Abortion Rights Advocates Win Key Victory in U.S. Supreme Court

  • News
  • Thread starter Entropia
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the controversial topic of abortion, with one person arguing that it is a woman's choice and the other arguing that it is taking a human life. The term "partial birth abortion" is deemed a non-medical term used for political gain and the procedure is rare, mostly used for non-viable fetuses. The conversation also touches on the issue of regret and the politicization of abortion as a religious and moral issue.
  • #1
Entropia
1,474
1
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030617/ts_nm/health_abortion_dc_2 [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hmmmm...'Roe" was apparently an idiot on many levels, and was ripe to get brainwashed. So what?

Oh, and the 'partial birth abortion' is a non-medical term which only exists in the minds of the anti-abortion crowd. The term exists only for political gain, and the procedure itself is extremely rare, and is normally used for non-viable fetuses(feti?). About 1% of abortions are D&X procedures, and 99% of them are used to save a mother's life, or because the fetus is severely deformed(spinal cord outside the body, stuff like that.)
 
  • #3
this is also known as the fisherman's paradox.
 
  • #4
Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
this is also known as the fisherman's paradox.
Could you elaborate? I don't think I've ever heard of it. Is that the remorse for catching the fish?

Many people regret many things they do. Almost all women at some point regret abortion and even adoption.
 
  • #5
Originally posted by russ_watters
Could you elaborate? I don't think I've ever heard of it. Is that the remorse for catching the fish?

Sorry, I was thinking row vs wade, not Roe vs Wade.
 
  • #6
All I can say is that there is scientifically little to no difference between on of these 'fetuses' after the first trimester and a baby. In my opinion that effectively makes late-term abortion the same thing as infanticide. The idea that fetuses aren't actually human beings disturbs me because it implies that
a) The fetus just suddenly becomes human in the process of being delivered, which is physically impossible.
or b) The fact that you haven't met this person makes it ok to kill it.
I find it rather odd that the same people that are putting up so much protest about the innocent lives lost in war in Iraq are promoting this sort of thing right here at home.
 
  • #7
Originally posted by Kagmi
All I can say is that there is scientifically little to no difference between on of these 'fetuses' after the first trimester and a baby. In my opinion that effectively makes late-term abortion the same thing as infanticide. The idea that fetuses aren't actually human beings disturbs me because it implies that
a) The fetus just suddenly becomes human in the process of being delivered, which is physically impossible.
or b) The fact that you haven't met this person makes it ok to kill it.
I find it rather odd that the same people that are putting up so much protest about the innocent lives lost in war in Iraq are promoting this sort of thing right here at home.

No, I would say that you are off the mark. The 6-7 month mark is where teh fetus becomes semi-viable. Plus, like people keep saying to no avail, the so called 'partial birth abortions'(a right-wing fictional term), are performed generally when the fetus is extremely malformed. I find it odd that people who want to ban all abortions seem to be pro-death penalty and pro-war, and anti-public school, school lunch, Head Start, medical aid for poor children, etc. All this 'concern' about the 'unborn', and no concern for actual living human beings.
 
  • #8
you fail to realize that public schools, school lunches, head start, and medical care all require higher taxes, and republicans don't want this! :wink:
 
  • #9
Actually, they don't require higher taxes...they require tax dollars to be diverted away from bloated military budgets, and corporations and the wealthiest 1% to actually stop dodging the taxes they are supposed to pay in the first place.

The problem of politicizing abortion is that it isn't a medical issue, it is the religious fundamentalists wanting to legislate their warped morality.
 
  • #10
Originally posted by russ_watters
Could you elaborate? I don't think I've ever heard of it. Is that the remorse for catching the fish?

Many people regret many things they do. Almost all women at some point regret abortion and even adoption.

Almost all women regret adoption at some point? So, you have established that people have an equal probability of regretting any decision they make. By this rationale many people would also regret not having an abortion.

Perhaps you think it best to let the state make the decisions for the people because the people are too stupid to make the "right" decision. Yeah, true Americans like myself call that facism.

Thank you for presenting such a weak argument.

eNtRopY
 
  • #11
Originally posted by eNtRopY
Almost all women regret adoption at some point? So, you have established that people have an equal probability of regretting any decision they make. By this rationale many people would also regret not having an abortion.

Perhaps you think it best to let the state make the decisions for the people because the people are too stupid to make the "right" decision. Yeah, true Americans like myself call that facism.

Thank you for presenting such a weak argument.

eNtRopY
Wow. You missed my point completely. Do you think I'm "pro life"? My point was that since people often have regrets about difficult or painful choices, its not surprising nor is it important to the issue of choice that she regrets hers. I'm pro choice.
 

What was the key victory for abortion rights advocates in the U.S. Supreme Court?

The key victory for abortion rights advocates in the U.S. Supreme Court was the ruling in the case of June Medical Services LLC v. Russo. The Court struck down a Louisiana law that required doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, stating that it placed an undue burden on women seeking abortions and was therefore unconstitutional.

Why was this ruling significant for abortion rights?

This ruling was significant for abortion rights because it reaffirmed the precedent set in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt that restricting access to abortion through medically unnecessary regulations is unconstitutional. It also showed that the Court remains committed to upholding the right to abortion established in Roe v. Wade.

What impact will this ruling have on abortion laws in other states?

This ruling will likely have a significant impact on abortion laws in other states. It sets a clear precedent that laws targeting abortion providers and clinics cannot be passed under the guise of protecting women's health, and gives advocates a strong argument to challenge similar laws in other states.

How did the Court's decision split among the justices?

The Court's decision split in a 5-4 vote, with Chief Justice John Roberts joining the liberal justices in the majority. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

What does this ruling mean for the future of abortion rights in the United States?

This ruling is a significant win for abortion rights advocates and suggests that the current balance of the Court is still in favor of upholding the right to abortion. However, with the recent appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the future of abortion rights in the United States remains uncertain and will likely depend on future cases brought before the Court.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
3
Replies
73
Views
11K
  • General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
5
Replies
147
Views
15K
  • General Discussion
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
18
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top