Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kadath
It's not a question of switching parties, as you're clearly aware; it's getting people to vote at all. It's like Republicans are trying to scare people into voting by summoning the specter of terrorism. Same technique, different topic.
Also, it would not be the will of the people, as we're not a democracy (as you're also aware), we're a republic, and we elect people to vote for us. If a law is uheld or overturned by the Supreme Court, how does that represent the will of the people? The people don't vote for Supreme Court judges; they vote for the people who nominate and confirm them.
|
My contention that people who ONLY vote for one reason (being anti-abortion in this case) will continue to do so even if abortion was outlawed inorder to keep it outlawed. I was thinking about this a bit, and really the only way for this to in any way affect the Republican party would be if Democrats moved to outlaw abortion. That kind of move would not only remove the one issue voters, but cut into the Republican base enough to make a difference. Since that isn't going to happen, they can't do a 180 like they did with gun control, its only interesting as a hypothetical.
As for the civics lesson I am well aware of how the government works. I just find it amusing that the precious right to abortion is not supported by even a simple majority of the voters. Roe v Wade was one of those classic examples of judicial activisim, which is something I find closer to a dictatorship than a republic, reguardless of the outcome being something I favor like abortion or something I oppose. Once a member of the SCOTU you are accountable to no one. This, like all power can be a used for good or for ill.