need to take account of the peculiarities of the US system of government. And the deeply political views held on what should be acceptably decided at a federal versus a state level. That without significant interventions from the judiciary, you wouldn't have had advances like the de-segregation of schools.

Contentious issues are very hard to get legislated for at a federal level for a number of reasons (filibuster, super majority etc)

The pro-life lobby has done an exemplary job over the last few years of developing their arguments to appear more reasonable and even progressive. The "it's anti-democratic for SCOTUS to decide" is genius. Guaranteed however they will now shift their significant resources to lobbying at state level to erode abortion laws completely. And their efforts to block voting rights are part of this same strategy.. Limit who can vote so "your guy" always wins... Their end game is total ban and they have the resources to achieve that.

So in some senses you are right. If the decision comes out as currently drafted, then yes pro-choice efforts will have to do the same and go to state level. But it shouldn't have to be that way. Roe V Wade was presented untouchable, settled law. Almost akin to federal law. But it's not.

The alternative is senate has to find a way to legislate federally.. and overcome all the other obstacles out in their way by Republicans to allow that.

Methodist Pastor David Barnhart quote:

“ The unborn are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands on you, they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted or the chronically poor, they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans they don’t need money, education or childcare; unlike aliens they don’t bring all that racial, cultural and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. You can live the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologising or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but dislike people who breathe. Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn”

And women are thrown under the bus more than anyone.

Another issue is that a ban is going to lead to poor maternal care for women. There are already stories circulating of women who have had miscarriages that require D and Cs being unable to find doctors who will perform that procedure, women who have eptopic pregnancies being able to have their lives saved as doctors are scared of being charged with perming an abortion.

There are also concerns that IVF will no longer be an option because unused embryos are disposed of but some advocates of abortion consider these to be live. Amy Coney Barrett is apparently of this view.

If Roe v Wade is overturned the future is bleak for women.

That's a powerful quote Rainbowqueeen. Thank you for posting it.

I know @knittingaddict I messed up and use ‘live the unborn’ instead of ‘love the unborn’ in the middle

I love the way it so eloquently says that pro life supporters have chosen to be pro life so that they can feel like good people for supporting a cause while at the same time making sure nothing changes for them

That's an excellent quote,

I've seen some posts point out that if fetuses have rights because they are living from the moment of conception then all foreign pregnant women in the US are carrying US citizens which gets the extremists twitchy because of the immigration angle.

Desperately hoping this is all a mistake because all rights not mentioned in the constitution are under threat - gay rights, children's rights, women's rights....

Some people are that stupid.

A couple of women on twitter who had experience pre R v Wade have told what happened to, in most cases, their mothers.

One woman had come home from school to find her mother collapsed and bleeding heavily, she had miscarried but the foetus had not been expelled.

She went to a neighbour, got an ambulance and her father and sibling.

Mum was being transfused with blood constantly but dad had to take his two daughters to a meeting with the hospital governors to bed them to treat his wife.

72 hours after admission the foetus was surgically removed.

The 'pro life' twitterverse just said, "that won't happen, that is life saving".

Could the banning of abortion be the American way of implementing Eugenics by stealth? Maybe it's their way of eradicating poor women who have health issues around being pregnant and a new way to create a "Master race".

Implantation in the wrong place? Death

Not rich enough to afford maternity health care, but need it? Death

Pregnancy is hazardous to your health? Death

Couldn't fight off your male attacker whilst being raped? You will most likely end up passing on the genes for physically stronger males and weaker (more subservient) females as it's easier to force weaker physically females to produce more offspring than those who can fight back.

@allsorts1 sorry, I didn't get a notification that you'd responded.

You can lobby in your state, but as most politicians are funded by PACs and large corporate donors, the don't tend to listen to "the people". Lobbying as an individual has become less effective since the Citizens United case allowed money into politics.

As others have said, this isn't about the sanctitiy of life at all - it's about full and total control:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-61347934

www.vox.com/2019/10/31/20939890/missouri-abortion-clinic-hearing-periods-roe-wade

"At a hearing over an investigation of Missouri’s lone abortion clinic, a state official testified to something that has disturbed reproductive health advocates in the state and beyond: With the help of state medical records, his office had created a spreadsheet tracking patients’ menstrual periods.

The goal, according to the Kansas City Star, was to investigate “failed” abortions, instances in which the patient needed to return a second time to complete the procedure. The idea was apparently that, by gathering data on patients’ periods, state officials would know who was still pregnant after a scheduled abortion."