[Abortion Thread] A Matter of Choice (NEW POLL!)

[Gig em Aggies]

So my question in regards to todays historic news would the Democratic controlled state governments such as California ban all government travel or business with states that implement a full on ban on abortion? because last I recall roughly 13 states will have a complete ban within a month of the overturn with another 7 likely to ban abortion which means around 40% of the country will ban abortion. as shown in this map here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... ation-roe/. I also want to know the possible economic effect this could have on states like California if it bans government business or travel to anti-abortion states.

[Elwher]

It depends on the state such as in Kentucky

https://www.wlky.com/article/abortions- ... /40406350#

There's gotta be one state or territory out there that allows them past 40 weeks. Surely there is.

New Jersey has no time restrictions on them. There may well be other states as well.

[Bear Stearns]

yes. the US has internal freedom of movement

There is a difference between something being legal and something being a feasible solution. While it may be legally possible to cross state lines in order to get an abortion that doesn't mean that it is a practical solution. The direct and indirect costs of travel can make it prohibitive depending on the person and their financial status. As has already been noted in other places this is a solution for the well off but not a solution for those who are not well off. It also isn't a solution if abortion is banned across the US, as some Republicans have stated they want to try and do.

between car, bus, greyhound, amtrak, low cost airlines, bicycles i dont understand how this is an issue for people who arent literally homeless.

there are busses that run between NYC and DC that cost like $40 per ride.

[Elwher]

61% of Americans want to make abortions legal, I reckon that's a sufficient majority.

Majority of voters doesn't matter when it comes to the Amendment process.

Article V:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

A sufficient majority does matter, all that is necessary is to either elect enough pro-abortion Representatives and Senators to the Congress or to elect pro-abortion majorities in 2/3 of the state legislators and call for a Constitutional Convention. Either method could result in abortion being Constitutionally protected and no SCOTUS decision could alter it then.

[Necroghastia]

There is a difference between something being legal and something being a feasible solution. While it may be legally possible to cross state lines in order to get an abortion that doesn't mean that it is a practical solution. The direct and indirect costs of travel can make it prohibitive depending on the person and their financial status. As has already been noted in other places this is a solution for the well off but not a solution for those who are not well off. It also isn't a solution if abortion is banned across the US, as some Republicans have stated they want to try and do.

between car, bus, greyhound, amtrak, low cost airlines, bicycles i dont understand how this is an issue for people who arent literally homeless.

there are busses that run between NYC and DC that cost like $40 per ride.

...Good lord, y'all city folk really are out of touch.

[Bear Stearns]

between car, bus, greyhound, amtrak, low cost airlines, bicycles i dont understand how this is an issue for people who arent literally homeless.

there are busses that run between NYC and DC that cost like $40 per ride.

...Good lord, y'all city folk really are out of touch.

ouch. i didnt become a city person until after i was an adult.

barefoot guatemalans can literally walk across mexico into arizona so i dont think its hard to drive up i-95.

[Spirit of Hope]

There is a difference between something being legal and something being a feasible solution. While it may be legally possible to cross state lines in order to get an abortion that doesn't mean that it is a practical solution. The direct and indirect costs of travel can make it prohibitive depending on the person and their financial status. As has already been noted in other places this is a solution for the well off but not a solution for those who are not well off. It also isn't a solution if abortion is banned across the US, as some Republicans have stated they want to try and do.

between car, bus, greyhound, amtrak, low cost airlines, bicycles i dont understand how this is an issue for people who arent literally homeless.

there are busses that run between NYC and DC that cost like $40 per ride.

Wow you missed half the point of what I said: between direct and indirect costs.

Yes the cost of travel may be relatively low depending on the type of travel taken, but that travel also isn't fast. If you are an hourly worker who doesn't find your schedule out until a couple of days before hand how are you going to schedule multiple days off? Don't forget they may not have paid time off and may fear a loss of future hours if they are unavailable now.

Also NYC to DC is a false equivalency, you are looking at two major cities with some of the most developed infrastructure between them. Now everyone lives in those circumstances, if you live in a small town in much of the mid west or south their may not be local transport easily available to you. If you don't own a car, no train or bus runs through your town, and the closest airport is hours away, how exactly are you supposed to make a trip across state lines?

[Existential Cats]

There is a difference between something being legal and something being a feasible solution. While it may be legally possible to cross state lines in order to get an abortion that doesn't mean that it is a practical solution. The direct and indirect costs of travel can make it prohibitive depending on the person and their financial status. As has already been noted in other places this is a solution for the well off but not a solution for those who are not well off. It also isn't a solution if abortion is banned across the US, as some Republicans have stated they want to try and do.

between car, bus, greyhound, amtrak, low cost airlines, bicycles i dont understand how this is an issue for people who arent literally homeless.

there are busses that run between NYC and DC that cost like $40 per ride.

I think you underestimate how many Americans live paycheck to paycheck. Plus there's still the cost of lodging, transportation to the specific clinic, and the abortion itself, and the factor that it's lost time that could have been spent working. All of this in an era of shit wages and inflation.

I mean, I amtrak-ed out from Toledo to Boston and back, economy. It was hardly cheaper than a flight and 2/3rds of a day long each way, sitting in an uncomfortable chair and having to buy their overpriced food for sustenance. It's fine for me as a lowly student, but I can't imagine doing that as a working-class, single pregnant woman, which would basically be the case for a lot of women seeking an abortion in middle America.

[Fartsniffage]

between car, bus, greyhound, amtrak, low cost airlines, bicycles i dont understand how this is an issue for people who arent literally homeless.

there are busses that run between NYC and DC that cost like $40 per ride.

I think you underestimate how many Americans live paycheck to paycheck. Plus there's still the cost of lodging, transportation to the specific clinic, and the abortion itself, and the factor that it's lost time that could have been spent working. All of this in an era of shit wages and inflation.

I mean, I amtrak-ed out from Toledo to Boston and back, economy. It was hardly cheaper than a flight and 2/3rds of a day long, sitting in an uncomfortable chair and having to buy their overpriced food for sustenance. It's fine for me as a lowly student, but I can't imagine doing that as a working-class, single pregnant woman, which would basically be the case for a lot of women seeking an abortion in middle America.

Bear knows. He just doesn't care.

[Bear Stearns]

I think you underestimate how many Americans live paycheck to paycheck. Plus there's still the cost of lodging, transportation to the specific clinic, and the abortion itself, and the factor that it's lost time that could have been spent working. All of this in an era of shit wages and inflation.

I mean, I amtrak-ed out from Toledo to Boston and back, economy. It was hardly cheaper than a flight and 2/3rds of a day long, sitting in an uncomfortable chair and having to buy their overpriced food for sustenance. It's fine for me as a lowly student, but I can't imagine doing that as a working-class, single pregnant woman, which would basically be the case for a lot of women seeking an abortion in middle America.

Bear knows. He just doesn't care.

tbh i really dont.

[San Lumen]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/353 ... on-ruling/

Murkowski vows to work on legislation in response to abortion ruling

[Diarcesia]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3536561-murkowski-vows-to-work-on-legislation-in-response-to-abortion-ruling/

Murkowski vows to work on legislation in response to abortion ruling

I think if they really want abortion access to be allowed across the US, this is the more long-term solution than Roe v. Wade

[Spirit of Hope]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3536561-murkowski-vows-to-work-on-legislation-in-response-to-abortion-ruling/

Murkowski vows to work on legislation in response to abortion ruling

Not going to go anywhere I imagine, with only two republicans who are likely to go for it they don't have a hope of breaking the filibuster and I doubt that the democrats leadership is going to get rid of the filibuster.

[Thomasi]

Abortion Illegal in Wisconsin after law making abortion murder passed 173 years ago 1 year after the state was admitted into the union goes back into affect.

[San Lumen]

Abortion Illegal in Wisconsin after law making abortion murder passed 173 years ago 1 year after the state was admitted into the union goes back into affect.

source?

[Terminus Station]

its gross how a 3rd of you guys dont understand why its immoral to force a woman to carry a fetus to term.

[Thomasi]

Abortion Illegal in Wisconsin after law making abortion murder passed 173 years ago 1 year after the state was admitted into the union goes back into affect.

source?

https://www.wpr.org/no-wisconsin-clinic ... roe-v-wade

[San Lumen]

source?

https://www.wpr.org/no-wisconsin-clinic ... roe-v-wade

So its automatic? In places like Arkansas the AG had to certify the law taking affect.

[Vassenor]

(Image)

For those of you saying "jUsT gO sOmEwHeRe eLsE," these are the states where the rights to one's own body are actually safe and enshrined into law. Do you really think it's feasible for someone in the Deep South to do as you suggest?

yes. the US has internal freedom of movement

Which is why we've seen anti-abortion states attempt to criminalise leaving the state to access abortion services. Because at the end of the day it's all about control over women.

[Diarcesia]

yes. the US has internal freedom of movement

Which is why we've seen anti-abortion states attempt to criminalise leaving the state to access abortion services. Because at the end of the day it's all about control over women.

Wouldn't that run afoul of internal freedom of movement in the first place (strictly legally speaking)?

[New haven america]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3536561-murkowski-vows-to-work-on-legislation-in-response-to-abortion-ruling/

Murkowski vows to work on legislation in response to abortion ruling

I think if they really want abortion access to be allowed across the US, this is the more long-term solution than Roe v. Wade

It's going to die because of Manchin and Sinema and if not the GOP are instituting a federal ban in '24 if they win.

There's a reason why "They could've just legislated it" wouldn't work nearly as well as a lot of you think, and that's because the Reps can just easily legislate its death.

[Autumn Wind]

Yes there is.

without due process of law. the passage of a law constitutes due process, as it is debated by the legislature and only passes upon the support of the majority*.

* a majority of the legislature having no necessary relation to the majority or even a near plurality of the governed populace.

[Diarcesia]

I think if they really want abortion access to be allowed across the US, this is the more long-term solution than Roe v. Wade

It's going to die because of Manchin and Sinema and if not the GOP are instituting a federal ban in '24 if they win.

There's a reason why "They could've just legislated it" wouldn't work nearly as well as a lot of you think, and that's because the Reps can just easily legislate its death.

I disagree. You can choose not to abort your baby under a regime of legal abortion.

Under a regime of illegal abortion, you can't choose to abort your baby.

[Thomasi]

https://www.wpr.org/no-wisconsin-clinic ... roe-v-wade

So its automatic? In places like Arkansas the AG had to certify the law taking affect.

The AG had to because it was a trigger law, this is simply a law that was on the books then stopped being enforced because the supreme court made it unconstitutional yet didn't explicitly strike down any laws.

The state GOP gaveled in and out and the law went back into affect.

[The Black Forrest]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3536561-murkowski-vows-to-work-on-legislation-in-response-to-abortion-ruling/

Murkowski vows to work on legislation in response to abortion ruling

Oh that’s nice. She voted for 2 of the three trump judges. She probably would have voted a third if it was election times.

I won’t hold my breath on her efforts.