• BU Today staff

    BU Today staff Profile

  • Dana Ferrante

    Production Manager

    Photo of Dana Ferrante, a young white woman with long brown hair and an undercut. She smiles, wears purple glasses, and a sand-colored shirt.

    Dana Ferrante is production manager for BU Today, The Brink, and Bostonia, and produces BU Today’s award-winning, biweekly podcast Question of the Week. She is also a Metropolitan College MLA candidate in gastronomy, and can be reached at dferr@bu.edu. Profile

Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.

There are 18 comments on What Would It Mean to Codify Roe v. Wade?

  1. In my opinion our government should have no right to over turn anything. Anybody ever think of regulating how many a person has. ITS NOT BURTH CONTROL THAT IS CRUEL. Luckily that soul will go where it was suppose to be! If there really is GOD

  2. As a former OB nurse, I had the opportunity to support women who had had an abortion at some point in time and subsequently decided to have a child.
    Having seen the pain of women carry a pregnancy as a result of incest or rape is terrible as well as a women who has been forced to continue with the pregnancy til term even though the fetus has multiple anomalies and will not survive after birth.

    Let’s get down to some basics, do we as women, impede a man from getting an erection and wanting sex. What is the broader issue, that some on the Pro – life camp want more white children born so they think they will have a base in the future? Or is this about control over women that so many men still feel that they have?

    Am I angry, you are darn right I am! While I am well beyond child bearing years and changed my field of nursing a long time ago, I am sick and tired of individuals who feel that it is their place to govern the body of another person.
    It is time to codify Roe v Wade and to impede those who feel that they are personally responsible for the choices that others make, while appreciating that abortion is not a form of birth control. Yet these same individuals what to hinder a woman from these options as well.

    1. The term “codify” appears to be a weasel-word that polls well, but isn’t specific. I cannot believe that after SCOTUS ruled that the 10th amendment applies, that this is not a right or power assigned to the federal government, that they would recognize any new law as not a violation of enumerated powers. I doubt that an amendment on this issue is likely.

      Empty partisan rhetoric aside, any faction that fails to present a serious argument based on precisely when a fetus should be conferred rights isn’t addressing the core issue. The extremest positions on both sides (full human rights from conception, vs no rights till birth) have a very heavy burden to demonstrate a good case.

      1. The definition of codify itself is vague. Nowhere can you find what codify actually means other than “arrange into a system of code” OK what the hell does that mean.
        if they said make a law broader, stronger etc. fine. But to say arrange into code is meaningless. Also seen codify means to affirm. If a law is in place what is their to affirm? How to do codify or affirm a law defining speed limit @ 45MPH?
        So all the time spent passing laws is a waste of time if they are so weak they need to be codified?

    2. If you pro choice idiots had any clue you would understand that the original Roe decision was not for SCOTUS to decide.

      Let me be crystal clear:
      SCOTUS IS NOT A LAW MAKING BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT

      They have no rights or powers to make laws. That’s what they did with Roe vs Wade.

      Personally I don’t give a crap about pro choice or pro life. You’re all a bunch of hypocrites.

      The bottom line is, if you want a pro abortion society pass laws through congress, the senate, then signed by the president.
      The law needs to protect your privacy rights. That’s all.
      If your right to privacy is protected then what happens between your doctor and you is protected.
      There is no need to ever mention the word abortion.

      It’s a 2 edged sword for you hypocrites though.

      Once you provide that privacy you cannot tell me I have to get vaccinated or wear a mask. You can’t have it both ways.

      This SCOTUS is restoring democracy. By bringing out rights back.

  3. Codifying Roe v. Wade is long overdue, it should have been done decades ago. The Republican party has evolved into this radical right-wing fascist like party hostile to democracy thanks to this modern GOP version of Adolf Hitler for president who has helped radical anti-choice forces to further erode reproductive healthcare access and install justices hostile to roe v. wade for the specific purpose of overturning it. We now have a ‘corrupted’ Supreme Court with right-wing justices not concerned with any legal theory but instead with political ideology subservient to the Republican party and to whatever they desire not what the people really want.

  4. Would the democrats having codified Roe have in any way prevented or impeded the supreme court’s decision to deem it unconstitutional?

    1. Agree. It doesn’t appear in any reasonable extrapolation of the Bill of Rights not other amendments, and it seems to not be part of the enumerated powers of Congress. So the 10th amendment seems to apply. It’s left to the states and people. And “code” or “codification” would be a usurpation of powers by the Federal government,

      I hope that devolving this issue to states (again) will eventually result in a less device set of state laws. That seems to work well in Europe. Sadly we seem to have two extreme positions in the US – those believe a fetus has full human rights from the moment of conception, and those who believe that a fetus has zero rights until birth or even later!.

  5. The planet is bursting at the seems with OVER-POPULATION as it is, and the food supply throughout the world is impaired because of severe climate changes, making people suffer from hunger and disease because there are too many mouths to feed and not nearly enough help to irradicate hunger. Crime in recent years has escalated beyond all expectations; jails are full of criminals, and all this while the planet turns up-side-down causing great domestic, social, commercial, and government pressures that are suffocating humanity.

    Having innocent life come into the world, especially when uninvited and rejected, weighs heavy creating an UNbalance of opportunity and progress, and a very poor outlook for future growth. The world has assuredly expanded it’s frontiers to the highest limit.

      1. It’s actually sad how blinded people are that are pro-abortion. Do you not realize that we all began as a fetus? That there is always a beginning to everything??? No man or woman has any right to decide whether a child lives or dies IN THE WOMB. If you had an unplanned pregnancy… put the innocent child up for adoption. But you say that’s too painful for the mother because she’ll get attached or she can’t get medical care? Those are all just excuses. The truth is, you feel it’s easier to eliminate that child so you can just move on with your life. You delude yourselves with the lie that the baby isn’t a baby, but instead a parasite, so you don’t feel the guilt of ending its life. We all began at conception, remember that.

        1. are you willing to pay an increase of 25% of your income to ensure all mothers have an income sufficient to raise a child? if youre going to foce a woman to be a mother, we’re going to force younto foot the bill. Anything less is anti-life “pro lifers” treating babies like parasites by way of enforced poverty. Every mother in thisncountry should receive a guaranteed income equal to the per calita income MEN make in her state. Again, anything less makes you sub human hypocrites. I guess you want more babies on earth for target practice. You make me sick.

  6. The United States Constitution is very clear on this matter. Anything not specifically mentioned (abortion is NOT mentioned) rests the individual states. Consequently any law addressing abortion is legal in a given state unless that state passes legislation related to abortion. Very, very simple if you can read the English language and just as easily translated from any foreign language.

  7. The Democrats had the White House, Senate and Congress under both Clinton and Obama. Why didn’t they do it then?

    Because they didn’t care. They’re ALL politicians.

Post a comment.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *