Don't care about your position on the subject. Just wondering if people think it will ever happen?

 

My answer is no. But I do believe if it is to happen the timeframe is the next 10-20 years or not at all.

I'm on the app. Could a mod please add a poll?

I do. The science has changed and it is a subject of minor discussion in the legal community. There is at least one U.S. District Court case pending that I am aware of. I say 8-10 years.

No.

Tough to say. For lack of a better term, we progressively are becoming a more "liberal" nation... at least one straying from "traditional" values. I do not mean that in a derogatory sense, just the facts, especially as it pertains to social issues. It will just have to take the right combination of power to make it happen.

I agree with Former....If it's going to happen, it'll be in the next 10-15 years IMO. As the older, more strict "religious" generation starts to die off and the younger more accepting generation grows up, I think we'll start seeing things like abortion, gay marriage, etc., become non-issues.

On gay marriage, America has been moving slowly to the left. But on abortion we are moving slowly to the right.

 

It's hard to make a guess, but I would probably say no.

The one thing on the Pro-Life Movement's side is technology. As the quality of ultrasounds gets better and better, many women are looking at their ultrasounds which gives a much better image of the fetus and realizing what is inside them is not merely a glob of cells.

 

The largest disadvantage of the Pro-Life Movement is some of its most extreme supports who give the entire movement a bad image.

I agree with Former....If it's going to happen' date=' it'll be in the next 10-15 years IMO. As the older, more strict "religious" generation starts to die off and the younger more accepting generation grows up, I think we'll start seeing things like abortion, gay marriage, etc., become non-issues.[/quote']

 

My thinking is neither Romney or Obama will put a SC justice in that would overturn it. So you have at least 4-8 years before the possibility of a judge taking a seat that would vote to overturn.

 

And I like Bugatti/UKMF think the country is going the other way so the window of opportunity is short.

I took an Ethics class in college, and a major part of our grade was participating in debates which were open to all topics EXCEPT abortion. The professor said that he almost had fist fights a few times with previous classes and didn't want to deal with it anymore. That just shows that the topic still makes some peoples blood boil. As long as Roe v. Wade stands, I personally hope that abortion always remains a big issue among people. I don't want to live in a society where abortion is completely socially acceptable. At the same time, I don't see RvW being overturned either.

I do. The science has changed and it is a subject of minor discussion in the legal community. There is at least one U.S. District Court case pending that I am aware of. I say 8-10 years.

 

And yet they've passed on any opportunities they've had to overturn it in the past. They've pulled back and pulled back and pulled back but never overturned the decision. Reading Scalia's opinions in them are fantastic; his legal writing on the matter is the equivalent of jumping up and down on his chair screaming, "JUST OVERTURN THE THING!" I really haven't been given any indication that the Court is willing to do anything other than place additional conditions on the ruling while leaving it as fundamentally effective law.

 

And yet they've passed on any opportunities they've had to overturn it in the past. They've pulled back and pulled back and pulled back but never overturned the decision. Reading Scalia's opinions in them are fantastic; his legal writing on the matter is the equivalent of jumping up and down on his chair screaming, "JUST OVERTURN THE THING!" I really haven't been given any indication that the Court is willing to do anything other than place additional conditions on the ruling while leaving it as fundamentally effective law.

 

I don't follow the SC as closely as you. How many more judges like Scalia would they need to overturn?

Won't ever happen in today's political climate. The GOP doesn't want to lose its No. 1 wedge issue.

I don't follow the SC as closely as you. How many more judges like Scalia would they need to overturn?

 

Scalia, Alito and Thomas would vote to overturn with no questions asked.

 

Under no circumstances would Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor or Kagan vote to overturn.

 

Given the current makeup of the court, that leaves Roberts and Kennedy as the ones that would have to be convinced. Truthfully, I think they're too middle-of-the-road to want to shake things and bring that sort of notoriety to the court. Roberts' time as chief justice has shown me two things 1) he doesn't want the court to set political policy and 2) aside from policy itself, he doesn't want the court to be a place where political battles are fought. The trouble for him is that when Roe came down, the court absolutely set that policy and it's going to be up to the court to un-set it. The question is whether his dedication to that second principle will overpower his desire set things back under the first.

 

However, given that we have four justices aged 74 or older (Breyer, Ginsburg, Scalia, Kennedy), the makeup of the court could change considerably in the next few years. If Romney wins, then the chair of the 79-year-old Ruth Bader Ginsburg will be something to watch out for. If a conservative-minded judge winds up in that chair, then that could conceivably be five votes to overturn (again, depending on Kennedy) with Roberts not having to be the one making the call.

 

Scalia, Alito and Thomas would vote to overturn with no questions asked.

 

Under no circumstances would Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor or Kagan vote to overturn.

 

Given the current makeup of the court, that leaves Roberts and Kennedy as the ones that would have to be convinced. Truthfully, I think they're too middle-of-the-road to want to shake things and bring that sort of notoriety to the court. Roberts' time as chief justice has shown me two things 1) he doesn't want the court to set political policy and 2) aside from policy itself, he doesn't want the court to be a place where political battles are fought. The trouble for him is that when Roe came down, the court absolutely set that policy and it's going to be up to the court to un-set it. The question is whether his dedication to that second principle will overpower his desire set things back under the first.

 

However, given that we have four justices aged 74 or older (Breyer, Ginsburg, Scalia, Kennedy), the makeup of the court could change considerably in the next few years. If Romney wins, then the chair of the 79-year-old Ruth Bader Ginsburg will be something to watch out for. If a conservative-minded judge winds up in that chair, then that could conceivably be five votes to overturn with Roberts not having to be the one making the call.

 

Thank you. Nice info. I'm not as sold as some that Romney will put a judge in the chair who leans as conservative as many in his party would like. Especially in his theoretical 2nd term.