Roe vs. Wade overturned

[ronntaylor]

That doesn’t answer the question. What’s the solution if the supreme court puts them up shit‘s creek?

GFC! It took a concerted effort over nearly 50 years to do it. And it was solidified in the last five years with the election of Mango. All of that with the concerted effort of a hostile nation, and racist, illegal voter suppression and dumb-fuckery on the part of enough Dem/progressive voters. Dems will have to undo it over a few or more years if they maintain control of both the Senate and House, or over several years if they lost either/both during the upcoming midterms.

You asked the question about abortion, but live in a state where equal rights for Queer people was on the ballot. And lost!! And previously in that "liberal bastion" Latinos suffered at the hands of that same electorate. Same in Hawaii on marriage equality. So in reference to equality for Queer folk, we don't have to imagine our rights, our equality being at the whim of voters. And that's in two liberal, Democratic states. Forget the right-wing, crazed evangelical states. Alabama barely voted for a Dem over a sexual predator (Jones vs Moore) in a Senate race that was way too close for comfort. In that race 60%+ of White women voted for the homophobic, racist predator. Black people, Queer people, Latinos would be up shit's creek if that same electorate voted on any referendum on whether or not they deserve equality.

 

[JayMysteri0]

That was an actual miscarriage though and she basically told police about her drug use and she didn't know if she wanted the child or not.

Although the charges and judgement in that case is pure lunacy. My argument is based on privacy protected by the constitution and hipaa laws. Women simply don't have to answer personal medical questions.

Once again, that's been ANOTHER concern since the leak.

App data could be used to prosecute under anti-abortion laws - 9to5Mac

Pro-choice and privacy campaigners are warning that app data, and other personal data pulled from smartphones, could be used to prosecute ...

9to5mac.com

Pro-choice and privacy campaigners are warning that app data and other personal data pulled from smartphones could be used to prosecute women who have had abortions …

The concern has been raised in light of the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion that looks set to remove legal protection for both those having abortions and the medical professionals performing them. Indeed, under some state legislation, it could even be illegal to send a text message offering help or support.

CNN reports.

A wave of new legislation taking aim at abortion rights across the country is raising concerns about the potential use of personal data to punish people who seek information about or access to abortion services online.
In some of the most restrictive states, digital rights experts warn that people’s search histories, location data, messages and other digital information could be used by law enforcement agencies investigating or prosecuting abortion-related cases.
Concerns about the digital privacy implications of abortion restrictions come amid a movement by Republican-controlled states, including Georgia, Texas, Mississippi and Oklahoma, in recent years to pass laws severely curtailing access to the service. And they take on additional significance following the leak Monday of the Supreme Court draft opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade, which guarantees a person’s Constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy before viability (usually around 24 weeks). Overturning the landmark 1973 court ruling would transform the landscape of reproductive health in America, leaving abortion policy up to individual states and potentially paving the way for more than 20 states to pass new laws restricting abortions.

The piece gives an example of how app data might be used to provide evidence for prosecutions.

For example, in states that make it a crime to help an abortion-seeker such as Texas and Oklahoma, data from women’s period-tracking or pregnancy apps could end up being subpoenaed as evidence against the person who helped them, said Danielle Citron, a law professor at the University of Virginia and author of the forthcoming book “The Fight for Privacy.” “Let’s say you got your period, stopped your period and then got your period again in a short time,” Citron said. “It’s [potential] evidence of your own criminality, or your doctor’s criminality.”

Something as basic as a text message offering to drive a friend to the airport – so that they can get an out-of-state abortion – could potentially be used as evidence for a prosecution in some states.

Some lawmakers have even put forward proposals that would effectively ban citizens from getting out-of-state abortions. Missouri state representative Elizabeth Coleman is pushing a provision that would allow citizens to sue anyone who “aids or abets” a Missouri resident in getting an abortion, including out of state doctors, friends who help arrange transportation or even hosting a website that “encourages or facilitates efforts” of Missouri residents to get elective abortions. And other states could follow suit.

Many experts have warned that it is impossible for the law to actually prevent abortions – it can only prevent safe abortions. History shows that those who are denied legal access to abortions will instead seek underground alternatives, which can put their life at risk.

As far as privacy...


Suffering something as traumatic as a miscarriage, the authorities may want to speak with you in the future.

Something to consider, the "stand your ground" law. For some it sounds like a great thing concerning self defense. Except if you're a woman. Especially if you're a woman of color. This is NOT an area that should suddenly involve the authorities, but in some states that may very well be the case very soon. This entire exercise has been about control & punishment. You better believe the places that rush to do this, are going to exercise this to make examples of some, to reinforce that control & use that punishment.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

GFC! It took a concerted effort over nearly 50 years to do it. And it was solidified in the last five years with the election of Mango. All of that with the concerted effort of a hostile nation, and racist, illegal voter suppression and dumb-fuckery on the part of enough Dem/progressive voters. Dems will have to undo it over a few or more years if they maintain control of both the Senate and House, or over several years if they lost either/both during the upcoming midterms.

You asked the question about abortion, but live in a state where equal rights for Queer people was on the ballot. And lost!! And previously in that "liberal bastion" Latinos suffered at the hands of that same electorate. Same in Hawaii on marriage equality. So in reference to equality for Queer folk, we don't have to imagine our rights, our equality being at the whim of voters. And that's in two liberal, Democratic states. Forget the right-wing, crazed evangelical states. Alabama barely voted for a Dem over a sexual predator (Jones vs Moore) in a Senate race that was way too close for comfort. In that race 60%+ of White women voted for the homophobic, racist predator. Black people, Queer people, Latinos would be up shit's creek if that same electorate voted on any referendum on whether or not they deserve equality.

I don’t share your optimism that the Democrats have 2 - 4 years to fix anything, or more specifically have the will or stomach to do it. The incumbent cartel would rather go down in flames. The national Democrats are the Uvalde police.

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

Once again, that's been ANOTHER concern since the leak.


Pro-choice and privacy campaigners are warning that app data and other personal data pulled from smartphones could be used to prosecute women who have had abortions …

The concern has been raised in light of the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion that looks set to remove legal protection for both those having abortions and the medical professionals performing them. Indeed, under some state legislation, it could even be illegal to send a text message offering help or support.

CNN reports.


The piece gives an example of how app data might be used to provide evidence for prosecutions.


Something as basic as a text message offering to drive a friend to the airport – so that they can get an out-of-state abortion – could potentially be used as evidence for a prosecution in some states.


Many experts have warned that it is impossible for the law to actually prevent abortions – it can only prevent safe abortions. History shows that those who are denied legal access to abortions will instead seek underground alternatives, which can put their life at risk.

As far as privacy...


Suffering something as traumatic as a miscarriage, the authorities may want to speak with you in the future.

Something to consider, the "stand your ground" law. For some it sounds like a great thing concerning self defense. Except if you're a woman. Especially if you're a woman of color. This is NOT an area that should suddenly involve the authorities, but in some states that may very well be the case very soon. This entire exercise has been about control & punishment. You better believe the places that rush to do this, are going to exercise this to make examples of some, to reinforce that control & use that punishment.

These proposals will be shot to the ground or be completely unenforceable, basically cause it infringes on such a wide scope of privacy issues that NOBODY leaning in any direction would want to corrode.

 

[fooferdoggie]

buy an apple phone to prevent this.

 

[SuperMatt]

These proposals will be shot to the ground or be completely unenforceable, basically cause it infringes on such a wide scope of privacy issues that NOBODY leaning in any direction would want to corrode.

Except Clarence Thomas. He’s happy to revisit the legality of gay marriage and the use of contraception.

And he’s FAR from the only one that wants to invade our privacy.

The original post of this thread indicated that even Republicans didn’t want Roe overturned because it went too far. Well, we see that “too far” no longer exists now that the Federalist Society rules America.

 

[ronntaylor]

I don’t share your optimism that the Democrats have 2 - 4 years to fix anything, or more specifically have the will or stomach to do it. The incumbent cartel would rather go down in flames. The national Democrats are the Uvalde police.

It remains to be seen. I remember a lot of similar chatter for the 2020 Senate races in Georgia. And then leading into the runoffs. Dems only need to maintain a majority in the House and 51 votes in the Senate to push through legislation. Even if they Lose one or both these midterms Biden will be wielding his veto pen. And they'd simply need to use outrage and voters need to actually fucking vote in 2024. So between early 2023 and early 2025 is the earliest. Tall order, but no taller than winning two Senate seats from incumbent Republican control in Georgia.

If voters outraged by this ruling and the many years leading up to this don't vote, and vote for the right candidates...

 

[Runs For Fun]

This sums up how so many people feel about Christianity and dictating laws based on a stupid mythical book.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1540382064142233600/

I consider myself a Christian and I agree with this.

The original post of this thread indicated that even Republicans didn’t want Roe overturned because it went too far. Well, we see that “too far” no longer exists now that the Federalist Society rules America.

 

[JayMysteri0]

These proposals will be shot to the ground or be completely unenforceable, basically cause it infringes on such a wide scope of privacy issues that NOBODY leaning in any direction would want to corrode.

You can say that with the same certainty that some believe Roe Vs Wade wouldn't be overturned?

With our current political climate, you're betting on the rights of others.

buy an apple phone to prevent this.

I was listening to a podcast where two women discussed the various health apps, when it concerned things menstrual. Basically no app could be particularly trusted. But the did give the nod to Apple's health app, but since Apple is always completely clear, it was tenative.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1523639381533151233/

 

[fooferdoggie]

I consider myself a Christian and I agree with this.

the man that tried to Destroy his party is worried about hurting his party? what a blithering idiot.

 

[fooferdoggie]

I was listening to a podcast where two women discussed the various health apps, when it concerned things menstrual. Basically no app could be particularly trusted. But the did give the nod to Apple's health app, but since Apple is always completely clear, it was tenative.

How fast will apple adapt and say they will keep this info safe?

 

[JayMysteri0]

How fast will apple adapt and say they will keep this info safe?

I vaguely remember, but I think the claim was that they don't actually keep the info or it isn't attached to a specific person.

 

[Runs For Fun]

How fast will apple adapt and say they will keep this info safe?

I vaguely remember, but I think the claim was that they don't actually keep the info or it isn't attached to a specific person.

How to ensure Apple Health cycle tracking data stays private | AppleInsider

Cycle tracking is a feature built into the Apple Health app, and there are plenty of reasons why it shouldn't be handed over to third-party data brokers. Here's how to check your health data privacy.

appleinsider.com

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

You can say that with the same certainty that some believe Roe Vs Wade wouldn't be overturned?

With our current political climate, you're betting on the rights of others.

Nowadays, I say nothing with certainty.

But I still think the majority of both sides are very stringent when it comes to privacy. And many might be oblivious now, but when they realize it can put their own privacy in danger, there's going to be a whole lot of backpedaling.

 

[JayMysteri0]

How to ensure Apple Health cycle tracking data stays private | AppleInsider

Cycle tracking is a feature built into the Apple Health app, and there are plenty of reasons why it shouldn't be handed over to third-party data brokers. Here's how to check your health data privacy.

appleinsider.com

-Looks down-

I'm fairly certain I don't need that information.

I'm just trying remember what the ladies in that podcast discussed about apps & privacy that track their cycles.

 

[mac_in_tosh]

Now that the Court, in its strict adherence to the Constitution, has overturned Roe v. Wade, maybe it will turn its attention to gun laws and base decisions on the fact that the 2nd amendment specifically refers to well-regulated militias, the regulation of which by the government is spelled out in the Constitution. Maybe, guided by its belief in the sanctity of life, it will rule that individual ownership of guns, especially guns of war that were never anticipated in the 18th century, is not guaranteed by the Constitution...NOT

 

[JayMysteri0]

Nowadays, I say nothing with certainty.

But I still think the majority of both sides are very stringent when it comes to privacy. And many might be oblivious now, but when they realize it can put their own privacy in danger, there's going to be a whole lot of backpedaling.

Once again, I believe that's the same thinking that happened BEFORE Roe Vs Wade was overturned. Once the leak came out though, more & more people were looking into how over zealous state gov't may try to find those who do seek abortions out of state to circumvent the state's control.

Some of the information involved doesn't require legal permission, but can be purchased. Texas already has the little abortion bounty hunter workaround in effect, it could very well be turned into purchasing particular data to out those believed to have sought an abortion.

 

[JayMysteri0]

Now that the Court, in its strict adherence to the Constitution, has overturned Roe v. Wade, maybe it will turn its attention to gun laws and base decisions on the fact that the 2nd amendment specifically refers to well-regulated militias, the regulation of which by the government is spelled out in the Constitution. Maybe, guided by its belief in the sanctity of life, it will rule that individual ownership of guns, especially guns of war that were never anticipated in the 18th century, is not guaranteed by the Constitution...NOT

Not gonna happen. Everyone now knows that guns have more protections than women.

 

[SuperMatt]

Nowadays, I say nothing with certainty.

But I still think the majority of both sides are very stringent when it comes to privacy. And many might be oblivious now, but when they realize it can put their own privacy in danger, there's going to be a whole lot of backpedaling.

I don’t know that the right of privacy is that highly valued.

After 9/11, we subjected everybody to pretty invasive searches to get on a plane.

When crime was high in NYC, a lot of people liked “stop and frisk” I recall.

Abortion bans amount to a violation of privacy. Why should anybody be entitled to know if somebody else is pregnant or not?

I hope you are right and that people see privacy going away and backtrack.

But the court’s willingness to flip-flop on states’ rights in the space of 24 hours makes me think that they will be fine with invading privacy in some cases while leaving it intact in others. Because, the indignity of stop-and-frisk and the absolute privacy of unlimited “dark money” in politics co-exist. If privacy can be bought, the wealthy are going to be just fine with it.

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

I don’t know that the right of privacy is that highly valued.

After 9/11, we subjected everybody to pretty invasive searches to get on a plane.

When crime was high in NYC, a lot of people liked “stop and frisk” I recall.

Abortion bans amount to a violation of privacy. Why should anybody be entitled to know if somebody else is pregnant or not?

I hope you are right and that people see privacy going away and backtrack.

But the court’s willingness to flip-flop on states’ rights in the space of 24 hours makes me think that they will be fine with invading privacy in some cases while leaving it intact in others. Because, the indignity of stop-and-frisk and the absolute privacy of unlimited “dark money” in politics co-exist. If privacy can be bought, the wealthy are going to be just fine with it.

I agree, but when it comes to the medical side of things. That might be a little too much.

I guess it's a wait and see game right now. I think Reps are just throwing everything at the wall to appease their demographic and see what sticks. What's scary is the lack of fight coming from Dems. Speeches without action ain't cutting it.