3 ms·

the supreme court did not ban abortion. It removed abortion as a legal right. It means people cannot use the power of the federal government to overrule their

the supreme court did not ban abortion. It removed abortion as a legal right. It means people cannot use the power of the federal government to overrule their own state legislature on the topic of abortion. If you understand how the US Government works, then you understand that the Supreme Court cannot establish ANYTHING by removing laws. (ie overturning previous decisions). What the Supreme court did was allow for the POSSIBILITY of a fully Catholic US State to practice Catholic religion with respect to abortion. It ALSO allows a fully Jewish state to practice Jewish religion however they want with respect to abortion. They actual problem caused by overturning Roe v Wade is that some states who's laws are already catholic will regain the power to stop abortions in their state. That's it. California, New York, etc, are absolutely and completely unaffected by this decision, for example.

timbit42 4y ago
So theocracies? Huge doubt there are any states where every citizen is of the same religion.
- cupofpython 4y ago
  well, voting majority - not exactly every citizen. The US is an agreement. It is more comparable to the EU than it is Spain, or France, etc. Each state is meant to have autonomy relatively similar to a country, but are united together for purposes of national defense and human rights. that was the initial premise. it's expanded from there, but the constitution was a compromise.. states did not want to join the union just to transfer power from a king to a federal government. The heart of the Republican platform is upholding that compromise. The heart of the Democratic platform is that was then, this is now, we are a single country and need to centralize more power.
bombcar 4y ago
> If you understand how the US Government works, then you understand that the Supreme Court cannot establish ANYTHING by removing laws. (ie overturning previous decisions). This was actually part of the issue: > After cataloging a wealth of other information having no bearing on the meaning of the Constitution, the opinion concluded with a numbered set of rules much like those that might be found in a statute enacted by a legislature. For way too long the entire political argument in the US on way too many things has been punted to the Supremes to let the elected officials get out of any responsibility whatsoever.

timbit42 4y ago

So theocracies? Huge doubt there are any states where every citizen is of the same religion.

cupofpython 4y ago
well, voting majority - not exactly every citizen. The US is an agreement. It is more comparable to the EU than it is Spain, or France, etc. Each state is meant to have autonomy relatively similar to a country, but are united together for purposes of national defense and human rights. that was the initial premise. it's expanded from there, but the constitution was a compromise.. states did not want to join the union just to transfer power from a king to a federal government. The heart of the Republican platform is upholding that compromise. The heart of the Democratic platform is that was then, this is now, we are a single country and need to centralize more power.

bombcar 4y ago

> If you understand how the US Government works, then you understand that the Supreme Court cannot establish ANYTHING by removing laws. (ie overturning previous decisions). This was actually part of the issue: > After cataloging a wealth of other information having no bearing on the meaning of the Constitution, the opinion concluded with a numbered set of rules much like those that might be found in a statute enacted by a legislature. For way too long the entire political argument in the US on way too many things has been punted to the Supremes to let the elected officials get out of any responsibility whatsoever.