Democratic Senator Predicts ‘Revolution’ If Roe v. Wade Reversed

[Hoodat]

Democratic Senator Predicts ‘Revolution’ If Roe v. Wade Reversed

CAROLINE DOWNEY  |  November 30, 2021 3:23 PM

Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen said that if the Supreme Court overturns the landmark decision in Roe v. Wade it could precipitate a “revolution.”

When asked by a reporter if public discussion over abortion had tempered since the 1973 ruling, Shaheen answered that outrage and potentially violence could erupt, among young people especially, in the event of a reversal.

“I hope the Supreme Court is listening to the people of the United States because – to go back to Adam Sexton’s question – I think if you want to see a revolution go ahead, outlaw Roe v. Wade and see what the response is of the public, particularly young people,” Shaheen remarked. “Because I think that will not be acceptable to young women or young men.”  .  .  .

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/democratic-senator-predicts-revolution-if-roe-v-wade-reversed/


Democrats said the same thing about Plessy v. Ferguson back in the 50s.

[Wingnut]

A Kotex Mafia revolt?

[Killer Clouds]

Shaheen should be careful what she wishes for. Revolution? BRING IT ON DCP MORONS!

[christian]

We saw plenty of democrat allies attempt revolution, burn baby burn, last year.  Is she threatening out right war, by democrat powers and a woman base?

[libertybele]

We as a nation need to reverse the moral decay in our country, otherwise we will continue to destroy ourselves. 

IF the SCOTUS overturns R v Wade, I will be very surprised. It would be a huge turning point in our society.  Young women and young men need to think twice and even three times about their actions and the ramifications of their actions.

I could go on, but I'll refrain and  just pray that our society reaches a turning point.         
                                                                 

[txradioguy]

Ok. I'm ready.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

When Roe vs Wade was decided, pro-lifers did not like it but did not riot.

Now we get threats from the left it will burn down the country.

It is the way libs do it. Lawlessness.

[libertybele]

When Roe vs Wade was decided, pro-lifers did not like it but did not riot.

Now we get threats from the left it will burn down the country.

It is the way libs do it. Lawlessness.

Very true, but WE cannot continue to allow that lawlessness. It is that lawlessness that continues to destroy our country. It needs to be stopped. Unfortunately with Joe in charge, I don't see that happening.

[jafo2010]

If reversing Roe vs Wade causes a revolution, than I say reverse already.  Best thing that could happen to this nation is purging these genocidal maniacs that think killing the unborn is more a right for women than it is the snuffing out of a human life.

Just because we have the ability to do something does not mean we should be doing it.

Ask Scott Peterson who was sentenced to death for the murder of his unborn child in one of the most liberal states of the union.  If it is murder for him, why is it women get a pass?  Makes no sense.  Either the unborn is human life, or it is not.  From where I stand, killing the unborn is murder, and has never been in the best interest of this nation.

Adhering to the Margaret Sanger eugenics policies while being funded by the USA taxpayer MUST come to an end.  It is so contrary to what this nation stands for, and it is a national disgrace.  And it will be recognized as such through history 100 years from now.  It is evil personified.

But do not hold your breath for pansy Roberts to end Roe vs Wade.  It just will not happen with that weak worthless puke as the Chief Justice.

[roamer_1]

So what are they gonna do? Burn down their sh*thole cities... Again... Sommore?

Meh.

[Hoodat]

Mike Pence made an interesting case for overturning.  He argued that the original decision was based on benefitting America.  But after half a century, it is clear that the opposite has occurred.  Thus, based on the original intent of the ruling, the court must now overturn in order to benefit the nation.

[LMAO]

So what are they gonna do? Burn down their sh*thole cities... Again... Sommore?

Meh.

Yeah there’s not really anything left to burn. I’t would be like starting a campfire with the ashes

[Free Vulcan]

So what are they gonna do? Burn down their sh*thole cities... Again... Sommore?

Meh.

Exactly. If you don't give me what I want, I'm gonna chop off my finger!

Conservatives can do well just letting the other side do themselves in and not interfere.

[Hoodat]

So what are they gonna do? Burn down their sh*thole cities... Again... Sommore?

Let's call it a win-win.

[bilo]

I'm betting it will be Kavanaugh and Roberts who side with the Rats and do not overturn Roe V. Wade.

[DefiantMassRINO]

If the State is God, life begins when the IRS assigns a Tax Payer ID number.

Without a Tax Payer ID number, there is no viable source of tax renevue.

[Hoodat]

This isn't an abortion rights case.  It is a State's right case.  Specifically, in the absence of any federal law, does the Great State of Mississippi have the right to formulate its own laws in regard to abortion?  According to the Tenth Amendment, it does.

[DefiantMassRINO]

So, Massachusetts could pass a law that bans gunpowder and explosives, including bullets and fireworks?

There's nothing in the 2nd Amendment that guarantees right to ammunition.

So, states can criminalize any medical procedure because there are no explicit Federal Constitutional protections for access to medical procedures?

State and Federal constitutions are agreements among citizens to create governments and to enumerate the powers deligated to them.

If a state constitution does not enumerate the power of the state to ban abortions, from where or whom does the state obtain the power to implement such a ban?

Do state constitutions have a clause that delegates all powers not enumerated in them to the State?

Can states ban vasectomies, artificial birth contol, access to Viagra, and other unnatural intervention in human reproductive activity?

[txradioguy]

So, Massachusetts could pass a law that bans gunpowder and explosives, including bullets and fireworks?

There's nothing in the 2nd Amendment that guarantees right to ammunition.

Wrong.  "Shall not infringe" covers what you speak of since it's a backdoor weapons ban.

[Killer Clouds]

So, Massachusetts could pass a law that bans gunpowder and explosives, including bullets and fireworks?

There's nothing in the 2nd Amendment that guarantees right to ammunition.

So, states can criminalize any medical procedure because there are no explicit Federal Constitutional protections for access to medical procedures?

State and Federal constitutions are agreements among citizens to create governments and to enumerate the powers deligated to them.

If a state constitution does not enumerate the power of the state to ban abortions, from where or whom does the state obtain the power to implement such a ban?

Do state constitutions have a clause that delegates all powers not enumerated in them to the State?

Can states ban vasectomies, artificial birth contol, access to Viagra, and other unnatural intervention in human reproductive activity?

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed covers ammunition. Already decided by SCOTUS.

[roamer_1]

So, Massachusetts could pass a law that bans gunpowder and explosives, including bullets and fireworks?

There's nothing in the 2nd Amendment that guarantees right to ammunition.

Of course. The 2nd reserves the right to keep and bear arms. That right is made moot if there is no ammunition.However, states DO limit certain calibers... Try to get live rounds for a howitzer. And states DO limit explosives and license their use.

So, states can criminalize any medical procedure because there are no explicit Federal Constitutional protections for access to medical procedures?

Yes.

State and Federal constitutions are agreements among citizens to create governments and to enumerate the powers deligated to them.

If a state constitution does not enumerate the power of the state to ban abortions, from where or whom does the state obtain the power to implement such a ban?

Powers not delegated to the fed belong to the state. Powers not delegated to the state belong to the people.
 

Can states ban vasectomies, artificial birth contol, access to Viagra, and other unnatural intervention in human reproductive activity?

By right, YES.

[libertybele]

So, Massachusetts could pass a law that bans gunpowder and explosives, including bullets and fireworks?

There's nothing in the 2nd Amendment that guarantees right to ammunition.

So, states can criminalize any medical procedure because there are no explicit Federal Constitutional protections for access to medical procedures?

State and Federal constitutions are agreements among citizens to create governments and to enumerate the powers deligated to them.

If a state constitution does not enumerate the power of the state to ban abortions, from where or whom does the state obtain the power to implement such a ban?

Do state constitutions have a clause that delegates all powers not enumerated in them to the State?

Can states ban vasectomies, artificial birth contol, access to Viagra, and other unnatural intervention in human reproductive activity?

States rights period.

Amendment 10 - the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

 

[Hoodat]

So, Massachusetts could pass a law that bans gunpowder and explosives, including bullets and fireworks?

There's nothing in the 2nd Amendment that guarantees right to ammunition.

Arms are no longer arms without ammunition.  And unlike abortion, there is an Amendment that specifically addresses the right of the individual regarding firearms.

So, states can criminalize any medical procedure because there are no explicit Federal Constitutional protections for access to medical procedures?

Kind of like how Massachusetts banned elective surgeries or the dispensing of Ivermectin to treat Covid?

If a state constitution does not enumerate the power of the state to ban abortions, from where or whom does the state obtain the power to implement such a ban?

I am not aware of a single State that denies itself the power to make laws.

Do state constitutions have a clause that delegates all powers not enumerated in them to the State?

Are you intentionally being obtuse?

Can states ban vasectomies, artificial birth contol, access to Viagra, and other unnatural intervention in human reproductive activity?

According to the Supreme Court, no.  According to the Constitution, yes.  In Griswold v. Connecticut, the existing statute was in clear violation of Amendment XIV equal protection.  Yet the Court decided to base it on the infamous privacy 'penumbra' (Latin for 'making it up as you go') instead.

But hey, if you can find a right to abortion in the Constitution, then congratulations will be in order.  The Supreme Court certainly failed in doing so.

[Bigun]

States rights period.

Amendment 10 - the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Don't forget this one @libertybele

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

[libertybele]

Don't forget this one @libertybele

Noted.  Thank you @Bigun