Oliver Bender

On the SC battle pro/contra «Roe v. Wade»

However, he also wrote separately in this opinion disagreeing with the Court’s refusal to hear the 7th Circuit Court of Appeal’s opinion that struck down Indiana’s law that prohibits abortions motivated by race, sex, Down syndrome or disability.

Neither of these dynamics is politically healthy. The task of legislators is not to posture in order to provoke jurists who are actually in charge. Rather, legislators’ job is to legislate and, crucially, to be accountable for it. They are not accountable for that which no one actually believes will occur, especially when the reason is that judges will not permit it. Nor is it politically healthy for the Court to shelter one side’s absolute position while disenfranchising the other’s.

But when pollsters ask more nuanced questions, which legislators would be compelled to do in the absence of Roe, they get more nuanced answers. The most common position by far is that abortion should be “legal on
... show more
Pepe de Brantuas
Thus, I don’t know what would be your exact point against abortions.
My view with abortion is that it should be prohibited. That does not prevent there may be mitigating, or even exonerating, depending on the circumstances of the woman.
When it’s inside the mother that dependence is inevitable without killing him. Then it can be given up for adoption or social services. Or can’t it?
Since you would like to stick to science in regards to the abortion debate…
Scientifically it’s a human being different from the mother genetically from the beginning. Another thing is that there are scientists who speculate about their “humanity” at different times of development, but that depends more on those who believe it to be “human” than on any scientific proof that denies it.

Saludos.

This website uses cookies to recognize revisiting and logged in users. You accept the usage of these cookies by continue browsing this website.