Since this was never law, but a terrible SCOTUS ruling, the proper terminology is REVERSE ROE vs WADE. But I absolutely agree with the concept.
I remember well the original ruling. It was all about trimesters with unfettered abortion only in the 1rst trimester, almost none in the 3rd trimester and abortion for cause in the 2nd. The proverbial slippery slope has now expanded it to new borns after botched abortions.
We might as well follow the trend and make abortion extend throughout life. It would certainly make honoring your mother a much higher priority.
No need to even reverse it - since it is not a law, as you say.
I don't trust Roberts so maybe that is why they wait. But the moment they think they can get it...start operating like RvW never happened. Start arresting for murder. It will then be re-challenged in court.
It seems only logical that a mother should be able to sit down and have a serious talk with their therapist and decide if it's right for her to abort her young adult child who is still living at home. I'm not a doctor, but is a home really all that different than a uterus?
They wouldn't survive outside of the home, just like how they wouldn't survive outside of the womb. Strictly speaking probably no adults would survive in the womb so maybe anyone can be aborted. It all gets very complicated.
The details of the original ruling would be progress toward a permanent compromise, but why did SCOTUS have to do it instead of Congress or just ordinary citizens running on pro choice platforms?
Since this was never law, but a terrible SCOTUS ruling, the proper terminology is REVERSE ROE vs WADE. But I absolutely agree with the concept.
I remember well the original ruling. It was all about trimesters with unfettered abortion only in the 1rst trimester, almost none in the 3rd trimester and abortion for cause in the 2nd. The proverbial slippery slope has now expanded it to new borns after botched abortions.
We might as well follow the trend and make abortion extend throughout life. It would certainly make honoring your mother a much higher priority.
No need to even reverse it - since it is not a law, as you say.
I don't trust Roberts so maybe that is why they wait. But the moment they think they can get it...start operating like RvW never happened. Start arresting for murder. It will then be re-challenged in court.
It seems only logical that a mother should be able to sit down and have a serious talk with their therapist and decide if it's right for her to abort her young adult child who is still living at home. I'm not a doctor, but is a home really all that different than a uterus?
It should be the mother’s choice to abort her 34 year old basement dweller.
They wouldn't survive outside of the home, just like how they wouldn't survive outside of the womb. Strictly speaking probably no adults would survive in the womb so maybe anyone can be aborted. It all gets very complicated.
The details of the original ruling would be progress toward a permanent compromise, but why did SCOTUS have to do it instead of Congress or just ordinary citizens running on pro choice platforms?