T Nation

Trump and Roe V. Wade

While I think that Trump cares about Roe v. Wade (or even knows what the ruling was) about as much as the Big Mac he ate yesterday; he most certainly has stirred up a hornet’s nest of State Legislatures saying that “Now is the time…”

Missouri joins a movement of GOP-dominated state legislatures emboldened by the possibility that a more conservative Supreme Court could overturn Roe V. Wade. Its senators voted only hours after Alabama’s governor signed the most stringent abortion ban in the nation on Wednesday, making performing an abortion a felony in nearly all cases.

The fight is on…

And the door is now open for your thoughts, PWI…

Another juicy one. Getting the popcorn.

1 Like


We’ll just take the thread wherever it goes…

For what its worth, even Pat Robertson has said that the Alabama law has gone too far. He believes it will either fail to reach the supreme court, or will fail to overturn Roe at SCOTUS.

Never thought I would be referencing Pat Robertson to make a point.

1 Like

Should these cases reach the Supreme Court…I just have this feeling (@pfury!)…that Kavanaugh and Gorsuch will approach this from a more Legal/Constitutional standpoint. Thomas? Who knows.

In other words; when it comes to Roe v. Wade…a “Conservative” vs. a “Liberal” Justice becomes a very hazy distinction.


I agree Mufasa.

I think these law-writers should be careful. If their case reaches the Supreme Fourth they may get a decision they don’t like.

Similar to the way laws banning gay marriage ended up totally legalizing gay marriage.

1 Like

This is what Pat Robertson is worried about. It could also switch the premise on which much of the public thinks the legality of abortion is based on. It seems that the GOP has done really good job in making the argument about if the fetus is a person, and that being the basis of wither abortion should be legal or not.

In my opinion it should not matter if the fetus is a person or not from a legal standpoint. What matters is that a person has a right to their own body.

I like to think of a hypothetical example of a medical procedure in which one person could be hooked up to another’s body in order to use the other’s body function to survive. Now if I hook my self up to you to save my own life, I believe you still should have the option to disconnect me. I may feel you are being immoral, but legally you should have the right.

1 Like

Whyyyyyy? Why would you open Pandora’s box @Mufasa?


Well, it’s more as if I took part in an activity that hooks you up to me for 9 months. To be clear, not you hooking yourself up to me. “I hooked you up to me. And now that you are, I’m going to kill you (though I could just wait 9 months and you’ll unhook).”

Consent is an ongoing thing. You could decide to let me hook myself to you, then change your mind. I believe that even if you consented initially, you would have the right down the road to unhook me.

The child was placed in the situation without its consent.

So, if I hook you up to me while you’re unconcious. That is, without your consent…


There’s a lot wrong with that analogy. Most importantly, YOU didn’t hook YOURSELF up, someone else did it without talking to you and without you even being aware of it happening. In fact, the very same person who now wants to disconnect you from the lifesaving functions is the one who did it.

Maybe, but you if you have a right to your own body, then you also have to accept the consequences of your voluntary actions when those actions result in a major effect on a different person’s body.


My opinion is that the status of the fetus does not matter legally. Morally is a different story.

What about if we remove the fetus, without causing harm to it? It may die without the mother, but the mother did not do harm, only removal of support?

Don’t mind me. Just a brief check in before going back into hibernation.

I still think legally this should be allowed. I am not arguing about morality.


I feel your pain, @Aragorn!

These Conservative Legislatures were making the issue hard to ignore.

I know there is no way of preventing this thread from becoming an argument on Life, murder, and the like…but again; the issue was just begging for a new thread, considering the recent actions of these Legislatures.

1 Like

This is why the status of the fetus is so integrated to the debate… in most other situations that’s called homicide. Or conspiracy to commit homicide. Or manslaughter.

If the fetus isn’t a person, then it’s no big deal. That’s why it’s part of the debate. Pro choice or pro life, I have yet to hear ANY argument from any side that doesn’t address the status of the fetus.

“Just when I thought I was out…they pulled me back in!”


I do not think the status of the fetus should be part of the debate if we are talking about legality (morality it is fitting). I believe everyone has a right to do with their body as they please. A pregnancy causes many undesirable impacts to the pregnant woman. She should be allowed to stop her body from being pregnant if she wishes.