This is wonderful news! It’s also a major reason I did not want to see Hillary Clinton elected. She stated (paraphrasing) in the last presidential debate that she would appoint Supreme Court justices that would stop this.
Transcript Search abortion
God bless the voters who saw the big picture!!!
If Roe v. Wade was reversed, it would not automatically make abortion illegal across the country. The legality of abortion would be in the hands of the states, some of which already have laws in place that would restrict a woman’s right to choose.
If the Court overturns Roe , that does not mean that abortion will be illegal. It means that each state can then enact laws voted upon by the state Legislature, signed by the state governor, and reviewed if necessary by the supreme appellate court of the state to be sure it complies with the state constitution.
Before you get too excited over this, realize that states that permit abortions could provide them now for free. Illinois recently passed such a bill signed by a Republican governor and there was a fourfold increase in the number of abortions. Such a shame since abortion rates have been dropping all these years, thanks partly to the Hyde Amendment prohibiting Federal funding of abortions.
Yes. If it returns to states they will be allowed to legalize them.
Free abortions? Possible, but the state of Illinois is going to pay for them? Or doctors and nurses are suddenly going to provide services for free? State taxpayers will, out of spite, just open up there pocket books to pay for strangers abortions?
Please cite a source for this and explain where the funding comes from.
The state of Illinois does not give give abortions for free. I guarantee it.
The governor signed the bill but we may not know if it was veto proof and if a veto might have been a futile act. In fact, we know very little about this bill he signed, whether it was a part of a budget and so on to keep on tossing this out there.
Oregon and Washington may have had legislation to offer free abortions but I’m not sure either became law. Again, this would just be up to web searching the information out there.
Your stats that abortion has been dropping over the recent years is true for the USA but I don’t know if it is true for a deep blue state like Illinois.
Continuing to state something about the Hyde amendment may be non-material to the conversation; it exists and seemingly will continue to exist. It doesn’t seem to directly affect the argument.
To say Illinois abortions increased four-fold since the governor signed the bill is a stat that needs to be verified. I don’t think they have those stats since this bill was signed.
Furthermore, just stating that “nothing” should be done which appears to be what you are saying is a pro-choice argument to me.
There are pro-choice Republicans as Murkowski and Collins are in the Senate that have kept Planned Parenthood from being defunded. This is true. Still, to just harp on Republicans when the most pro-abortion President the nation has ever had in Obama but not mentioning this seems inconsistent, let alone, dozens if not hundreds of Republican bills have been passed around the nation that are pro-life. It’s puzzling why you target Republicans with the needle in the haystack.
Looking at the bill Rauner signed, it says it was voted on “party lines” in the legislature, why not mention he signed a Democrat bill??? This reflects bias.
Mentioning the Hyde amendment basically has nothing to do with the price of tea in China and if one is arguing to keep the status quo, then, I’ve got to think one is just making a pro-choice argument.
The bill that Rauner signed was voted on per one article I saw by party lines? Why not mention this? It’s a Democrat bill?
The statement quoted seems to be nothing than lacking facts and more thumbing their nose at the Republican party who have done much in this area, true cherry picking along with going with the status quo is nothing but a pro-choice argument, the Hyde Amendment is from many years ago.
These states are going to require doctors to provide this service for free?
There is no such thing as a free abortion.
Rauner, a Republican, held veto power over the legislation—which Democrats pushed through on a strictly partly line vote and put on his desk May 31—but he went against the grain of his own party in approving the legislation.
It seems to just be couching an argument as anti-Republican to read the one post, bringing up the same old saws, “Hyde Amendment” which seems irrelevant to the total equation, if one has ever prayed a pro-life Rosary or gone further, prayed at abortion clinics and things like that, it’s pretty easy to spot someone who doesn’t have experience making weak arguments, sorry to say. Just like one can usually tell if one has given military service to the country.
You were saying?
There are no free abortions.
insurance companies to cover the procedures and putting taxpayers on the hook for the tab.
The doctor still got paid.
You want end abortion quickly? Start making taxpayer pay for it.
The original statement was about states giving free abortions. That has been met.
Of course, not one thing is free in life, it be where one rents or whatever, that is nitpicking.
Kids might have a free lunch at the school, of course, it’s not free totally but it is free to those children.
There you go!!! Let the pro abortion crowd push the expense more and more on taxpayer. That doesn’t sound like a winning strategy.
I will live in the real world, which means, Oregon has signed on to give free abortions, howeveer one wants to interpret it. If one wants to stick so much to their position that “I’m right”, so be it. Nothing is free including freedom. Let’s outlaw the word then. This is semantics. Good, so one wants to say those abortions in Oregon are still paid by someone. A lot of good that does.