Roe v. Wade: A Legal History 

Right there with you. I don't even know my parents. Mother squeezed me out and bounced before i was dry, i swear... Father is an alcoholic, remarried, and bounced out before i was 10. Got stuck with an absent stepmom who dragged me across the country to live with another physically abusive alcoholic stepfather. Not the environment a child deserves to be brought into.

I just dont see how that relates to someone's right to life. You'd rather be aborted than have a chance at having a good life? Just because you struggle, it doesn't mean you will always struggle. And even then, shouldn't the argument be "let's make better laws and resources for fixing the issues" rather than "I want the right to just kill the person that might struggle so I don't have to deal with the bigger issue".

Mama's baby. Papa's maybe

@@randomfemaleopinion3167 yea nah, I'd rather the spirit that chose to inhabit my body was given the chance to pick another body than settle and be born into a world where all my family didn't give a shit and bounced on me. I'd rather that spirit go to a loving home with a support base to nurture and develop a healthy body and mind, and have more opportunities to be successful than i had. Rather be placed in a home where neglect, physical, and mental abuse were absent than the norm. Where meals weren't a luxury. Yea. I didn't ask to be born into a world that from the age of 5 i basically had to be self reliant. Where at age 7 i had to figure out how to bandage a severe hemmorage on my own because my parents were too busy to even notice their kid was bleeding out...

@@cbrindle91 I don't believe in spirits so to me you wouldn't even exist. I'd like to no matter the circumstances. So life shits on you, it's what you do with it that matters. Im not here to use my life story for sympathy by if I gave up so young, I wouldn't have what I do now. This defeatist mentality is so non productive. You are invalidating people's struggles and their feat to overcome them. Do I wish life was easier? Yeah but I've never thought of wishing I was aborted. Stop trying to take people's opportunities in life because nothing is ever set in stone by deciding its best to kill them simply because they MIGHT have a bad life. We all might have a bad period of time in life so why do we even try to live? Why don't we all just stop trying and kill ourselves? Because that's stupid that's why. Because you dont know if its temporary or not, that's why.

But you do take law advice, such as if a legal ruling, Roe v Wade, was legitimate for the government to say

Little known fact - The docs are wise men priests of kabala/ paganism/ devil worship in disguise. The med docs are sorcerers tricking folks with their poison potions called pharmacia/ pharmecy drugs. And tricking mamas into sacrificing their babies to the false / fake so called gods hermes, baal, and, molech. The chemistry docs/wise dude priests, are alchemist in disguise. The astronomy docs are the astrologers Etc. All "fields " of science and his(lucifers)story, have their roots in kabala/ paganism/ devil/rebellion led by lucifer worship.

@@kylehager4113 challenging the ruling explicitly goes against the will of the people, so why should such a thing be respected?

This is exactly what Roe & Casey protects-a person's right to take medical advice from their doctor.

Abortion is medical advice?

What medication was it? I’m glad you were born, too! Life is great!

@Jack pine Savage • Although my grandma had 5, 6 miscarriages (1930s), she was still a Firtyl Mertyl and had nine kids. I didn’t have kids by choice and never regretted it. I think what your Mom was given was a drug ‘thalidomide’ which was given often and for everything. Birth defects were a side affect. I’m thankful for my life too. 😏☺️

Ya; your post doesn't sound made up at all. 🙄

@@aarone8740 it doesn’t? Sounds believable to me.

@ Jack pine Savage,Yes miscarriages were very,very common back in like the1900's 1920's,1930's,etc...before medical technology took hold,and doctors made alot of mistakes back then. Now my mom had 7 kid's 6 girls and 1 boy,but like she told me she wanted to be a mom,and to her and most men and women abortion was unthinkable! But I'm glad my mom never aborted us I love my sisters and brother,and I'm grateful for them,and my life as well. And I think that the way my mom raised me was the reason why I feel so adamantly against abortion,it just seems like for most people I meet (younger people) that is the in thing to do nowadays,and if you're a young woman and don't go along,I don't know,but it's like they won't be accepted or not considered cool by their peers,or whatever.

They had to put an acceptable sounding label on it somehow.

It was a bad decision that took the issue out of the people's hands. Even PRO CHOICE justices disagreed with the logic behind the court's decision.

Yeah right? The decline of USA is stuggering

Actually, it is technically a private health issue just like mercy k!lling. The most potent argument on the Pro-life side, is that the baby is a living human and has a fundamental right to life which should not be trumped by the mother’s right to personal health choices.

The 2 are connected! Your health is your privacy! Does it matter? The courts take your privacy rights away or take away your health rights? Both are UNAMERICAN! Unless your a radical republican with no education! The Federalist society are trying to creat a new gilded age!

Interesting... Considering that what the Bible says usually conflicts with our natural desires

@@sherrieflynn252 Actually no, it doesn’t. This is the “sin” and/or “worldly” argument fundies (like you?) MUST use. The Bible asks that we behave as humanity did THOUSANDS of years ago, LONG before anything like a civil right was even considered, much less codified. You’re aware children used to “work for a living”, are you not?

@@hadara69 The Word of God is eternal Mankind's heart and desires have been and still are corrupt Ps child labor is still being used in many countries

@@sherrieflynn252 So you just REASSERT your beliefs without trying to defend them, huh? Interesting that you CANNOT do that, isn’t it? It’s almost as if your superstitious beliefs cannot tolerate my simple scrutiny. Does child labor still existing in poor countries prove the Bible is correct or excuse it? How is it therefore NOT a civil right we've acheived here despite the Bible's "eternal teachings"? You just proved you can’t reason thanks to your faith. Didn’t even realize this did you? Shaking? Scared? This is the point. It’s the SAME point I make over and over whenever I engage with believers as a former believer. YOU ARE IN A CULT!! Until you can face that fear, that thing that’s making you shake right now, you will remain in said cult. I left the cult decades ago. I faced my fears. Why can’t you?

You should desire what God wants you to do. They should coincide. This quote makes no sense.

keyword: **sold**

Best comment

Couldn't have said it better. All our elected representatives refuse to do their job and instead rely on the SC to make decisions.

You are 100% right

Yes. A sentence can not be stated as a constitucional right. Strictly speaking

I think you are right, but also, leading up to and after RvW the pro life group could have codified laws protecting motherhood, reducing risks and costs, and strengthening adoption and childcare. That didn't happen either. The real weaknesses are that these choices by the government takes lifetimes to fix. Lifetimes. The next solution to any of this concerns may come from the states in the near term, but states that haven't spend anything on birthcare, childcare, and adoption will find themselves in a whole other conversation from states that give options. Options prior to Roe were, do it illegally, stay in the relationship, kidnap or abandon your child (respectful of situations regarding abuse). Many state's trigger laws return to that situation. After 50 years of divorce laws stating childcare is an agreement, and after 50 years of near zero incentives for having children. Now that its up to the states, hands are tied until someone is on trial for murder. As i said, it will take a lifetime to continue to conversation regardless of the Federal or State governments having jurisdiction over a womb. As we just proved, the federal government causes a nationwide discussion, and the states cause a nationwide discussion. If we had 50 separate options for all 50 states, you may can argue we have options. But most of these states copy off one another.

How can you be pro choice...it is murder of an innocent everytime? My legal argument is that: A woman has the right to keep her legs closed in a peaceful society and should be put in prison if she kills her unwanted child.

Super clever!!

Poor sad little troll

He said recently (after the overturning) that it was not the SCOTUS' choice if the woman wanted to "abort the child". The ol' troll admitted it was a child.

@@Addison.Renfroe ya; if only he had suggested useing an A-r 50 to kill it; that would be acceptable!

@@aarone8740 child's not in the middle east

No one ever really want to hear truth, esp when one's way is achieved on a wrong premise

Because most people know that the Federalist Society is likely to lie quite a bit.

It's from the Federalist society, a religious law group that has been turning the U.S. into a theocracy.

What you resist, persist. If not for Roe vs Wade there would be an estimated 80 million more dems in the US. Seriously do you really want someone who has so little concern for their unborn child to breed?

@@frankl1955 it's happening already anyway... They would've adapted. Now we have psychopaths that are psychopaths because they know they can dodge nature. Some of it is genetic but most of it is actually how we've been conditioned. Single people having contraception means married people are free to put their families at risk cause they can run around shielded by the idea that they can twist nature.

@@frankl1955 Interesting point.

What I can not believe, is that anyone, especially women, would even imagine that killing their own babies (at any stage of development) could be considered a right,much less have anything to do with "health care " (like if pregnancy was a disease).

Mothers will still be murdering their babies no matter forward or backwards. The only difference is the rights or lack of rights will be given back to the states where the laws have always belonged. Abortion is a personal choice and that choice will continue to be made by women until the end of time. Roe vs Wade was used under false pretenses. It was what the democrat party needed to take place in order to stay in power; the party was already murdering babies before Roe vs Wade by murdering black babies throughout the black community for decades. The government and insurance companies give out free contraptions why not practice safe sex instead of going on a murder spree every time someone lays down and gets pregnant? Murdering one’s own child has nothing to do with the public good. The Supreme Court knows that they overstepped their boundaries when it comes to Roe vs Wade. It is the States that have the rights not the federal government.

We can’t move on until abortion is federally banned.

Because of the overruling bias against common sense

It is a 50/50 issue, and those on either end of the spectrum have strong opinions. All the more reason to leave the question to the individual States. The goal of the court was to settle the controversy amenably, thence the complex trimester scheme. Task was failed successfully.

COMMON SENSE WHO ON THIS DAMN PLANET KNOWS SHIT B4 THEY F*N 4 YRS OLD PRETTY MUCH

Also there's cancer surgeries that don't guarantee whatsoever a positive result in fact could result in more complications or death itself as well as many other surgeries that we ARE GIVEN THE CHOICE and it's not always a guarantee of survival, but for a chance at QUALITY OF LIFE!!!

And I'm all for medically assisted suicide as well which... Well that's obvious my point I imagine

Including the misrepresentations you wanted?

Exactly, though I see not everyone agrees. I found it to be fairly balanced. I don't need anyone telling me how to think. I'm perfectly capable.

@@DaveMustang74 That statement, "I don't need anyone telling me how to think. I'm perfectly capable." is why so many are so weak at thinking.

Confirmation bias confirmed.

@@UnconventionalReasoning so, by someone else telling you how to think, it makes you think for yourself better????? Sure thing...🙄

Religion is a belief system with rules made by yourself or another man in an attempt to substitute the one and only rule giver - God

ALL Religions are man made to enslave your mind. RISE ABOVE THE 🐂💩 👊

Democracy came because of religion. In the monastery the head of the monastery was chosen according to a democratic method. So most people talk bad about religion and specially Christianity but must of the good things we have is because of Christian values. So whoever wrote that quote was another person who knew nothing about religion but maybe was hating it.

@@mariacortez5931 Your “reasoning” betrays your own ignorance, fundie. Music came from the church too, so did many forms of Art, does that THEREFOR MEAN (according to who?) that all Music & Art must remain “pious”? How does that work? I’ve heard this exact same “argument” from many science-denying Creationists (you too?) about science. Doesn’t work and if you don’t get WHY that is, you are actually TOTALLY proving my point for me. Quite the self-own. Our democracy is currently being attacked by Christian fundie nutjobs like you who think our rights are ALL “God’s domain” when the Bible was pro-slavery, pro-owning women like livestock, pro-war with ALL others who don’t share your particular sect of faith, and PRO-ABORTION (Look up Numbers 5:11-31 if you’d like to see RECEIPTS for this claim). Now what? “God created you so you owe him your unquestioned loyalty, you heathen!!” Is that what you got in your chamber for me? Latina, huh? Que Lastima....

@@mariacortez5931 people forget that before Christianity post civilisations were sacrificing their children something certain people want to bring back

Exactly! It's hypocrisy in my view.

Moral superiority? I haven’t heard that, (maybe cause I don’t dive deep into debates and arguments on the web) but I do know of many conservatives who put their money where their mouth is and donate to crisis pregnancy centers, etc. And there are many people like me and my family who volunteer to help single mothers- in my case, by providing free babysitting a for a mother for about a year.

As for increasing government programs- It’s far more effective for us to get out there and help mothers through volunteer hours and monetary donations to charity rather than have our funds be sucked away by increased taxes for government programs. Let’s direct our funds to helping others!! We can be much more careful, shrewd and effective with our money than the government can.

What actions do you interpret as "moral superiority"?

By 'These "conservatives"', do you mean the 5 justices that voted to strike down the Roe v. Wade decision? If so, their only authority for making judgements are *legal* arguments. What happens to a child or its circumstances fall out side the narrow questions SCOTUS is suppose to address in any specific court case. All these whiney liberals going nuts right now on cable shows, editorials, protesting, etc... need to get that thru their skulls. SCOTUS is not a political body. Save the protests and all the screaming for the U.S. and States legislatures whose job it is to pass laws (such as legalizing abortion).

They do in Japan.

Because it takes only the mother to birth the child. He doesn't have to suffer health issues related to the pregnancy. Even the most easy and healthy pregnancy has every possibility to turn into a life-threatening one in a span of minutes. Besides, the man always has the option to walk away on the mother of he's not ready to parent the baby. I wonder if there's any law, anywhere in the world, that makes a man walking away on his pregnant partner, no matter married or unmarried, illegal and criminal.

​@@OneBigStoryVerseso then child support should be optional?

And abortion was pushed on the country by racist secularists to profit off of killing minorities and the poor and now it's a billion dollar racket

This quote can be equitably applied to so called "non-religious" institutions or ideologies. In fact anyone who thinks they have the morale authority to force their will on others.

@@bubsavvyd6103 Except it can’t and this is easy to prove. The PROBLEM is, the faithful (talking about you, personally now) are unwilling to debate and put aside your own religious certainties long enough to get it. For instance, if we were talking about Global Warming, you’d claim (by all means, correct me if I’ve misread your subtext) that scientists are “just as religious about it!” or that those of us who trust the science behind this are. Would you not? Same with the vaccines? Same with Trump losing? Same with LGBT folks deserving equal rights? Etc... Guess what? Those are ALL based in easily debunked RW and/or Christian propaganda. There’s no way to “debunk” the opposing arguments because they’re facts: Vaccines save lives, Trump LOST, and gays deserve equal rights. So when it comes to THIS issue, abortion, it is irrational to demonize women who get abortions, claiming they’re “murdering their kids!” or whatver, and is based soley in fundie nutjob certainties. (Pssst….RELIGION) The opposing view, that they deserve a CHOICE, is not any kind of “religion”, it’s simply reason, based in facts (like that it’s just a gob0goo, not “a soul”), etc. If you want to get philosophical about life, that’s fine, but it has NOTHING to do with imposing your SUPERSTITIONS onto OUR secular society. This is not a Theocracy, YET! (Your wet dream, ain't it fundie?) Clear? I encourage you to prove to me that your claim is true, using examples that I can then DEBUNK for you. Or does the prospect of testing your hypothesis scare you, fundie? That’s how science works, btw. Hypotheses are tested and PASS! GET IT?!

The Only thing evil here is killing babies or agreeing that killing babies is ok sooo…

@@FortheluvofGod I cherish every fundie like you who says this about this quote more than you could ever know. It’s EVIL to force women (again, YOU’RE A WOMAN, RIGHT?!!) to do something they don’t want with their lives, like having an incest baby, etc. True or False?

At the time the Constitution was written, abortion was legal.

@@UnconventionalReasoning Abortions were generally ILLEGAL after "quickening", when a pregnant woman could feel her child moving (variable timing, roughly 5 months). Thus the states had and used the legal power to regulate abortion, which is what the upcoming Supreme Court decision apparently will reaffirm. Edit: As Justice Alito's draft opinion notes, Planned Parenthood v Casey supersedes Roe v Wade. The justification for Casey is taken from the 14th Amendment. Quoting the draft opinion, "Indeed, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, three quarters of the States made abortion a crime at all stages of pregnancy." Thus it's ludicrous to think that the 14th Amendment was intended, by any stretch of the imagination, to create a national right to abortion.

The original decision was so poorly thought out that it could not stand in the long run

Unpopular opinion: Thankfully Roe was overturned. Hopefully abortion can become legal democratically.

@@nicfeller Given that abortion (with some restrictions) is legal in multiple states, anyone in the US who really wants an abortion can get one. It's unclear to me if Congress has the power to regulate abortion nationwide, but apparently a number of Democrats want to try.

And very neutral the federalist society is a conservative/libetarian institute yet they brought people from both side i like it! It wouldn't have been the case if PBS or Politico !

@@bestproto5117 It was quite nonpartisan and neutral for a conservative legal shill group until the last 2 minutes or so

17:58 It tried to co-opt Roe as being pro-life by claiming that it recognized the "child" (more like fetus) from the moment of conception, while also disparaging it.

@@kenlandon6130 since 1952 all the way up until 1994 when thomas joined the court we had a very very Liberal supreme court. They made it harder to perform executions despite the fact that the death penelty is mentioned in the constitution and all the founders who wrote the constitution were supportive of capital punishment. At the same time they legalized abortion claiming a woman has the constitutional right to an abortion nation wide despite the fact that the constitution does not even mention the word abortion and despite the fact that in 1973 52% of Americans were against abortion a majority. ROE V WADE was an undemocratic action. Today we don't have a conservative supreme court like the media keeps claiming we have a constitutionalist supreme court . We have six constitutionalists who follow the constitution and 3 Liberal activists who rule based on what they like.

Let’s be totally honest here …. We have 6 judges that were put on the SC to overturn roe. Be honest, they are biased.

Who's choice? Theirs or the child's?

Dobbs was another act of raw judicial power!

@@edsr164 - When any of the three branches does something unilaterally, it's raw.

@@edsr164 no, Dobbs puts the decision back in the hands of individual voters and the legislative process, it is the exact opposite of what you are describing

@@kevinwoolley7960 What do you think about the fact when this court overturns Lawrence on the same grounds, that being gay will be instantly criminalized in many states? Ken Paxton has already said he will prosecute under Texas' sodomy law. Stop buying into christofascist propaganda

@@bladee_enjoyer540 The court has no intention of revisiting those decisions. Justice Thomas is the only one who has expressed interest and the others have explicitly stated that they aren't interested. It takes 4 justices in order for a case to be reviewed by SCOTUS. So the court "overturning Lawrence" is not happening, and I'm not sure why you would think otherwise.

Did you forget your seroquil this morning?

@@nobodynoone2500 Ah yes Seroquel what we take for problems with LIFE. If I had been aborted that wouldn't be a problem.

Awesome ….. bottom line …. It’s our choice …. Regardless of circumstances

Let us not beg for justification for abortion rights …. We are here first and only is can make the decisions to let someone else grow

@@anjalithangavelu6929 and when will that line be drawn.

this is always the argument when in reality these make up a small percentage of elective abortions. there will be access for these people. but if you are using abortion as birth control ... it's not the same.

I seen this meme before lol

As the video mentions, Roe v Wade was only the first such case to reach the Court. A majority of Justices were apparently determined to usurp the legal power of the states to legislate abortion, so only the case would change, not the outcome.

@@Hunpecked They couldn't find a women who wanted to challenge it in court due the the STIGMA so they had to invent one.

She did, then she didn't, then she did .. she was a flawed person, but aren't we all. The baby was already born because these cases take FOREVER. You can look her up .. as a deathbed "confession" she admitted she was paid by pro life advocates to publicly join their side. Whatever, she was in the right place at the right time to be pivotal and then had to somehow live with all the judgement & expectation & pressure. :-(

@@mdb1239 On the video's map at about 4:46 you'll see Doe v Bolton. This also involved a pregnant plaintiff ("Mary Doe'). The Doe and Roe decisions were announced by the Court on the same day.

@@rb-pk8ds If you haven't already, you might want to check out the film "Citizen Ruth" (1996), starring Laura Dern as a homeless pregnant drug addict. Pro-lifers and pro-abortionists end up in a bidding war for her unborn baby. None of the characters come off well in the film.

Truman hw, you have problems,please seek help!

Probably a few too many misrepresentations in this.

The truth is very hard to watch when it collides with the ideology you have been sold.

@@bradrichards8122 are you referring to what you think is the truth because of your ideology?

@@UnconventionalReasoning Truth and ideology don't belong together as synonymous. The truth feeds you, ideology devours you. Avoid ideologies.

No you are not a criminal. It is a difficult decision you had to make, with which the government has NO RIGHT to to interfere.

ectopic pregnancies were never considered medically viable I am SO sorry for your pain and so glad you made a hard choice for your 15 year old's best life. It will never feel easy or ok, but you made a wise decision, and you made it for love. Those are good things.

Oh please! No one , not even the most right leaning anti-abortionist person out there would ever suggest that a woman have to deal with an ectopic pregnancy that could k¡|l her to save a baby that won't even live because that baby will never grow to be the size of a viable baby while inside of the fallopian tube. Quit it. 🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️

And abortions will always be legal as long as states like California and new York exist. 🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️

@@MsTifalicious Actually, many states do not have an exception for ectopic pregnancies in their upcoming legislations. It is like THAT now.

Hey there. While I do not agree with your positions, I want to say you geniunely walked through it very well, and spoke open-mindedly. Not very common among most pro-choicers, so I wanted to say excellent job; I admire the tone and respectful way you spoke/wrote.

Tbh I prefer the Oxford definition where what you called induced abortion is just called abortion. There is another term already when the baby dies unintentionally - it's called a miscarriage.

How come here you are accepting ??

I believe legally that a if state wants to ban or have abortions its none of the court's business. The court has no enumerated constitutional power to decide what an individual may do to their body or children. Morally I believe it is murder and irresponsible to have an abortion. Its not about choice its about being responsible to for your actions. How can one call themselves pro choice if the choices now are to be on the pill, use protection, morning after, tubes tied, stop fucking lame as dudes, adoption etc be in control of your life by being preventative. There are many choices there but your only pro choice if you consider death uh i mean abortion. Thats not pro choice thats pro irresponsibility. Yes rapes happen but they are so far and few that we can not apply an exception as the general rule. I also believe if you abort thats your business and you should be able to abort whenever you feel like it. I also believe a man should be able to choose to be there for the kid as well

Lets do the process that is designed to make babies! Oh no, we made a baby. Good thing we can just kill it and avoid any responsibility for our actions. What “burden” would it put on women?? Having to face responsibility for their mistakes? Intentionally ending an innocent human life is murder. The baby developing inside of a mother’s womb is a human life. And a very innocent one. Abortion is murder, plain and simple.

Fetus, embryo, zygote, and child are not the same thing

@@tkam54 so you’re against abortion when a fetus is viable then, I would presume?

@@yvonnelee4385 - nope. Its not my choice...up to doctor and woman

@@tkam54 then your distinction doesn’t mean jack shit. You’re fine with a woman murdering her baby up to 9 months, aka after it’s viable and could survive outside the womb. Just say that you’re okay with baby murder and be done with it 🙄

@@yvonnelee4385 procreation is the mother of all evils. abortion is mercy. ALL pregnancies should be aborted as early as possible. end the cycle of death and suffering.

Does the constitution state that fundamental rights won't be violated

9th amemdmemt

Due process provides catch all phrase for fundamental rights unenumerated

@Israel Ninth Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people, addresses rights given by The Constitution. Therefore IX Amendment does not protect interpretations of Constitution, but only our Constitutional rights as written. Founding Fathers wrote in plain english what they meant so no interpretations are required.

@Artemis You can’t say it’s law of the land and then say you’ll sign it into law. There is no provision or amendment for abortion, nor is it at any where stated in the constitution. The fact that this is known yet accepted is a disgrace. The same judicial blessing protecting abortion, protected racial segregation and emboldened Jim Crow era politicians to enact racial laws . So Roe V Wade should be struck down because it is not protected in the constitution, it is in fact the duty and responsibility of the people legislative and executive branch to sign laws into existence.

I think most people are focusing on the bigger problem first which is making sure the unborn actually have a right to exist before going any further. Unborn human don't need a legal right to SNAP they need a legal right to exist. Thats the starting point for support before anything else. We regonize that a 3-month old baby should be protected by the state but for some reason we get muddled about a 7 month old fetus simply because the mother within whose body the fetus is gestating has decided that she'd rather not carry it to term. The mother of the 3-month old can just as easily decide to extricate herself from the responsibility of child rearing right? What is fundamentally different here? In the grand scheme of things, not carrying a 7-month fetus to term and killing a 3-month-old is not really all that different. The only major difference is in the fact that to commit the latter you would need to overcome basic human parent instincts. To do the former you can rely on a trained specialist who can pull a part the fetus with tongs without having to hear it scream or see its eyes filled with terror. Someone who has ostensibly made their peace long ago with the barbarism of the act and rationalized it as "just a medical procedure." Besides, SNAP and WIC are not rights. They are means-tested support programs for struggling households (out of the umbrella of dozens of means-tested programs). They don't get conferred on you as some kind of constitutional right. The government provides SNAP and can take it away at any moment if it decides your should not have it because you don't need it or it does not want you to have it. That's hardly arguable as a right. Rights are things that by dint of our existence and are granted us by god and nature. They are unalienable. Government payments are not rights in such respect as they can be cannot be articulated as fundamental out of the necessity of our state of being. If you think SNAP is a right then virtually anything you might want or need or find useful could be considered a right. This is ostensibly risible. Your point in the abstract is important however. There should be a lot more discussion about providing resources for prospective and expectant fathers and mothers. What form that will all take is certainly up for debate and discussion but most people will agree that more resources are needed so that women are not pressured to have abortions simply out of fear or panic. A lot of people don't even know that there are already some resources out there already.

It isn't messy. One would extend the same human rights that one would recognize for a neonate, infant, or toddler. They aren't developing into a baby, they are babies. It makes sense that they would enjoy the same rights that any other human baby would.

You do realize if a person was to kill a pregnant woman they get punished for killing the mother and the baby.

@@engmed4400 Yeah, that's the question, isn't it? because if they were really babies, then someone, or a group of somebodies, would've already been petitioning for that status to happen. Thus the status for citizenship, so they could have their rights. So I'm still curious why there's no documentary discussing that. Especially when the taxpayer dollars needed for such rights will become involved.

They are babies. They meet the definition of human children by virtue of their genetic makeup and stage of development. As for the rest, consider two points. First, there's the phenomenon of fetal victim laws, and then there is the fact that either the City of Portland or Seattle has extended bereavement benefits to city employees who've had abortions. If that isn't an admission of their humanity, then I don't know what is.

Well said!!!💖👣

Yes!

They are saying the baby doesnt have the right to use the mother as an incubator. Which means the baby will die. Immigrants dont need human incubators so your arguement doesnt really work

@@chrislo7385 - My argument works, my short-sighted friend, because EVERYONE NEEDED AN INCUBATOR TO LIVE. Also, silly, my point was that EVEN IMMIGRANTS HAVE A RIGHT TO THEIR LIFE. You're not one for thinking much, are you?

@@chrislo7385 - Our president is even considering giving ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS $450,000. You don't even want to give an unborn American the chance to even take their first breath of air. Don't respond, you're just embarrassing yourself.

Roe basically said you can murder your children for any reason.That is why it must go.

So you agree with anti-vax?

@@d3fec767 lol are abortions contagious?

By our bodies do you mean the mother and the fetus’s bodies?

@@gustavotonnelli the mother and the conceived, growing baby

I completely agree with you. So many prochoice people never acknowledge that abortion is ending a life. This is a huge reason of why I didn't call myself prochoice for so long. It simply feels callous and like they're trying to sweep all the dark complexity under the rug. I still can't relate to that attitude. The reason I came to realize I was prochoice was when I read a bunch of answered questions on Quora of women who had had late-term abortions. I got ready to judge, because I thought how can you just kill something that is basically a baby? But as I read each account, none of them had wanted the abortions. There were medical complications, each story different but the same in that they all initially planned to have these babies but tragedy struck. I realized it was a heartbreaking ordeal for these women, and no one should judge them the way I had just been judging them before I listened to them. Hell, you don't know what another woman is going through. Many of the prolife bills that are passing since Roe got overturned don't even acknowledge the difficulties of pregnancy, which can happen at any time from conception to birth. Do these "prolife" laws acknowledge that abortion can be a life-saving procedure in many instances? Have the people who constructed these laws spent time in a NICU? Of course not. It's just "Abortion Bad" being spouted by a bunch of old men who have never been and never will be pregnant telling a bunch of women what to do with their bodies, AS IF THEY WOULD KNOW. Feels super authoritarian and like a personal affront.

There aren't. That's your religious belief. The concept of personhood before birth has a myriad of dangerous repercussions. Have you studied all of them? The arguments against these ill effects are compelling.

In US there were more than 900,000 abortion, the 0.01 % were mother's risk, 0.03% fetus risk. So the point is saving the mother's life is not what the pro life are talking about. NONE, prolife or prochoice are against to save mother's life. Value life of the human being, is not jugdge the women to decide abort her child, it can be a lot of circumstances, the point is the people understand that nobody have the right over another life including the one in you. Besides, if we talk about the good for woman, good for womans is not be avaliable to live that traumatic expecience, more of the cases women regret it. I can say, women can do everything including get ahead with her child.

@@scarletlora2634 Nope! Most of the women do NOT regret it bc we have a 3rd world countries policies for healthcare, education, daycare, etc.

@@kittyday1402 of course yes. 3er countries for not kill babies, so behind. Stupids ideas!

someone may think "why would i wang the state in my healthcare issues" and be thankful that the federal government protects them from their state

@@algerbanane4521 People move from state to state and laws change from state too state. Once the Federal government has their teeth in our everyday lives we're pretty much screwed. The federal government needs to take care of monitoring our federal taxes we pay for Social Security, immigration, homeland security, the educational system, OSHA, our military, health care system, the federal government hasn't balanced a budget in year's. Yes we need the feds lol the nation is 31 trillion in debt.

States' rights don't go so far as to infringe individual rights. This was the problem with the states' rights argument in support of slavery. There is no right to own another human because another human has their own rights, and there is no right to end the life of a kid in the womb.

My husband is army and we have tricare insurance. The govt is already in my shit 😭 I don’t care

Hey brother I want you to understand men are held accountable for every conviction of crime you can think of this is not about men being responsible this is about women having a constitutional right and fundamental right to an abortion and what trimester it can happen at, both sides that being pro-life and pro-choice don't matter because both are backed by the constitution I hope there is a little understanding in what I am saying.

No need to, it's no longer a thing.

@@richlaw5136 Really?

@@alyssajones4368 yeah, I mean, it's pretty much ancient history.

Um, it's the Federalist society. I guess reading isn't your strong point?

A couple of points: 1) Yes, I believe the state should absolutely force the father to be monetarily responsible. I've never heard a single conservative say otherwise. This is a straw man liberals keep propping up, but it's not remotely grounded in reality. 2) The death penalty is not an act of "raw judicial power". We are guaranteed to not be deprived of life, liberty, or property *without due process*. The court's holding that a trial by a jury of peers could suffice to carry the burden of due process is entirely within the realm of their enumerated duty. 3) Speaking of due process, the argument that the state can never encroach on bodily autonomy (a designation that I don't think applies to this situation, anyway) is also encapsulated within the same concept. That is, there is no constitutionally guaranteed right to never be deprived of bodily autonomy at all - the guaranteed right is to not be deprived of that liberty *without due process*. 4) There is no general right to privacy in the Constitution, so whether the matter is public or private is immaterial.

@@paulfoeller4780 Great points! Thank you! So you live in a country with no right to privacy in your constitution. Perhaps you should remedy that particular point. Yes, ‘so you can kill people as long as there is legal due process’. Correct. I don’t think it’s a straw man argument concerning the fathers responsibility, I have never heard any suggestions of monetarily responsibilities forced on biological fathers from the moment of conception, nor have I heard of any social programs sponsored by the state and paid fully by tax payers dollars to support mothers through their pregnancy, if fathers can not, or will not. Please provide with this information.

@@paulfoeller4780 Also, I forgot to say ‘ you don’t think this encroaches on bodily autonomy’, but the state is saying if you’re pregnant we have some autonomy in your uterus. If you are saying that it is a child, not an embryo, or a fetus, then has it not rights to protection, from the mother consuming alcohol or drugs, is this not child abuse if the mother poisons the child? She can’t take the morning after pill, because that would be murder. If I had a uterus and the government said that I couldn’t deal with as I see fit, I would make a strong argument that my bodily autonomy is being encroached upon. If the government said my testicles can not be removed, they would encroaching on my autonomy. If a young fertile woman wants a hysterectomy is she depriving the ‘unborn’ from being born? I agree there is no constitutionally right to never be deprived of autonomy, you can imprison an individual. However, you can not sterilize them, even with due process as we have found out. Now, claiming that it is not a public or private matter, is odd because I can not think of anything more private that a woman’s private parts. I understand, that Supreme Court made a stretch under the 14th amendment. However, could the argument be made that ‘due process of law’ has been upheld and sanctified by the precedent of Roe V Wade. Certainly, all the justices in their confirmations hearings seemed to say so, and yet they may change their minds on this particular point. I’m not a lawyer, I truly appreciate the arguments you’ve made. I think of liberty of the individual in this debate more than anything else. Is the state imposing on a woman’s liberty over her body? If so, then the precedent holds and Roe V Wade can not be over turned, because then the court has claimed liberty over an individual with out due process. If a woman becomes pregnant, her right to liberty has been deprived, because the state with out due process is forcing her to bear a child, therefore limiting her liberty. Unless, you claim there has been due process, ‘making it illegal’ which is the same argument I made about the precedent of Roe v Wade, being ‘the due process’. Anyway thanks for the healthy debate. Please remember, if you are against abortion, I strongly suggest that you don’t have one.

A non-citizen criminal rapist entering the USA illegally has the protection of the Constitution - shouldn't a innocent, unborn, legal, law abiding female child also be protected by the constitution?

hmm abortion kills an innocent life death penalty kills a guilty killer of life... and somehow you think these opinions are somehow dichotomy-like opposed to one another? Both are well represented as being in the best interest of the state (to regulate)* *edited for grammar

Good to be educated. Educate and use protection.

Please watch more than just this video, this is from one of the most biased sources on this issue.

@@UnconventionalReasoning facts cannot be bias. Fact is Roe was a fking liar.

Don't listen to AM. An doesn't like inconvenient facts.

@@McFaddenWasRight Interesting that you're so confident in your evaluation of me.

Except of course when it benefits conservatives.

exactly. all the people wanting afab people to be incubators are calling in jesus and god. step off your high horse. if you want a kid, have it if you can, and if you want to force your beliefs on another then kindly go through the devastating process and fear that you will have your body completely change- and may never come back from- because of it

In God we trust… Right. We must trust in life. You lay , you raise up and be responsible. The foundation is USA suppose to be o. The foundation of God. Read your money, look at the swearing in. We the people need to stay woke😳

Yeah, Ruth Bader Ginsburg basically said Roe was garbage law that would inevitably be overthrown one day, which is why she strongly urged Democratic Party politicians to force through some sort of federal legislation or even amend the U.S. Constitution if they wanted a right to abortion

There are definite some intellectually honest people out there who are pro choice but can see why Roe was bad case law. Unfortunately, I think there are far too few of these types. :(

Amen amen! There is a firm biological and ethical basis to decree human personhood as beginning upon conception. As long as unique dNA code denotes an individual as among homo sapiens, it is protected as one of us.

@@espositogregory why do personhood happens at conception?

@@entropy8634 it happens at registration/ Regi - ster > to leave in Queen's custody; for the census. You are not a person, you Have a person. Census purposes. Why do you think our parents give us names?

@@MarcDufresneosorusrex but parents doesn't register a person until birth

@@entropy8634 it's the doctor's job to register, he sends the documents to the Mint of Canada or the FED or whichever Central Bank you happen to be born into. Why do you think they call it a "Berth"/ Maritime law, current sea, dock, birth, .. keep on digging , you will eventually find the truth .. or it will find you

I personally don't see how a person could kill her baby. And, by the way, the baby feels pain during an abortion. Watch the videos. They literally scream and cry. Have you ever seen a baby bird get killed by toothpicks?

They should be arrested

And now they have to do it again. Could you imagine how horrified these millennials will be finding babies in the trash? Like maybe it will teach them abstinence?

@@BettyWhite2171 Exactly!! I’ve been saying for months that it should be common-sense compromise to mandate abortion doctors administer opioids to the mother (who shares a blood supply with the baby) to eliminate the child’s pain before death. At LEAST eliminate the pain

I’m confused at your argument here. Killing the born baby or throwing it in a dumpster is preferable to an abortion how?

Nobody has to live in ignorance, especially with the availability of information on the internet these days. There are no excuses anymore for not learning how to be an adult. If you are old enough to have sex, then you are old enough to understand it could result in the creation of another human life. The selfishness that people still stubbornly maintain they should be allowed to have on this issue is astonishing. They want the Right to do anything, without consequence, when that doesn't exist. They play, they pay. This mentality is 1000% the result of discipline and common sense being removed from the education system. Hell, MOST of our problems are because of this!

@@bobhabib7662 I agree, but you and I were also given the tools necessary and nurtured soul to explore self sustainability and reach whatever next step is in our lives. in my earliest days my mom would sing to me and read to me every night, no school would ever accomplish the same feeling and the same effect on a child's creativity. "There's no excuse for not learning how to be an adult". There isn't any excuse for not learning how to be a parent either I would argue, but time and time again, parents fail because they should not be expected to do it all by themselves, working to the bone,spending no time with their children. A more balanced school environment may have the potential to create more capable people. That is what our government is afraid of.

@@bobhabib7662 this is not enywhere near every situation, but neither is thinking that every Joe handed the internet would somehow make them educated. You need to teach them where to look first

@@bobhabib7662 discipline is built into the very center of our education system to teach us that some kids will always end up in suspension and expelled and some terrible kids have family on the student board and will never face consequences for their shitty actions. What kind of common sense are you implying schools teach?

@@Mary-Love We weren't always given the tools, but we were given the discipline!

So a rape victim would have to prove her rape before she could secure an abortion? How long do you think investigations and prosecutions take? Days??? What if she's unable to prove it since she has no physical injury? Of course you could just take the girls/woman word for it but something tells me anti-abortionists won't all it.

@@jakestroll6518 Police Report

@@jakestroll6518 also let's face it abortion happens mostly due to unwanted children from free sex.

All life matters. That child never asked to be created, regardless of how it happened. It’s hypocritical of you to suggest otherwise.

@@rosedalinevaletine6931 if all life matters then we would have universal healthcare for these babies and poor families, we would have universal childcare, we would have every job offer Family Paid Leave so mommy and baby can bond, we wouldn’t have a formula shortage with no relief insight, we would have adequate Gun regulation laws so that a crazy asshole doesn’t go in these babies schools and blow their heads off. Don’t let these politicians fool you, they can give two sh*ts about these babies, it’s all about having control.

I don't know. The states have almost always made TERRIBLE decisions that violates constitutional and humanitarian rights. Slavery, segregation, gun ownership restrictions...

Supreme court just interprets laws. if you don't like it, your representatives make the laws. Did you miss that part in grade school or are you another foreign troll?

My reproductive health choices are nobody's business but mine. "The people" and the state legislation can butt out.

@@jms9057 "What I do with my slave is nobody's business but mine. "The People" and the state legislation can butt out." -Your same logical argument in 1860

Welcome to law school!

Fed gov dies not have the right to regulate, states do. Abortion dies not fall under the constitution. Teach ppl to use protection. Anortion in early stages should be considered for rape, incest. Molestation, and harm to mom or baby. If Dr. Kevorkian was removed from practice, why is ok to kill a baby? Responsibility is key.

Truth!

Why?

@@teresaamanfu7408 The decision was made based on inaccurate science. We now have a thorough understanding of when life begins.

Amen.Roe will fall because God wills it.

Sadly, I believe there will be states that will uphold the pro-choice law(s). There needs to be a push to educate people about methods to prevent unwanted pregnancy so that any person can avoid being put into this situation of having to make the terrible decision to abort their baby.

We do have many options, for example you have the option not to post your moronic opinions online

All that wind to say your anti-choice based on your feelings. Fk that. Reevaluate yourself

Im not an expert but I would think some might say it would be when the baby has fully matured or when the the fetus has a heartbeat in some cases.

I think the arguments to dehumanise the fetus is to provide a more clear conscience to the person or the persons involved in the abortion. Regardless of if it's alive or not, it one moment of its development I would be alive. Even acknowledging this, I do think that woman have a right to chose whether they give life or not. I think we like to pretend that human life has a lot of value, but that's just sometimes when it conveniences us; if not we would be anti war, anti guns or even more sympathetic to the weak. The prohibition of abortion is a decision to control women's body, and doesn't come from a concern for human life. Besides it targets the poorest and the more uneducated parts of society, and that's just plain evil.

@@JuanLopez-mv7ru it’s a developing human being.

@@JuanLopez-mv7ru why is it evil to pray on the poor if"we just like to pretend that human life has a lot of value for record all laws affect people differently the best we can do is apply it equally

@@malinoisnation9392 I know, that's why is one of the saddest decision a woman can make, but still I do think she should have the right to make the choice. It's a tragedy I know, I get sad just thinking about it, it's just not our damn business to police others people.

I thought so too except for one person throughout the whole video had to add their personal opinion.

This really isn’t very neutral

I mean this is the most honest way possible when I say this. If you genuinely believe that this video is neutral, as you say...do some research into The Federalist Society. This video is pure propaganda and you would be doing yourself a huge service to recognize it for what it is.

@@marktaylor3290 yeah seriously. Regardless of what you believe, it’s really important to be able to recognize that this is far neutral on the subject

Any discussion of law and supreme court decisions will involve opinions, by it's very nature. Even a history of a law will generally include the bias of the teller regarding their views of the law. Plus, this is a Federalist Society video. They have a very clear mission statement.

Problem is that politicians (leadership) are corrupt. They only care about money. All of them. Profit at all costs is our culture here.

@@CBT5777 who's falt is that?

@@brianculham1180 Watch some George Carlin. "The people that own us"

@@CBT5777 oh i agree.

And if the responsible choice is to terminate the pregnancy, then so be it.

Exactly!! 💯

If you don't believe in the "my body, my choice" argument, perhaps some day the government will decide that everyone needs to stop having children due to over crowding and climate change "for the greater good!" Mandatory abortions for all!!! Think it can't happen? Look at the child bearing policies in China. Be careful what you wish for...why would you want the government controlling anyone's body? Also, I don't know of any forced vaccines...the option to test has always been an alternative choice. Maybe not the military...but ALL other vaccinations are required for military deployment, so why not this one? Hardly the same stakes...but actually, it's probably safer for a woman to have an abortion than to catch covid.

You don't catch pregnancy if you wear 3 masks. Problem solved..? lollllllllllllllll

No one forced you to take the vaccine. Don't force women to have an unwanted pregnancy. Becoming pregnant by Choice has the best Lifelong outcome for both mother and child. And no one is saying that having a child is for the greater good.

Vaccines for greater good

I'll be 31 in August

PLEASE DO NOT CRY FOR ME, I AM A MOTHER OF 2 AND GRANDMOTHER OF 4, I DID WHAT COMES NATURAL TO MOST WOMAN OF SOCIETY, I GAVE BIRTH TO, LOVE AND RAISED MY CHILDREN, ABORTION NEVER CROSSED MY MIND AS AN OPTION, I LOVED THEM THE MOMENT I LEARNED OF MY PREGNANCIES, I ALSO LOVED BEING PREGNANT AND COULD NOT WAIT MEET THEM AND TO HOLD THEM. I CANNOT IMAGINE MY LIFE WITHOUT HAVING MY DAUGHTERS IN IT!

@@christinaboling2796 I’m a mother of 3 and abortion never crossed my mind because for me it was a conscious choice I made to have children. BUT if it had happened that It was forced upon me without my consent or if forced through violence I would have CHOOSEN to have an abortion! And that should be the right of the mother to terminate a pregnancy that she didn’t ask for or want! It should be available to her and protected! So for that reason I’m pro -choice.