Supreme Court Argues Roe

Sounds like the court might make some historic changes based on the questions they were asking. I am leaning to them overruling Roe V. Wade and the states would take back control of their abortion laws. Blue states like Colorado would still make it legal, might even permit partial birth abortions. The other thing I could see would be a national law permitting abortion but only before week 20. Any other speculation? Even Roberts looks like he is onboard. Justice Kagan was strangely quiet.

Every change that puts the power back to the states is progress in my book, I don't care what it is. If that keeps Democrats in blue states and they don't bring their destructive politics to red states, I think we would all e better off. I hate to say that since I love Colorado, but it's already lost with little hope of recovery.

As for R v W, I would think that this time they would bring more science into the argument since we have been instructed to follow it so often.

"As for R v W, I would think that this time they would bring more science into the argument since we have been instructed to follow it so often."

I disagree, the "science" is there, i.e. a heartbeat is present :

"When Does a Fetus Develop a Heartbeat?
Through the use of ultrasounds, modern science can detect the waves of the baby’s heartbeat as early as three weeks after fertilization. Although the child’s organs have not yet fully formed, soon after this three-week mark the heart beats about 110 times per minute.
www.hli.org/resources/when-does-a-fetus-develop-a-heartbeat/

The argument is whether the presence of a beating heart is an indication of a life. A question that is based on moral equivalency not science.
The big question: when does life begin. This should not be a legal question rather a strongly held belief question.
Ask yourself and answer when you think life begins.

I support abortion rights but also support common sense limits like 15 or 20 weeks. The Mississippi bill limits abortion to 15 weeks. Seems fair to me.
Denver Post today, the Democrats in the Colorado State Legislature are writing up a new bill to guarantee abortion rights in the Centennial State. Don't they realize any legislation they pass can always be repealed if the state becomes Red again?

Rick wrote: Every change that puts the power back to the states is progress in my book, I don't care what it is. If that keeps Democrats in blue states and they don't bring their destructive politics to red states, I think we would all e better off. I hate to say that since I love Colorado, but it's already lost with little hope of recovery.

As for R v W, I would think that this time they would bring more science into the argument since we have been instructed to follow it so often.

I NEVER thought I'd utter these words....even as a 3rd gen Coloradan,I no longer find this state dear to my heart. It has morphed into a monster (not just political,but in all manners livable.) It use to be a purple state and my DH is LIVID and has threaten to move. BUT,no place to go that is agreeable to both of us)...No cold for him, no hideously hot for me)......as for R V W....it will take awhile for it to wind thru the courts,Mid year next year will be the "tell".

I agree, but it is the basic science that tells what life is.

Life:
the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.

I agree that it's a moral question as one considers when a human life has a right to continue living. This is why I think states should be making these decisions based on the will of voters in each state. If individual states can have different rules about what kind of cars you can buy or what type of weapon you're allowed to protect yourself with, then the states should also make their own rules on when it is allowable to end a life.

THE PROBLEM......exceptionally tuff burden on those who can not afford to travel to another state for the
procedure....it is discriminatory. JMO

So you believe 9 people who did well in law school should decide for everyone? You should remember that individual states make decisions about the death penalty as well.

Just curious HA, would you be willing to tell me what stage of a pregnancy you feel is too late to have an abortion?

Rick wrote: So you believe 9 people who did well in law school should decide for everyone? You should remember that individual states make decisions about the death penalty as well.

Just curious HA, would you be willing to tell me what stage of a pregnancy you feel is too late to have an abortion?

[/b]


when THE FETUS IS VIABLE AND CAN LIVE OUTSIDE THE WOMB,technology has improved those odds immensely. THE REAL problem is ......who is going to take on the overwhelming responsibility to raise the infant to adulthood ...18 yrs. and do so in a caring,thoughtful and affordable living arrangement,...THE MAN?

homeagain wrote: THE PROBLEM......exceptionally tuff burden on those who can not afford to travel to another state for the
procedure....it is discriminatory. JMO

Or they could have always been responsible and used birth control or Plan B early in the pregnancy.