In response to another post where I said that no one wanted abortion returned to the states, someone stated that he did want that. I didn’t want to go off topic , but I’m really curious as to why someone would take that position. If you think abortion is murder , you want it banned everywhere. If you think a woman has a right to have an abortion, you want it legal everywhere. Why would you want it left to the states, except as a compromise?
I think only very rarely do people believe in “states’ rights” when it comes to their pet issues. It’s just a tactic and rationalization to change federal laws to whatever ideology they favor.
All too often we’ve seen the hypocrisy. When it comes to abortion or firearms it’s VERY important that we honor states’ rights. But remember when states like Colorado began relaxing marijuana laws? Well then it became absolutely critical that we enforce federal law!
Now, a principled argument can be made for what is appropriate to regulate by state or by federal law. But by and large, anyone bleating about states’ rights has an ax to grind and doesn’t really care otherwise.
I genuinely don’t think it’s a federal matter; some things are, and some things aren’t, and I think this happens to be one of the latter, and that’s why I would’ve reached the same decision the Supreme Court did.
It is a federal matter, I believe women have a right to bodily autonomy wrt to reproductive decisions. Why should it matter if the woman resides in Michigan or Georgia?
Would men be comfortable with a state dictating access, accommodation and permission to the male population seeking vasectomies or treatment for erectile dysfunction?
After the Supreme Court decision, it was reported that many in the anti-abortion movement publicly celebrated and privately muttered under their breath that a valuable fund-raising issue and political hammer had been taken away from them.
From my cynical perspective, abortion as a tool to harass the libs and punish who they see as irresponsible, mostly dark-skinned people has been far more important since Roe v Wade than the prohibition of abortion itself. At no time since then was it feasible to get a national anti-abortion law passed. Therefore letting the states cater to the right was the goal.
I’ve said it before and here is another opportunity. The right’s only two core principles are hypocrisy and bigotry.
We most certainly do, and a national constitution. The “states rights” issue hinges on disputes over exactly what the federal government can and cannot doe.
Then please explain why the federation can’t do anything about ICE invading their states against their express will and having “absolute immunity” from state laws.
In the face of federal tyranny like we have now, I’m in favor of states securing individual rights and freedoms.
As a general rule, I like what Union General George ‘Pap’ Thomas said after the battle of Missionary Ridge in 1863. His staff asked about burying Union dead by state. His answer was “No, mix ‘em up. I’m tired of states’ rights."
Is it silent on the issue of privacy and state enforced pregnancy even in cases of incest and rape. Sounds a bit like slavery, eliminating the rights of a woman to bodily autonomy so where’s the 13$14 amendment?