Roe vs. Wade overturned

Yoused said:
Remember how the head of the EPA was getting all that super security in his office so that no one could find out what he was doing?
Click to expand...
Yeah, he had that cone of silence installed. Another weirdo.
 
I find it appalling that anyone would even seriously contemplate going back to the days when women died or were seriously injured undergoing sometimes self-administered "coat-hanger abortions" or at the hands of others during abortions in mysterious back-alley rooms or other undisclosed locations which were unclean or not suited to performing any sort of medical intervention on anyone.
 
Heard the Senate is going to vote on codifying abortion rights. Doesn’t mean it will pass but this should be the first of voting on many initiatives, vote away at each major initiative in BBB. Even if none of it passes it will have every member on record on exactly what they are for or against. This would be a win for Democrats and a horrifying prospect for Republicans. But I fully expect blanket corruption to keep this from ever happening.

Remind me again, exactly what it is we’re trying to fight to preserve.
 
Cmaier said:
Another weirdo.
Click to expand...
You are being charitable. That kind of MO suggests to me that he has venal sociopathic tendencies bordering on (if not well into) criminality. On the other hand, my opinion is suspect, since I regard Reagan as a criminal who was about the worst choice the country could have made at the time.
 
SuperMatt said:
Sorry, where is it you are getting the idea that Democrats are focused on personal pronouns or men having babies? Can you point to certain politicians using it on the campaign trail? How about bills introduced?

Or is this all just regurgitation of Fox News talking points, which accuse Democrats of focusing on these things, when it’s actually right-wing talking heads that are fixated on them?
Click to expand...
A good majority of my high school classmates are liberal democrats and that's their primary focus unfortunately. If they along with like minded people focused on the real issues, perhaps we'd be better along as a country.

As I've said before, I don't have cable news. No Faux, CNN, MSNBC, NewsMax, etc. Just local stations broadcasting from Boston. Right wing talking heads are also obsessed with things like pregnant man emojis and testicle tanning (ask Cucker Tarlson)
 
SuperMatt said:
Abortion was a constitutionally protected right for the last 50 years. And then suddenly it’s not?

Neither you nor I are arbiters of the constitution. What I can say is that Congress CAN pass a law protecting the right to abortion nationwide. Would the Supreme Court uphold such a law? We’d have to wait and see. Their current argument seems to be that it’s up to the states because Congress has no national law. That would change if there were a National law.
Click to expand...
the states right argument will be forgotten when the GOP moves to ban abortion entirely
 
ouimetnick said:
A good majority of my high school classmates are liberal democrats and that's their primary focus unfortunately. If they along with like minded people focused on the real issues, perhaps we'd be better along as a country.

As I've said before, I don't have cable news. No Faux, CNN, MSNBC, NewsMax, etc. Just local stations broadcasting from Boston. Right wing talking heads are also obsessed with things like pregnant man emojis and testicle tanning (ask Cucker Tarlson)
Click to expand...
“High school classmates”

ok then.
 
SuperMatt said:
Abortion was a constitutionally protected right for the last 50 years. And then suddenly it’s not?

Neither you nor I are arbiters of the constitution. What I can say is that Congress CAN pass a law protecting the right to abortion nationwide. Would the Supreme Court uphold such a law? We’d have to wait and see. Their current argument seems to be that it’s up to the states because Congress has no national law. That would change if there were a National law.
Click to expand...

Why does 50 years matter?


I assume everyone knows the current President voted FOR a Constitutional Amendment to make it actually constitutionally illegal?
 
Yoused said:
If SCotUS rules to allow states to prohibit temination in all cases, the RW religious freaks will be almost satisfied, which means their motivation to go vote for the person who will save babies has been rinsed away. Some will shout that we need a human-life-amendment, to protect every single fetus across the nation, but I suspect that such a rallying cry will not have much traction – Roe has been upended, what more do you want?

And the nutcase justices are not ignorant of this concern. As much as they are insulated in their positions from politics and public opinion, they would still prefer to have the country controlled by nutcases. Hence, this draft was leaked as a feeler: there are other RW drafts that frame a slightly different opinion, and the nutcase justices want to sign on to the opinion that will least throttling effect on their preferred party.

Thus, the issued ruling may ultimately converge on a different document, just to keep the country from losing too much precious batshittery due to the fundy fanatics not feeling as compelled to go vote for nutcases.
Click to expand...

You are assuming that abortion is the only thing that will drive them to the polls. I assure you, it is not.
 
Clix Pix said:
I find it appalling that anyone would even seriously contemplate going back to the days when women died or were seriously injured undergoing sometimes self-administered "coat-hanger abortions" or at the hands of others during abortions in mysterious back-alley rooms or other undisclosed locations which were unclean or not suited to performing any sort of medical intervention on anyone.
Click to expand...


But that's what Jesus wants. Just ask his followers. He said it right after he said worship the rich and hate and punish the poor. I probably should have paid attention more back when I went to church because none of this is really ringing a bell. Who am I to argue with those who bet the entire ranch on his teachings.
 
ouimetnick said:
A good majority of my high school classmates are liberal democrats and that's their primary focus unfortunately. If they along with like minded people focused on the real issues, perhaps we'd be better along as a country.

As I've said before, I don't have cable news. No Faux, CNN, MSNBC, NewsMax, etc. Just local stations broadcasting from Boston. Right wing talking heads are also obsessed with things like pregnant man emojis and testicle tanning (ask Cucker Tarlson)
Click to expand...


I didn’t want to believe hyper woke culture was a thing, but I am somewhat sheltered as most of my work and personal interactions are with people at least in their 40’s with a couple “kids” in their 30’s. My 53 year old cousin recently corrected me though. There’s a wider age range at his work and he said the younger they are the more they are obsessed by things like pronouns.

This really lessened my faith in the younger generation. One side thinks democracy is the enemy and the other, pronouns. Both completely ignorant to what is at stake. But they aren’t completely alone. A good percentage of older people either think authoritarianism is the bright future winning ticket or they are in complete denial of the guardrails being removed despite being slapped with evidence on a near daily basis. The right isn’t the only side that denies facts.
 
Joe said:
Welcome to Gilead!

I know in Texas you can drop off your unwanted baby or kid at a fire station and they won't charge you with a crime.

People should just start dropping off their babies at the fire station. Let them deal with it. Let the folks who pretend they care about the babies, yet never adopt them deal with it.
Click to expand...
There’s a wonderful series of books called Unwind. In this reality, parents who don’t want their babies can “stork” them. They leave them on the porch of a much better off family and that family has to keep them.

Maybe instead of leaving infants at the fire station, they should be dropped off at the homes of Cruz and Abbott, and all the other horrible TX pols.
 
What is the GOP plan to cover the increased costs in caring for unwanted babies?

God.

  • Amna Nawaz:
    Let me ask you about what resulted in experts say unwanted pregnancies, right? What about those kids? Kids in Arkansas, I think one in five right now, live in poverty. And the foster care system is already overwhelmed after the last two years. . What's the state's plan for those kids?
  • Leslie Rutledge:
    Well, we are going to love those kids and we're going to give them great educational opportunities.
  • Amna Nawaz:
    But how will you care for them?
  • Leslie Rutledge:
    I had heard from a woman earlier who thanked – who thanked me for my stand on the Supreme Court issue because she said she and her husband were able to adopt four children many years ago whose parents did not want them. And had abortion been available, then those children would not have been living and thriving.
    And so, we are going to take care of the children in the state of Arkansas.
  • Amna Nawaz:
    If I may, just from a resources standpoint, just from a resources standpoint, your system is overwhelmed. You had a 14 percent increase in the last two years of kids in the foster care system, too many kids, over 4,400, and not enough families to take them in. Is there a plan in place?
  • Leslie Rutledge:
    Well, certainly, there is. And that's why I am serving as the attorney general and running to be the next lieutenant governor of Arkansas and supporting my dear friend, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, as the next governor, because we're going to make sure that we have the resources necessary to take care of our kids and give them the education that they need, to make sure that we take care of those in foster care.
    I have worked in the foster care system. What those children need our love. What they don't need is someone putting a price tag on their life.
    What is their life worth to them? Absolutely everything.
    What is it worth to God? Absolutely everything. God intended for that life to begin at conception. He didn't intent for that life to have a nominal price tag on it, put on that child's head from some liberal who says it costs too much for that human life.
Click to expand...



That ought to work out nicely. 🤦‍♀️
 
SuperMatt said:
What is the GOP plan to cover the increased costs in caring for unwanted babies?

God.





That ought to work out nicely. 🤦‍♀️
Click to expand...



The elevation of states' rights will destroy the “united” states. I say we split up and then we can wheel that blue state federal funded tit they’ve been sucking on back across the border. “The lord will provide. Go pray the gay away. Ta.”
 
Chew Toy McCoy said:
The elevation of states' rights will destroy the “united” states. I say we split up and then we can wheel that blue state federal funded tit they’ve been sucking on back across the border. “The lord will provide. Go pray the gay away. Ta.”
Click to expand...
The paralysis of Congress is also part of the issue. States’ rights apply most strongly when there is no applicable federal legislation.
 
dukebound85 said:
“High school classmates”

ok then.
Click to expand...
Those are folks 25-26 that voted for Biden and are upset because he isn't forgiving their student loans like he said he would. They are the ones who love Bernie and are more likely to sit out the next election. It's a super woke chunk of people and ignoring them isn't going to make them disappear unfortunately.
 
That is the difficulty the D (or any sane & reasonable) Party has with younger voters. "I want it now!" When there are real challenges to accomplishing a goal, they might be better off issuing vague feel-good pablum, as is SOP for the Rs, rather than outlining policy goals that are simply not on the attainable horizon.
 
Back
Top