It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: windword
I never claimed that it would overturn the SCOTUS ruling in Roe-V-Wade, all I ever said was that, with the changing of the guard of justices being an imminent inevitability, the opinion on the matter may change with it.
... SCOTUS has determined that a woman's autonomy is an inalienable right, up until the point of viability.
It'll be interesting to watch, either way. As the science behind keeping a fetus alive outside of the womb gets better, and as we continue to understand more and more about the development of a child in the womb, opinions and science on the topic will continue to evolve, and with that evolution, laws should keep up, as should opinions on the matter.
originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Bluntone22
heck, take all the emphasis on late term abortions, they are really few, women have to shell out an unbelievable amount of money for them and travel sometimes across country if they need one... and most of these are for reasons that I believe are justifiable, usually either to preserve the mother's life and health or because medical tests have detected severe problems with the fetus.
originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: SlapMonkey
Do you ever see either side being willing to compromise their beliefs?
This may always be black or white.
The big question is if the bill is constitutional. Passing the bill will mean nothing if a federal judge puts a halt on it.