- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 41,104
- Reaction score
- 12,202
- Location
- South Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Depends on how you look at things. If you think voting on someone's rights should be left to the states than yes they overstepped their bounds. However, if you believe that states shouldn't be able to vote on someone else's rights, then no they didn't overstep.
I don't think the states should be able to vote on someone else's rights.
Abortion is not a "right".... If those whom are on the side of pro abortion want that to be, then they should go through the proper channels and pass an amendment....What they do have at the moment is what I would term a "faux right", that is to say that abortion advocates now have a tenuous ruling made by man, granted by a panel of 9 un-elected officials that can be reversed, or taken away at any time which that body feels that the original decision was made in error.
The problem we have when we let the SCOTUS make law is that in time that law can be overturned. The founding of this country never envisioned the court having the power to make law, that was supposed to be the power of the congress, and the President. The point in which started using precedent to make law was a bastardization of the intent of the Constitution, and I think purposely done to weaken it....