Roe v Wade set to be overturn

submitted by Richard_Parker from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

At first I agreed with you on this, because it's a good argument. The right could and should be sanctioning the left any way legally possible. It's good for us when the left chimps out. Why stop at Roe v. Wade? They could overturn Obergefell v. Hodges and watch the left literally attempt insurrection and Self-immolate in protest.

Then I got to thinking about it more and I disagree because the justices and republicans have no such motivation. They are only doing this because their pastor gives them sermons about how democrats are the real racists for aborting black babies.

[–]Richard_Parker[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

This needed to be done in 93 with Casey, to put an end to judicial activism. The Constitution has outlived its usefulness and I am fully post-democratic in my thinking but there is an advantage to stemming the tide. Roe v Wade style legislating from the bench is what made gay marriage possible....

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The constitution was admirable to some degree in its first draft when it restricted voting to land-owning white males only. The continuous amendments over time have rendered it into a shitshow.

[–]Richard_Parker[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The problem with requiring ownership of land is that it exacerbates problem of generatiobal wealth. The system envisioned in Starship Troopers is far better. Some poor people can be brilliant, capable and so on whilst some welarhy individuals can be degenrates, fools, cretins, idiots, etc.