If Roe v. Wade is overturned

[Rightguide]

That's your opinion whereas before you stated that it wasn't possible at all.

As for codifying it, the wording could be created to not address abortion the same way that this case was deciding.

As long as a fetus is contained within a woman, the woman should always take priority. Any legislation that decides differently should be opposed.
(Also my opinion)

Btw - if enough constituents lobby well enough, compromise is more likely. That's kinda how it works....left or right (even the far left)

Here's one of the problems faced by the Congress on this issue, in particular, Schumer's call for a vote this week:

Democrats lack votes to end filibuster for abortion protections​

• Alayna Treene, author of Axios Sneak Peek

Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) said Tuesday they plan to uphold the filibuster in the wake of the leaked draft decision from the U.S. Supreme Court on overturning Roe v. Wade.

Why it matters: Democrats have very few legislative options to try to stop the Supreme Court from carrying out a decision that would end the nationwide right to an abortion. While Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) vowed to hold a vote on codifying Roe v. Wade, the measure — which as of now does not yet even have 50 votes — would fail to meet the filibuster’s 60-vote threshold.

What they’re saying: Manchin told reporters: “The filibuster is a protection of democracy.”

• Manchin voted against similar legislation trying to codify abortion rights earlier this year.

Sinema: While Sinema is supportive of abortion rights, her spokesperson said her views on preserving the filibuster are unchanged and pointed to seven Senate votes where a 60-vote threshold ultimately protected abortion rights.

More here:

https://www.axios.com/manchin-sinem...tus-613d9325-fca5-42a5-98d5-3923bce3dc45.html

 

[Sean Renaud]

The problem with that is no human lives were lost. They literally were not people yet. Given the current economics in the world they would likely have had fairly fucked up childhoods. This another place where conservatives fail at basic logic abortions mostly happen for one reason even if they phrase it differently. To me "I can't afford a child" "I want to go to college first." "I need to get farther in my career" are all the same statement. I need money. Passing the equal for equal work amendment and raising the minimum wage would probably reduce pregnancies.

But since the goal is controlling women NOT protecting children none of this occurs to the Right.

 

[ll74]

Here's one of the problems faced by the Congress on this issue, in particular, Schumer's call for a vote this week:

Democrats lack votes to end filibuster for abortion protections​

• Alayna Treene, author of Axios Sneak Peek

Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) said Tuesday they plan to uphold the filibuster in the wake of the leaked draft decision from the U.S. Supreme Court on overturning Roe v. Wade.

Why it matters: Democrats have very few legislative options to try to stop the Supreme Court from carrying out a decision that would end the nationwide right to an abortion. While Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) vowed to hold a vote on codifying Roe v. Wade, the measure — which as of now does not yet even have 50 votes — would fail to meet the filibuster’s 60-vote threshold.

What they’re saying: Manchin told reporters: “The filibuster is a protection of democracy.”

• Manchin voted against similar legislation trying to codify abortion rights earlier this year.

Sinema: While Sinema is supportive of abortion rights, her spokesperson said her views on preserving the filibuster are unchanged and pointed to seven Senate votes where a 60-vote threshold ultimately protected abortion rights.

More here:

https://www.axios.com/manchin-sinem...tus-613d9325-fca5-42a5-98d5-3923bce3dc45.html

With enough political pressure, votes can change.

Machin voted against legislation earlier, but has signalled support of others.

I'll continue to lobby my representatives...you can as well

 

[Rightguide]

You continually exaggerate reality.

Joe Biden doesn't write legislation.

Unlike you, I don't care why a woman chooses to get an abortion. It's her choice to do so.

What exaggeration?

 

[ll74]

What exaggeration?

The "far left" and their actual effect on things mainly.

I think you underestimate the backlash that the ruling will have.

 

[Sean Renaud]

We don't even have a far left, we have a left in name only. What we have is a right and an extreme right.

 

[anarchoMando]

You ignore the political opposition to doing so. The vast majority of the 63 million human lives that have been snuffed out with abortion in the last 50 years had little to nothing to do with the safety or health of the mother's life.

Here's the real Joe Biden, before others had to put words in his mouth on abortion:

“I do not view abortion as a choice and a right,” he said. “I think it’s always a tragedy, and I think that it should be rare and safe, and I think we should be focusing on how to limit the number of abortions.” Biden also said he’d like to “focus on how to deal with women not wanting abortion.”

Fuck both who cares

In fact I wish there was more abortions, not every ejaculation deserves a name

 

[Naughtygirl201]

Probably? Consider? If it hasn't made up your mind already...then you condone it. Can't have it both ways. Only time a Republican is a good Republican...is the day they die and are buried. At least let them feed worms.

This is really helpful stuff. Thanks.

 

[Sh1ne0n67]

Drivel would have been a good, loyal supporter of the king...