Roe vs. Wade will be overturned if Donald Trump wins, Mike Pence says

[Henry Noel]

I have come to the conclusion that Robinson was never conservative, pro life, pro military or any of the other things he claimed to be. 

He set out to do good but ended up doing well. And that's what drives him now.

[mlizzy]

I have come to the conclusion that Robinson was never conservative, pro life, pro military or any of the other things he claimed to be.  What he did was find a niche where he could do very little and make good money.  On top of that he found a group of people who would worship his every word, just like they do the Donald.   They need to be told what to think and who to worship.  They are as bad as, if not worse than, Obama supporters.  This whole election season has been very eye opening.

It is mainly because of the Donald's supporters, both here and on FR, that I can not vote for him.  tRump is bad enough but his supporters are just awful people.  I'm not talking about those who feel the need to vote for him to keep the witch from winning, I'm talking about his hardcore butt kissers.  I will never trust a single thing any of them say again.

Some good insight you have there @beandog ~ Many cranky old men on that site; someone mentioned that to me privately [early on] after some other guy was telling me to take pro-life and shove it. Also most are retired, or disabled (and can't work). So they've got plenty of time on their hands, and that nasty stuff seems to feed on itself.

People who are still busy out in the work-a-day world, don't come across all the strangeness on forums, so that is not taken into consideration regarding their vote. For instance, my husband is on the Net maybe 15-30 minutes a week, and he asked today if there were any from pro-life [Cruz supporters!] who would now vote for Trump because of Pence's statement on Roe v. Wade.

He felt that many would eventually do so if only for the thread of hope Pence brings to the unborn. I'm not so sure they will, though. What do you think?

[Idaho_Cowboy]

Some of them aren't, unfortunately.  Those are the ones that frighten me if Trump wins.  They'll make fine brown shirts.

The ones that think Pence may have lost the election for Trump are even more disturbing. 

[beandog]

Some good insight you have there @beandog ~ Many cranky old men on that site; someone mentioned that to me privately [early on] after some other guy was telling me to take pro-life and shove it. Also most are retired, or disabled (and can't work). So they've got plenty of time on their hands, and that nasty stuff seems to feed on itself.

People who are still busy out in the work-a-day world, don't come across all the strangeness on forums, so that is not taken into consideration regarding their vote. For instance, my husband is on the Net maybe 15-30 minutes a week, and he asked today if there were any from pro-life [Cruz supporters!] who would now vote for Trump because of Pence's statement on Roe v. Wade.

He felt that many would eventually do so if only for the thread of hope Pence brings to the unborn. I'm not so sure they will, though. What do you think?

I have so given up trying to figure out the minds of tRump or Clinton supporters.  I think that many on the pro-life side will vote for tRump hoping that at least something will happen in regards to abortion.  They know with Hillary it'll just get worse and never be able to recover.  I personally do not believe tRump is pro-life and I seriously doubt Pence will have any influence on him on anything.  Like I've said before, the Donald is old, fat and crazy, so there is always the chance something will happen, stroke or heart attack, and then maybe we will get Pence.

I'm just so disgusted that the supposedly "Pro Life" FR has turned into the exact opposite.  If you notice Robinson has not bothered to comment.  Before tRump he would have put a stop to it immediately.  It appears since the money stream is now with the Pro tRump pro abortion supporters, babies lives have taken second place to the bucks.

[beandog]

He set out to do good but ended up doing well. And that's what drives him now.

I'm not so sure about that.  People who have such strong moral convictions,  as he supposedly did, do not turn on a dime like he did. 

[ABX]

I wish I could believe Mike, but I seriously doubt Trump would know Roe vs Wade wasn't a question about crossing a stream.

[mlizzy]

I have so given up trying to figure out the minds of tRump or Clinton supporters.  I think that many on the pro-life side will vote for tRump hoping that at least something will happen in regards to abortion.  They know with Hillary it'll just get worse and never be able to recover.  I personally do not believe tRump is pro-life and I seriously doubt Pence will have any influence on him on anything.  Like I've said before, the Donald is old, fat and crazy, so there is always the chance something will happen, stroke or heart attack, and then maybe we will get Pence.

I'm just so disgusted that the supposedly "Pro Life" FR has turned into the exact opposite.  If you notice Robinson has not bothered to comment.  Before tRump he would have put a stop to it immediately.  It appears since the money stream is now with the Pro tRump pro abortion supporters, babies lives have taken second place to the bucks.

It is disgusting @beandog ~ were you a long-term FReeper? I was there since '08, which isn't that long compared to others, but still, it was upsetting to me too. There was one member who spoke up and told Jim the Religion Forum needed an exorcism. That was some time ago, and it was in the Smoky Backroom, so Jim didn't say much about it, but I think the guy was on to something. That RF was/maybe still is dreadful; one of the reasons I'd pop off the site for months at a time, so who knows, maybe some demons came in through that door. 

We are ones who will vote against Hillary on the Trump/Pence ticket [unless something more majorly hideous happens], because like you say, he is "old, fat and crazy" [-lol-; funny way to put it] so who knows.

[beandog]

It is disgusting @beandog ~ were you a long-term FReeper? I was there since '08, which isn't that long compared to others, but still, it was upsetting to me too. There was one member who spoke up and told Jim the Religion Forum needed an exorcism. That was some time ago, and it was in the Smoky Backroom, so Jim didn't say much about it, but I think the guy was on to something. That RF was/maybe still is dreadful; one of the reasons I'd pop off the site for months at a time, so who knows, maybe some demons came in through that door. 

We are ones who will vote against Hillary on the Trump/Pence ticket [unless something more majorly hideous happens], because like you say, he is "old, fat and crazy" [-lol-; funny way to put it] so who knows.

I joined FR in Sept. of '04, during the Bush National Guard fiasco.  It was only my second experience with on line forums, the first being Vietnam Vets for Truth.  Someone posted a link to FR, I looked and was hooked from the beginning.  People were really funny back then.  There were, of course, some jerk faces like all forums have, but for the most part it helped me get through the election with some sanity. 

What saddens me the most is I stood with a group of them in front of the old Walter Reed Army hospital many a Friday night in the heat and the cold to support our troops against the Code Pinkos.  Many of these same people have turned into people I don't recognize and certainly are not the people I thought they were. 

Life got in the way, both health and personal wise, and I just didn't have it in me care enough about politics so I just quit participating for a little while.  When things settled down, sometime around October, I went back and was totally surprised at what it had become.  You'd think at my age nothing would surprise me.  Oh well, life goes on.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

If Roe is to be overturned it should be by means of a Constitutional amendment.

Disagree.  It came into being without a Constitutional Amendment, and can go away the same way.

Just get a new ruling from SC that says it is a states's right issue and let those states that choose to keep it slaughter their own would-be citizens.

[Hoodat]

Whatever you may think of Roe, it's been the law for over forty years

The defendants in 'Brown v. Board of Education, Topeka' offered the same argument that Plessy v. Ferguson had been the law for over 50 years.

If Roe is to be overturned it should be by means of a Constitutional amendment.

The Constitution as it is written now already refutes the Roe decision.  Amending the Constitution will do no good if judges are unwilling to go by what it already says.

And for the record, Roe is not being observed in that Roe specifically says that States have every right to regulate abortion after the 24th week.  Yet judge after judge after judge has struck down any attempt by States to do exactly that.

The bottom line here is that the Constitution doesn't matter.  Judges are going to do as they please regardless of what the Constitution says - amended or not.

[youknowwho]

"Watch Pence is a Cruz plant looking out for 2020."

 

And the really amazing part is.....

they ain't kidding!

My God.  Just when you think they can't say something dumber, they go and outdo themselves....

[mlizzy]

I joined FR in Sept. of '04, during the Bush National Guard fiasco.  It was only my second experience with on line forums, the first being Vietnam Vets for Truth.  Someone posted a link to FR, I looked and was hooked from the beginning.  People were really funny back then.  There were, of course, some jerk faces like all forums have, but for the most part it helped me get through the election with some sanity. 

What saddens me the most is I stood with a group of them in front of the old Walter Reed Army hospital many a Friday night in the heat and the cold to support our troops against the Code Pinkos.  Many of these same people have turned into people I don't recognize and certainly are not the people I thought they were. 

Life got in the way, both health and personal wise, and I just didn't have it in me care enough about politics so I just quit participating for a little while.  When things settled down, sometime around October, I went back and was totally surprised at what it had become.  You'd think at my age nothing would surprise me.  Oh well, life goes on.

The older we get, the older we get, and stuff falls apart ~ even our favorite websites ... I guess.   Was upsetting to me too. Fortunately many migrated over to this site; some 200 I think, give or take.

If you're on Facebook @beandog - you can also join here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1074926025897763/

[Jazzhead]

Disagree.  It came into being without a Constitutional Amendment, and can go away the same way.

Just get a new ruling from SC that says it is a states's right issue and let those states that choose to keep it slaughter their own would-be citizens.

The problem is that judicially-imposed solutions don't take.  Look at the last 40 years.   Nothing's polarized right vs. left more than the abortion issue.  It's the single biggest indicator as to what party you belong to.   This is women's rights vs. babies' rights.    If abortion is to continue to be fought over on political terms, there's no end in sight. 

Legislative solutions (e.g., a constitutional amendment) at least have the possibility of being built around consensus (and, yes,  compromise),  and that's what helps to drive cultural change in a positive direction.   You may not like what nine unelected judges did 40 years ago when they "created a right" to abortion,  but every single American woman has come to regard it as her right,  and as an affirmation of her personhood (and yes, you're right, at the expense of the baby's).

If the SCOTUS were to just overturn Roe,  do you think that would settle the matter?    Or just get millions up in arms at this arbitrary denial of an established right?   If you're to put a genie back in the bottle,  I really think that needs to be done by the hard work of the legislative process.   We need to create the conditions for reconciliation on this issue,  because the means to curb abortion are available but we distrust each other too much to harness the will to use them.         

[GrouchoTex]

I wish I could believe Mike, but I seriously doubt Trump would know Roe vs Wade wasn't a question about crossing a stream.

Sad, but true

[IsailedawayfromFR]

The problem is that judicially-imposed solutions don't take.     

Do you even understand what you are writing?  Roe vs Wade was a judicially-imposed solution.

I can name others that are here and you say 'don't take', like Court-imposed busing.

[Jazzhead]

Do you even understand what you are writing?  Roe vs Wade was a judicially-imposed solution.

I can name others that are here and you say 'don't take', like Court-imposed busing.

What I mean is that a solution imposed by an unelected judges won't be accepted by the people.  It will be resented, and resisted.   

[kevindavis007]

Ok, then how is Trump going to over turn a court decision short of an Constitutional Amendment??

[Emjay]

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-democratic-convention-2016-live-pence-says-roe-v-wade-will-be-1469737388-htmlstory.html

Roe vs. Wade will be overturned if Donald Trump wins, Mike Pence says
Thursday, July 26, 2016; 1:23 P.M.
REPORTING FROM GRAND RAPIDS, MICH.
Seema Mehta

GOP vice presidential nominee Mike Pence on Thursday predicted Roe vs. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion, would be overturned if Donald Trump is elected president.

“I’m pro-life and I don’t apologize for it,” he said during a town hall meeting here. “We’ll see Roe vs. Wade consigned to the ash heap of history where it belongs.”

The comments — made in a conservative stronghold that strongly supported Texas Sen. Ted Cruz over Trump in the Michigan primary — were part of a broader argument Pence has been making on the stakes of the election: Voters need to consider that the next president will likely select multiple Supreme Court justices.

Pence said Trump would appoint strict constitutionalists in the mold of the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

“While we’re choosing a president for the next four years, this next president will make decisions that will impact our Supreme Court for the next 40,” he said. “… Go tell your neighbors and your friends, for the sake of the rule of law, for the sake of sanctity of life, for the sake of our 2nd Amendment, for the sake of all our other God-given liberties, we must insure the next president appointing justices to the Supreme Court is Donald Trump.”

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I bet TOS is flipping out at Pence being too conservative.

If I believed that, I would vote for Trump.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

What I mean is that a solution imposed by an unelected judges won't be accepted by the people.  It will be resented, and resisted.   

So let me get this right.

For the first 180 years we had this country, it was accepted by the people that it was against the law to have an abortion.

For the past +40 years, due to a solution imposed by unelected judges and not by passing a law, we now have abortion as 'law' and any change will not be accepted by the people short of a constitutional amendment.

Why does this not sound kinda weird by anyone else?

[Oceander]

So let me get this right.

For the first 180 years we had this country, it was accepted by the people that it was against the law to have an abortion.

For the past +40 years, due to a solution imposed by unelected judges and not by passing a law, we now have abortion as 'law' and any change will not be accepted by the people short of a constitutional amendment.

Why does this not sound kinda weird by anyone else?

That there was a lot of resistance and illegal clinics proves that "the people" didn't accept anything of the sort.

[Smokin Joe]

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-democratic-convention-2016-live-pence-says-roe-v-wade-will-be-1469737388-htmlstory.html


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I bet TOS is flipping out at Pence being too conservative.

Overturning Roe would be good, but that is either a SCOTUS decision or a Constitutional Amendment. While it might be possible to stack the court, Would Trump do that, and would those judges be approved? Additionally, Obamacare is a problem, too, calling for funding of contraception up to and including the RU-486 type plan B pills. How about we get rid of both?

[Suppressed]

So let me get this right.

Ok.

For the first 180 years we had this country, it was accepted by the people that it was against the law to have an abortion.

Nope. 

Early in the country's history, it was accepted that abortion was fine until the quickening (fetal movements were felt).

Even by the time Roe v. Wade, abortion in at least some form was legal in 40% of the states.

For the past +40 years, due to a solution imposed by unelected judges and not by passing a law, we now have abortion as 'law' and any change will not be accepted by the people short of a constitutional amendment.

Why does this not sound kinda weird by anyone else?

No more so than saying SCOTUS decisions have said that an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home is guaranteed, and no state or jurisdiction can pass a law infringing on it.

To overturn a right found by SCOTUS in the Constitution requires an amendment to the Constitution.   Thank goodness a SCOTUS ruling blocks infringing laws.

Yes, stare decisis is sometimes set aside, but that needs to be extraordinary.  Otherwise, we devolve into a banana republic.

[youknowwho]

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-democratic-convention-2016-live-pence-says-roe-v-wade-will-be-1469737388-htmlstory.html

Roe vs. Wade will be overturned if Donald Trump wins, Mike Pence says
Thursday, July 26, 2016; 1:23 P.M.
REPORTING FROM GRAND RAPIDS, MICH.
Seema Mehta

GOP vice presidential nominee Mike Pence on Thursday predicted Roe vs. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion, would be overturned if Donald Trump is elected president.

“I’m pro-life and I don’t apologize for it,” he said during a town hall meeting here. “We’ll see Roe vs. Wade consigned to the ash heap of history where it belongs.”

The comments — made in a conservative stronghold that strongly supported Texas Sen. Ted Cruz over Trump in the Michigan primary — were part of a broader argument Pence has been making on the stakes of the election: Voters need to consider that the next president will likely select multiple Supreme Court justices.

Pence said Trump would appoint strict constitutionalists in the mold of the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

“While we’re choosing a president for the next four years, this next president will make decisions that will impact our Supreme Court for the next 40,” he said. “… Go tell your neighbors and your friends, for the sake of the rule of law, for the sake of sanctity of life, for the sake of our 2nd Amendment, for the sake of all our other God-given liberties, we must insure the next president appointing justices to the Supreme Court is Donald Trump.”

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I bet TOS is flipping out at Pence being too conservative.

They are!

Wanna see something else hilarious?
Just read the comments.  Get popcorn first.  Also a few lifelines might need to be extended. 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3455066/posts

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Ok.

Early in the country's history, it was accepted that abortion was fine until the quickening (fetal movements were felt).

Even by the time Roe v. Wade, abortion in at least some form was legal in 40% of the states.

So, we were talking about abortion in the country, now you switch to talking about abortion being illegal in a majority of the states when Roe vs Wade came around. 

No more so than saying SCOTUS decisions have said that an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home is guaranteed, and no state or jurisdiction can pass a law infringing on it.

Citizens do not need SCOTUS to declare a right already clearly found in the Constitution.  In the case you cited, the second amendment.  I do not see where you are going here.

To overturn a right found by SCOTUS in the Constitution requires an amendment to the Constitution.   Thank goodness a SCOTUS ruling blocks infringing laws.

Please direct me to where in the Constitution this is stated.  You are basically saying that SCOTUS writes the Constitution the way they wish and must be over-ruled.  I believe it is the opposite.

That is what I would call a banana republic.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

That there was a lot of resistance and illegal clinics proves that "the people" didn't accept anything of the sort.

There are lots of people who do not accept the laws of this country.  Abortion is no different.

For example, are you suggesting that if a few banks are robbed then "the people" agree it is ok to rob banks?