Texas Abortion Law Leaves Planned Parenthood in Tears

They have known that the previous decision infringed upon States Rights...but just didn't have enough of a majority to do anything about it.

That's why the recent decisions about homosexual marriages and now abortion.

This court is all about states rights. So we shall see what happens but it's a breath of fresh air.

The law has a couple of enforcement points that may create problems if it gets to the full court.

Mississippi has a law that is on the docket for the upcoming SCOTUS session. Upholding it would be progress.

States have enforced laws concerning murder for a very long time, there is a very good precedent on that and Roe V Wade doesn't dispute that. The Supreme court cannot define when a fetus becomes a human because that is a religious issue. Also, the Satanists who are now claiming that Abortion is a religious issue have just given the Supreme court the perfect out, they have no jurisdiction on religious issues.

I thought it was a "science issue"? I mean, you take the genes from a human male and female and, logically, you get a human, right? So a human is human from conception...from that first joining together of sperm and egg.
How could religion have anything to do with the facts of conception?

Pretty solid constitution and system that protects staterights. It is strange that it has taken tens of millions of antiabortion people 50 years to figure this out.

What's strange is how people don't realize Roe v Wade was decided under the Constitutions 4th Amendment.

The Constitution is the highest federal law in the land. Federal law supercedes state law when invoked.

What's strange is how people don't realize Roe v Wade was decided under the Constitutions 4th Amendment.

The Constitution is the highest federal law in the land. Federal law supercedes state law when invoked.

Science says that when you have a heartbeat you are alive. We commonly use this as proof of someone being deceased, because they no longer have a heartbeat.

States have enforced laws concerning murder for a very long time, there is a very good precedent on that and Roe V Wade doesn't dispute that. The Supreme court cannot define when a fetus becomes a human because that is a religious issue. Also, the Satanists who are now claiming that Abortion is a religious issue have just given the Supreme court the perfect out, they have no jurisdiction on religious issues.

Science may say we are alive when we have a heartbeat but it would (should!) also say we are human from conception. Do we suddenly become human when our heart starts beating? What are we before then? A vegetable? A dog? A mineral?

My argument is that the Supreme Courts should have no issue defining a fetus as human from conception because it's a scientific FACT.

As an aside, did you know jellyfish and sea cucumbers don't have hearts? Does that mean, according to science, they aren't alive? What about bacteria? It's alive but has no heart.

If you say that the heartbeat is not important, then you kind of say that I was not alive when I was put into induced coma before a lifesaving operation. Yes, we are humanbeings when our hearts beat. I just saw a headline today about a footballplayer who dies, after being in a coma for 38 years, was it not a life because he was in a coma? For God? For the medical team? Terminal patients, take dr khevorkian, why prosecute him for "helping" terminally ill patients? They asked for it, but not legal to do. There is some morals in medical ethics also, not just cold logic.

Science may say we are alive when we have a heartbeat but it would (should!) also say we are human from conception. Do we suddenly become human when our heart starts beating? What are we before then? A vegetable? A dog? A mineral?

My argument is that the Supreme Courts should have no issue defining a fetus as human from conception because it's a scientific FACT.

As an aside, did you know jellyfish and sea cucumbers don't have hearts? Does that mean, according to science, they aren't alive? What about bacteria? It's alive but has no heart.

I believe a human is alive at conception...before the heart starts beating (whether science will admit it or not). We are also human at conception.

Are you saying when you were in a coma your heart wasn't beating? I've heard of low brain function (which some like to argue negates being alive) but I've never heard that a comatose patient has no heartbeat. In fact, "science" says that while in a coma, "the brain still retains involuntary functions like breathing, swallowing, and heart rate."

https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/conditionsandtreatments/coma

So what? The US is a union. No different from the EU, your states are nations under the union if you read your constitution, they have more sovereign rights than EU countries have. The Roe law was federal overreach. And now you got played at your own game, by medical reasons, life is defined by heartbeat, so now it is on scientific grounds, not religious.

Surely you agree that the SCOTUS is in an almost constant state of politication by either side, and they rearely strike the balance. Sometimes the left has majority and push through their issues against the constitution, and sometimes the other side might do that, as a lot of left wing people speak of now. States must be respected and decide for themselves. Texas and NY is more different than portugal and Germany are. Unless you want a fractured union, you should respect the differences, otherwise you divide. You argue a losing bettle in this case legally, and no issue since they can drive to another state and get it done. This is merely symbolic, not anything practical and a must, only to oppress texans, and ending the union.

If I was a texan, I would start a movement to ceade from the union, and get a vote on it. Do a USAEXIT, get traction, to send you a message that you play with fire, BREXIT was impossible, but it happened. You have the same with California, where the left say they want out, so tolerance for statedifferences, culturedifferences is a must to keep the peace, and live happy. Going after all the freedoms, rights, and culture that texans value, is a bad idea, it is the state that brings in the most GDP pr capita, and extremely important for the US. Also, you have a mess on your hands when ammendments invalidate the original constitution, texans and other constitutionalists do not agree with that. So you unite libertarians and conservatives against you, and you lose other traditional groups. Freeflowing abortion and attacking christianity, is not a winning issue among hispanics as you know.

I am well aware of the use of unreasonable search being the basis for abortion. The government said they would hide their eyes.

It doesn't matter and is not relevant to the Texas law. The Texas law simply states that you must check for a heartbeat first and if there is one you cannot abort without it being considered murder. It is established precedent that the states can decide at which point the baby is a human being and it has always been acceptable that that date is well before the day the baby is born. Also, they aren't making this a criminal complaint, it is a civil complaint. Those involved in the abortion can be sued for malpractice.

Second, it was the Satanist temple that said that abortion is a sacred rite for their religious practice of worshipping Satan. That argument would make the Roe V Wade ruling unconstitutional. The Supreme court has no authority over religious issues. Also to say that Texas can't outlaw it because of that is idiotic. Many states have had blue laws, many states outlaw polygamy even though it is part of the Mormon practice.

In the case of Roe v. Wade the 4th amendment pertained to right to privacy.
In other words, the jurisdiction of the state, and federal government, does not have the right to invade a woman's womb, or her right to medical privacy and choice.

Before Roe V. Wade, many don't know this, birth control was once illegal in the United States. Again, that was a right to privacy issue as well. The overarching point of such laws being primacy of the male sperm over the females personal autonomy. Which made females unequal under such laws.

I predict this Texas fight isn't over yet.

Yes, claiming that killing babies is a privacy issue is what I meant when I said the government would "hide their eyes". In addition to killing babies we now learn it is a religious rite of Satanists to sacrifice babies and they feel that Texas law will infringe on their right at human sacrifice,

It's not good when someone who isn't American, doesn't live here, tries to tell us about our Constitution or government. They always get it wrong.

You're conflating Satanists with this issue. That's pathetic.