|
Posted Aug 16, '12 at 4:24pm
zakyman
1,588 posts
|
How do you know the US won't ban abortions?
Because First Amendment arguments could also be made against banning abortion. For example, it is permitted in Jewish law.
|
| |
|
Posted Aug 16, '12 at 7:38pm
nichodemus
10,521 posts
|
The Constitution can be brought in, but since when has that stopped people? Public opinion might go against it but has that ever stopped politicians?
|
| |
|
Posted Aug 16, '12 at 7:46pm
Jacen96
1,192 posts
|
Because First Amendment arguments could also be made against banning abortion. For example, it is permitted in Jewish law.
And First Amendment arguments could be made for banning abortion. For example, it is not permitted in Catholic Canon. But that is with religion, and religion is supposed to be separate from state.
|
| |
|
Posted Aug 16, '12 at 9:21pm
Krill11
99 posts
|
The Constitution can be brought in, but since when has that stopped people? Public opinion might go against it but has that ever stopped politicians?
That is why we as a people need to vote in people who support the constitution....
|
| |
|
Posted Aug 17, '12 at 2:09am
nichodemus
10,521 posts
|
I disagree. Sticking solely unto a piece of legislation, no matter how excellent, without stoping to consider whether it is ill-fitting in contemporary times smacks of narrow mindedness.
|
| |
|
Posted Aug 17, '12 at 4:47am
Uysername
32 posts
|
The Constitution can be brought in, but since when has that stopped people? Public opinion might go against it but has that ever stopped politicians?
Two thirds of both houses, three fourths of all states.
Familiar with that?
|
| |
|
Posted Aug 17, '12 at 5:55am
nichodemus
10,521 posts
|
No just 2/3 of the House. Where have you plucked the 3/4 magic figure from eh?
Also, remember that not all democrats are pro abortion; we have seen bills getting passed due to cross Bench support. Also, with the evangelical vote rising since the early 2000s it is an issue.
Familiar with that?
|
| |
|
Posted Aug 17, '12 at 6:02am
nichodemus
10,521 posts
|
And in any case, the 3/4 is to amend the Constitution, you might not even need to change it to pass pro life bills.
|
| |
|
Posted Aug 17, '12 at 8:12am
Uysername
32 posts
|
Umm, yes. You DO need to amend the constitution to pass pro life bills, since Roe vs Wade is a constitutional argument.
And the evangelical vote has not been rising as fast as you think.
|
| |
|
Posted Aug 17, '12 at 9:28am
nichodemus
10,521 posts
|
Actually no, historically abortion related bills didn't all have to be accompanied by a Constitution change. In the Roe vs Wade case, To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.
The evangelical vote is getting stronger. When Bush asked Ariel Sharon to pull his tanks out of Jenin in 2002, he received 100,000 angry emails from Christian fundamentalists, and never mentioned the matter again. Just this year, Santorum gave Romney a real run for his money due to strong evangelical backing.
|
| |
