Roe v Wade has essentially been overturned.

[goodknightfl]

Nothing changes immediately, it simply now will be a state issue. Very red states will likely continue to toughen rules and blue make them easier. Progressive Margarete Sanger's dream of wiping out blacks and other undesirables' long term is at risk in very red states.

As for hurting one party or the other, I don't think it matters much. Abortion has for a very long time been a 50/50 issue.

 

[Cubs79]

Nothing changes immediately, it simply now will be a state issue. Very red states will likely continue to toughen rules and blue make them easier. Progressive Margarete Sanger's dream of wiping out blacks and other undesirables' long term is at risk in very red states.

As for hurting one party or the other, I don't think it matters much. Abortion has for a very long time been a 50/50 issue.

Roe V Wade is not a 50/50 issue. It is more like a 70/30 issue in favor of Roe standing. It is actually more like 50/50 within the Republican party itself.

U.S. Public Continues to Favor Legal Abortion, Oppose Overturning Roe v. Wade

As debates over abortion continue in states around the country, a majority of Americans (61%) continue to say that abortion should be legal in all (27%) or most (34%) cases.

www.pewresearch.org

 

[DaShuckster]

Roe V Wade is not a 50/50 issue. It is more like a 70/30 issue in favor of Roe standing. It is actually more like 50/50 within the Republican party itself.

For the past fifty years, anger over the Roe v Wade decision has been the core of America's modern-day Conservative movement. When Roe gets officially overturned, I predict it will have the same impact on the progressive movement. The difference is that there are a hell of a lot more people who supported Roe v Wade in this country than didn't.

Galvanizing them may be the beginnings of a whole new era in American politics.

 

[Cubs79]

For the past fifty years, anger over the Roe v Wade decision has been the core of America's modern-day Conservative movement. When Roe gets officially overturned, I predict it will have the same impact on the progressive movement. The difference is that there are a hell of a lot more people who supported Roe v Wade in this country than didn't.

Galvanizing them may be the beginnings of a whole new era in American politics.

It will definitely get people fired up. I cant imagine Republican candidates in swing districts are thrilled about this. I also think it goes beyond that though. If our SC is going to start overturning what should be settled law, then no telling what other things will be challenged and over turned as well. This is a political decision, and politics in our courts is a road to disaster for any country.

Undermining of abortion rights is extremely rare and 'goes hand in hand with creeping authoritarianism' experts warn

Only a few countries have eroded existing abortion access laws in the 21st century. The United States is one of them.

www.businessinsider.com

Abortions rights are rarely rolled back throughout the entire world. The few times they have been rolled back, it was a sign the country was on a path of eroding Democracy. This isnt just about the issue itself, it is also about the fact we have a SC overturning established law, and it most certainly appears political.

 

[UCFBS]

turning back the clock 50 years. ‘Murica

View embedded media

SCOTUS about to hand the mid terms to the Democrats

Yep. Just when the left has most of America thinking the they are the destroyers of civil rights, the economy and national security all at the same time, under the guise of national security and prosperity, the right comes in with a 'States Rights' ruling, ending a 50 year civil liberty protected at the federal level.

 

[Nautiknight]

Who ever did had clear political motive to leak the ruling . They put 5-6 justices lives at risk and the joy of mostly peaceful protests are coming to a city and town near you. It's going to get ugly . I am not justifying January 6 events in our Capital ,however those unarmed yahoos wandering the halls of Congress is going to look like child's play compared to what we could see soon here with leftist riots.

Those Justices lives need to be protected by Secret Service security if not already. Then you will see the push to pack the court. If that happens our Republic is truly lost. No government system remains credible with packed political courts see Venezuela with 31 justices on their version of the Supreme Court.
As far as abortion goes , I find it repugnant and our modern system was born out of eugenics and the racism behind it. With that said, my wife's grandmother died in 1940 giving herself an abortion in Ohio. Desperate people do desperate things . We need as a society to step up and support those moms of unwanted pregnancy if we are going to say no you can't abort. I believe as a biologist, a Christian and dad that life begins at conception. If you think about it we were never dead. The egg and sperm are alive to create life .

I find abortion abhorrent but I think there needs to be a legal way to get one in the first trimester. Otherwise two lives are lost not just one. I believe in States Rights and let the states decide the legality on their own. If this decision holds it's the right one as the Supreme Court is not, repeat NOT , a legislative body and the decision should be left up to the states to decide.

Our nation could be in for some rocky waters ahead with civil unrest largely injected by radical violent leftist .

 

[Cubs79]

Who ever did had clear political motive to leak the ruling . They put 5-6 justices lives at risk and the joy of mostly peaceful protests are coming to a city and town near you. It's going to get ugly . I am not justifying January 6 events in our Capital ,however those unarmed yahoos wandering the halls of Congress is going to look like child's play compared to what we could see soon here with leftist riots.

Those Justices lives need to be protected by Secret Service security if not already. Then you will see the push to pack the court. If that happens our Republic is truly lost. No government system remains credible with packed political courts see Venezuela with 31 justices on their version of the Supreme Court.
As far as abortion goes , I find it repugnant and our modern system was born out of eugenics and the racism behind it. With that said, my wife's grandmother died in 1940 giving herself an abortion in Ohio. Desperate people do desperate things . We need as a society to step up and support those moms of unwanted pregnancy if we are going to say no you can't abort. I believe as a biologist, a Christian and dad that life begins at conception. If you think about it we were never dead. The egg and sperm are alive to create life .

I find abortion abhorrent but I think there needs to be a legal way to get one in the first trimester. Otherwise two lives are lost not just one. I believe in States Rights and let the states decide the legality on their own. If this decision holds it's the right one as the Supreme Court is not, repeat NOT , a legislative body and the decision should be left up to the states to decide.

Our nation could be in for some rocky waters ahead with civil unrest largely injected by radical violent leftist .

States rights can be every bit, if not more restrictive and authoritarian, than federal rights we can just look at the history of this country, certainly with regards to racial issues, to see that. I mean, we have people in state governments currently who wanted to throw out the electoral votes because the citizens of their state didnt vote the way they wanted them too. Obviously states deserve some level of rights, but states rights in and of itself isnt always a good thing.

 

[DaShuckster]

Who ever did had clear political motive to leak the ruling . They put 5-6 justices lives at risk and the joy of mostly peaceful protests are coming to a city and town near you.

Sooooooooooooooo....it's THE LEAKERS of the decision who are to blame??!?

It's going to get ugly . I am not justifying January 6 events in our Capital ,however those unarmed yahoos wandering the halls of Congress is going to look like child's play compared to what we could see soon here with leftist riots.

Soooooooooo....the January 6th insurrection was overblown hyperbole but anger over THIS will be the real deal?

As far as abortion goes , I find it repugnant and our modern system was born out of eugenics and the racism behind it. With that said, my wife's grandmother died in 1940 giving herself an abortion in Ohio. Desperate people do desperate things.

Hmmmm...maybe that's why Roe v Wade was enacted in the first place. Btw, no exceptions for rape and incest. Yikes, talk about a double blow to a victim!

Our nation could be in for some rocky waters ahead with civil unrest largely injected by radical violent leftist .

This is laughable coming from a 'what's the big deal about January 6th' guy.

 

[Nautiknight]

It will definitely get people fired up. I cant imagine Republican candidates in swing districts are thrilled about this. I also think it goes beyond that though. If our SC is going to start overturning what should be settled law, then no telling what other things will be challenged and over turned as well. This is a political decision, and politics in our courts is a road to disaster for any country.

Undermining of abortion rights is extremely rare and 'goes hand in hand with creeping authoritarianism' experts warn

Only a few countries have eroded existing abortion access laws in the 21st century. The United States is one of them.

www.businessinsider.com

Abortions rights are rarely rolled back throughout the entire world. The few times they have been rolled back, it was a sign the country was on a path of eroding Democracy. This isnt just about the issue itself, it is also about the fact we have a SC overturning established law, and it most certainly appears political.

Don't conflate a ruling as settled law. Settled law is actually a legitimate legislative law creates by local, state or federal government. Roe V Wade was an issue of privacy not the legality of abortion itself . It was always on rocky ground and everyone on all sides knew it. It is why the "fight" for SCOTUS in political arenas has been so volatile. It's not like they specifically ruled on a law like a land use takings case where they decide the Constitutionality of a zoning law or state regulation. At base that ruling is bad case law but I never saw it as settled law ..

 

[Nautiknight]

Sooooooooooooooo....it's THE LEAKERS of the decision who are to blame??!?

Soooooooooo....the January 6th insurrection was overblown hyperbole but anger over THIS will be the real deal?

Hmmmm...maybe that's why Roe v Wade was enacted in the first place. Btw, no exceptions for rape and incest. Yikes, talk about a double blow to a victim!

This is laughable coming from a 'what's the big deal about January 6th' guy.

I never thought you would agree with my take and I don't care one way or the other. I don't believe in political violence from any side . It's not how we solve problems . It's how radicals solve problems . You dont burn cities down , you don't threaten people's lives and guess what you don't storm the capital because you didn't win an election .

My observations though are valid , you wait and see if riots break out how the media and the left will justify it 9 ways to Sunday. You won't hear the words insurrection and such. It's only insurrection if you try to overturn an election but it's not insurrection if you try to over turn a SCOTUS decision? I don't think being violent is good any of those instances .

 

[DaShuckster]

It's only insurrection if you try to overturn an election but it's not insurrection if you try to over turn a SCOTUS decision? I don't think being violent is good any of those instances .

I agree that violence is not the answer. However, you might notice that in BOTH instances you cite, its about a powerful minority trying to force its will upon the majority of Americans.

 

[Cubs79]

Don't conflate a ruling as settled law. Settled law is actually a legitimate legislative law creates by local, state or federal government. Roe V Wade was an issue of privacy not the legality of abortion itself . It was always on rocky ground and everyone on all sides knew it. It is why the "fight" for SCOTUS in political arenas has been so volatile. It's not like they specifically ruled on a law like a land use takings case where they decide the Constitutionality of a zoning law or state regulation. At base that ruling is bad case law but I never saw it as settled law ..

Kavaugh said it was settled law at his hearing, that is why I used that phrase. And yes, it is was ruled on as an issue of privacy, which means the issue of privacy will also be gone and can lead to overturning other things. To put that in perspective, I am reading this could lead to challenges with Loving vs Virginia was decided 6 years before Roe, and it was based on similar contexts. Dont be shocked if we start seeing things like interracial marriage, birth control, and certainly gay marriage be challenged. This decision would open up all of those things to be challenged.

https://nwlc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Even-More-Than-Abortion-1.pdf

 

[UCFBS]

Who ever did had clear political motive to leak the ruling . They put 5-6 justices lives at risk and the joy of mostly peaceful protests are coming to a city and town near you.

Normally I'd utterly disagree with this, and accuse you of throwing gasoline on a tiny flame. But considering 4 out of 5 women lied or were pressured to lie about Kavanaugh, and the women lying or pressuring women to lie, felt justified...

You're actually spot-on. But... it would become public record at some point.

I'm just very disappointed in 2 of the 3 Libertarians on the Court. To me this is a clear Civil Rights issue, which trumps States Rights.

 

[DaShuckster]

4 out of 5 women lied or were pressured to lie about Kavanaugh ...

So our resident libertarian is concerned with liars?

No one can say with absolute certainty whether Kavanaugh's accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, lied about her assault.

But everyone can watch the videotape of his confirmation hearing and hear Kavanaugh tell Senators that he viewed Roe v Wade in no uncertain terms as 'settled law' and deeply rooted precedent. Given his vote to overturn Roe, that appears to have been a lie, right?

 

[sk8knight]

Normally I'd utterly disagree with this, and accuse you of throwing gasoline on a tiny flame. But considering 4 out of 5 women lied or were pressured to lie about Kavanaugh, and the women lying or pressuring women to lie, felt justified...

You're actually spot-on. But... it would become public record at some point.

I'm just very disappointed in 2 of the 3 Libertarians on the Court. To me this is a clear Civil Rights issue, which trumps States Rights.

What civil right will they void by reversing the ruling? Just because a state legislature may void a civil right in the future does not mean the SCOTUS should rule in any case to proactively stem that off. That’s the legislature’s job. The SCOTUS is too political because it usurped legislative power with rulings like Roe v. Wade. You fix it by undoing the overreach.

The legislatures will not just sit by without doing anything. We already have blue states passing “freedom of reproductive choice” legislation to protect abortion in their states. If Democrats think this is so important, they can pass a federal bill while they have the entire federal government. If America is as behind it as Cubs represents, then let’s push an Amendment and establish a Constitutional legal right.

 

[DaShuckster]

The SCOTUS is too political because it usurped legislative power with rulings like Roe v. Wade. You fix it by undoing the overreach.

Too political??!? The decision was 7-2 with five judges appointed by Republican Presidents voting in its favor.

 

[Cubs79]

What civil right will they void by reversing the ruling? Just because a state legislature may void a civil right in the future does not mean the SCOTUS should rule in any case to proactively stem that off. That’s the legislature’s job. The SCOTUS is too political because it usurped legislative power with rulings like Roe v. Wade. You fix it by undoing the overreach.

The legislatures will not just sit by without doing anything. We already have blue states passing “freedom of reproductive choice” legislation to protect abortion in their states. If Democrats think this is so important, they can pass a federal bill while they have the entire federal government. If America is as behind it as Cubs represents, then let’s push an Amendment and establish a Constitutional legal right.

Democrats should pass a federal bill, but it would require killing the filibuster and I have my doubts Manchin and Sinema would go for that, but we will see. In theory your argument sounds great, but the problem, is that a lot of state houses are just straight up nutty and made up of people who just like the pension and benefits. It was the SC that stopped things like Jim Crowe, allowed interracial marriage, integrated schools, etc etc, it wasnt state houses, and I dont think we are at a point where we should put much trust into state houses when left to their own devices.

 

[Cubs79]

Too political??!? The decision was 7-2 with five judges appointed by Republican Presidents voting in its favor.

IT has also been challenged in various capacities over the years, and held up by SC court justices who werent part of the original decision. The court doing this now is what is political.

 

[DaShuckster]

What civil right will they void by reversing the ruling?

Wow...........I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you're not a pregnant teenage girl from a poor family in a Red State who has been raped by Daddy or a stranger.

 

[UCFBS]

What civil right will they void by reversing the ruling?

Did you not understand what this is all about?

Just because a state legislature may void a civil right in the future does not mean the SCOTUS should rule in any case to proactively stem that off.

You fail to understand civil rights are federally protected matter.

The SCOTUS is now saying it's not a civil right.

That’s the legislature’s job.

Civics fail. We're done.

It's either a civil right, and federally protected, or it's not, and States have rights.

The SCOTUS protects civil rights, especially when the legislature and executive refuse to.

 

[Nautiknight]

I just heard Senator Mike Lee talk about this and he suggested the ruling if it goes forward is correct in that the US Constitution does not address the issue of abortion specifically and it's not one the federal government regulates . Medical procedures and licenses are a function of state regulation not federal . Doctors pass state board exams to get licensed to practice . Abortion is a medical procedure . Thats what it is . This is not ,hey I am a black guy who got refused lunch service at Woolworths. Of course the lunch counter issue is a civil rights issue and somewhat universal and basic right. Nobody should be discriminated against like that anywhere in America . Abortions , boob jobs and heart surgery are medical procedures and are all regulated . It's truly a function of state government and not the federal level. That's where the court took this .

Big picture there is a crap tone of federal over reach in our lives and the Constitution and Bill of Rights does it's best to minimize that over reach . One side sees it as states issue and the other sees as a federal civil rights issue . I lean to the state issue and again , while I detest the procedure I do lean for it to be legal .

I also don't think the government should pay a penny for it . The governments job in America is to protect life ,liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It's job isn't to fund procedures that terminate life . If a women wants to get an abortion it's on her to pay for it . Let's be clear here , the overwhelming majority of abortions are not from rape and incest , it's a form of oops birth control and not much else.

 

[Cubs79]

I just heard Senator Mike Lee talk about this and he suggested the ruling if it goes forward is correct in that the US Constitution does not address the issue of abortion specifically and it's not one the federal government regulates . Medical procedures and licenses are a function of state regulation not federal . Doctors pass state board exams to get licensed to practice . Abortion is a medical procedure . Thats what it is . This is not ,hey I am a black guy who got refused lunch service at Woolworths. Of course the lunch counter issue is a civil rights issue and somewhat universal and basic right. Nobody should be discriminated against like that anywhere in America . Abortions , boob jobs and heart surgery are medical procedures and are all regulated . It's truly a function of state government and not the federal level. That's where the court took this .

Big picture there is a crap tone of federal over reach in our lives and the Constitution and Bill of Rights does it's best to minimize that over reach . One side sees it as states issue and the other sees as a federal civil rights issue . I lean to the state issue and again , while I detest the procedure I do lean for it to be legal .

I also don't think the government should pay a penny for it . The governments job in America is to protect life ,liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It's job isn't to fund procedures that terminate life . If a women wants to get an abortion it's on her to pay for it . Let's be clear here , the overwhelming majority of abortions are not from rape and incest , it's a form of oops birth control and not much else.

Texts from Mike Lee show he was trying to assist in overthrowing an election and he has flat out said he Democracy isnt the goal of the country, so I dont really care about his opinion on any other issue.

 

[Poolside Knight]

 

[Cubs79]

View embedded media

Republicans have to be shitting themselves right now, especially ones in swing districts or states. This really throws a cog in the whole red wave we were expecting in November. I always felt this was an issue that most of the politicians didnt care about, and just threw it out there to engage the evangelical portion of the base. That has now obviously changed, and I cant possibly think the majority of them think this helps them as a party.

 

[Poolside Knight]

Republicans have to be shitting themselves right now, especially ones in swing districts or states. This really throws a cog in the whole red wave we were expecting in November. I always felt this was an issue that most of the politicians didnt care about, and just threw it out there to engage the evangelical portion of the base. That has now obviously changed, and I cant possibly think the majority of them think this helps them as a party.

yeah but despite having a majority of the public’s support on certain issues the Democrats are so inept at Politics , especially the Florida DNC. Republicans will try to find a distraction(caravans!, scary Guatemalans !)

 

[Cubs79]

yeah but despite having a majority of the public’s support on certain issues the Democrats are so inept at Politics , especially the Florida DNC. Republicans will try to find a distraction(caravans!, scary Guatemalans !)

THis is true, I think the groomers thing is already that issue. It will be interesting to see how this plays out, but I wouldnt be shocked at all to see many moderate Republicans start to decide the party is becoming too extreme for them.

 

[DaShuckster]

Abortion is a medical procedure . Thats what it is .

Guess what? The COVID vaccine and wearing face masks were "medical" things too. Yet we've heard over and over AND OVER AGAIN the passionate refrain "It's MY body, MY choice."

Weirdly, when it's a young teenage girl's body and her choices, I guess THAT'S a whole different deal, huh?

I find it ironic that when it comes to encouraging people to get a life-saving vaccine during a highly contageous, deadly pandemic, we're told its 'insidious government overreach.' But forcing a pregnant victim of incest and rape to carry the perpetrator's seed to term for nine months is...fine and dandy??!? WTF???

Apparently for our board's Constitution-thumping, 'civil rights' crowd, it all depends on who's "civil rights" are being violated.

 

[UCFBS]

I just heard Senator Mike Lee talk about this and he suggested the ruling if it goes forward is correct in that the US Constitution does not address the issue of abortion specifically and it's not one the federal government regulates .

So it means the SCOTUS now considers it not a Civil Right. It's really that simple. I disagree with it, but the SCOTUS will speak, and if they make it a States Rights matter, then it means it's not a Civil Right, so not protected.

The 10th Amendment reserves all power to the States over the Federal unless specifically granted, and the sole exception is that the SCOTUS has the right to rule something is a civil right, trumping the States, just like the Federal Legislature or Executive for that matter.

That's how Roe v. Wade worked for abortion.
That's also how Obergefell v. Hodges worked for same sex marriages too.
It was the SCOTUS deciding it was a Civil Right, in their purview.

Now the SCOTUS is saying it isn't a civil right, so it reverts to States Rights.

Again, it's that simple. I'm just laying it out, regarless of how I feel. I feel it's a Civil Right. But the majority of the court seemingly disagrees.

Medical procedures and licenses are a function of state regulation not federal.

Of course. I'm not arguing that.

What I'm arguing is that, if this is the ruling, it means it overturns Roe v. Wade as a Civil Right and federally protected, universally.

Let's not candy-coat what's going on ... we're making this about States Rights and the power to regulate to the point it's basically illegal in the supermajority of cases ... in that state.

Blue states basically pull this on self-defense, not just gun ownership, as well, and I do not like it for the same reason. As I said, if it ends up being 5-4, I will be extremely disappointed with 2 of the 3 Libertarians on the SCOTUS.

 

[DaShuckster]

So it means the SCOTUS now considers it not a Civil Right. It's really that simple.

How can anyone argue that a woman cannot decide whether to have an abortion or not in the first trimester of her pregnancy? This is especially troublesome when there is no exception for incest or rape.

When I argued with our Usual Suspect (yes, that includes you) about the importance of taking the COVID vaccine for the sake of your life and the lives of your loved ones, I kept hearing, 'the government can't make me do it.' In other words, the lives saved by wholesale vaccinations couldn't trump YOUR individual right to refuse.

But now?

While you support abortion rights, most of our Right-wing crowd here doesn't. To hear them talk, the RIGHT of an unborn fetus trumps a woman's right to an abortion. In other words, once that seed is fertilized, a poor woman living in a Red State is literally forced to carry it nine months to term -- even if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest.

So given the chest-thumping of our "freedom of choice" crowd here, I'm trying REAL HARD to understand why that's so dramatically different when it comes to a woman's right to have an abortion.

 

[Cubs79]

Not that anything will come of this, but for conversation sake, can the supreme court be considered legitimate when we know that 3 of the justices on it lied under oath about how they viewed this issue? This is the highest court in the land and for it to be turned into another partisan shit show doesnt bode well for this country going forward. But I also dont know the SC court can redeem itself, for a lack of a better word, when we have 3 known liars on the court. I think this goes beyond just the issue of abortion, and leads to bigger questions about the court in general.

 

[DaShuckster]

Not that anything will come of this, but for conversation sake, can the supreme court be considered legitimate when we know that 3 of the justices on it lied under oath about how they viewed this issue?

When you consider the BS move by McConnell to not even give Garland a hearing in Obama's last year while rushing Barrett's nomination through at the end of Trump's term, the reputation of the SCOTUS has been stained big time.

When you add the total disrespect shown to the judges who decided Roe 50 years ago in the draft opinion that was leaked, this Supreme Court is not likely to redeem itself anytime soon.

 

[Cubs79]

When you consider the BS move by McConnell to not even give Garland a hearing in Obama's last year while rushing Barrett's nomination through at the end of Trump's term, the reputation of the SCOTUS has been stained big time.

When you add the total disrespect shown to the judges who decided Roe 50 years ago in the draft opinion that was leaked, this Supreme Court is not likely to redeem itself anytime soon.

At least 2 flat out lied about it during their hearings too (and I think Barrett did too, which would be 3). How can we trust a our judicial system when the highest court has 3 people that are simply liars? We know politicians lie, but that is why we have courts so they can make sure the politicians dont pass crazy laws. But doesnt it now feel like our courts are just part of the crazy? And yes, McConnell's stunt also makes the court appear partisan, because one of the three wouldnt be on the court if McConnell actually governed like he was supposed to. This is going to end up being one of the most famous supreme court cases in history, and this decision was made because Republicans stole a SC seat.

 

[UCFBS]

So it means the SCOTUS now considers it not a Civil Right. It's really that simple.

How can anyone argue that a woman cannot decide whether to have an abortion or not in the first trimester of her pregnancy?

First off, do not partially quote me. Keep the context ... especially as I'm taking issue with Conservatives!

So it means the SCOTUS now considers it not a Civil Right. It's really that simple. I disagree with it, but the SCOTUS will speak, and if they make it a States Rights matter, then it means it's not a Civil Right, so not protected.

Secondly ... I'm as pro-choice as they come, but ... most of the red states are making it a 15 week rule. That's means in even red states, they do allow abortions through the 1st trimester! So ... don't demonize red states more than they are actually passing laws against. Don't make shit up.

Sure, in another 5 years, they'll try to outlaw all abortion. Just like blue states go after AK and AR 'style,' even though they hardly commit crimes (rifles <<5%), and are not the majority of mass shootings either, and then will want to ban all guns, as the prior bans do nothing.

Stop being sheep! Read the red state laws, not what MSNBC says.

This is especially troublesome when there is no exception for incest or rape.

Which states? Be specific! There's a lot of demonizations out there when there are very much exceptions for this in most red state laws that limit abortion to the first 15 weeks (1st trimester).

Otherwise ... you're just spewing MSNBC fear mongering as much as Fox News does for the right.

When I argued with our Usual Suspect (yes, that includes you) about the importance of taking the COVID vaccine for the sake of your life and the lives of your loved ones

^^^ And that is proven bullshit ... the current crop of vaccines were never designed to reduce spread, and they just do not. That load of bullshit finally needs to die. Stop using the 'herd immunity' argument, even if you're not using the phrasing.

Stop being sheep!

I kept hearing, 'the government can't make me do it.' In other words, the lives saved by wholesale vaccinations couldn't trump YOUR individual right to refuse.

Hey man, I'm for prevening the government from making or, in this case, preventing people from doing anything.

But if you're going to argue with things that don't exist, and use proven bullshit in your arguments, you're not helping your position.

 

[UCFBS]

At least 2 flat out lied about it during their hearings too (and I think Barrett did too, which would be 3).

If you really want to make this argument ... I think the entire left destroyed their credibility during Kavanaugh.

Women didn't help their cause during Kavanaugh at all. It was even worse when Virginia and other situations occured, let alone Biden's non-sense. It's double-standards, and 70% of America sees it.

 

[Cubs79]

If you really want to make this argument ... I think the entire left destroyed their credibility during Kavanaugh.

Women didn't help their cause during Kavanaugh at all. It was even worse when Virginia and other situations occured, let alone Biden's non-sense. It's double-standards, and 70% of America sees it.

This has nothing to do with the issue at hand. He is a SC justice who lied about his views on this issue, while under oath mind you. The fact people didnt like him has absolutely nothing to do with him lying under oath, that was his choice. If the SC has become a partisan entity, then this country as we know it is about to be over. That might sound dramatic, but the SC justices are suppose to be above partisan politics and actually be a check on partisan politics, but that clearly isnt the case anymore. From a stolen seat, to Clarence Thomas's wife trying to overthrow an election, now 3 justices who lied under oath, the SC is just operating as another arm of the GOP. Even people who are Republicans should be concerned with this IMO. This isnt a sign of a healthy Democracy or healthy justice system.

 

[Cubs79]

Which states? Be specific! There's a lot of demonizations out there when there are very much exceptions for this in most red state laws that limit abortion to the first 15 weeks (1st trimester).

.

13 states have trigger laws that would immediately either reinstate the abortion laws in those states prior to Roe, or they have passed a new version in recent years that would immediately become law. In my state, TN, the only exception to allow an abortion would be if the mothers life is in danger. Missouri is trying to make a law that even if you leave the state, you are still committing a crime. With a normal court I would think that would get thrown out by the SC pretty easily, but I have my doubts with this court. THe Texas law also makes no exceptions for rape or incest, and I am sure there are others but I havent looked them all up.

 

[DaShuckster]

Stop being sheep! Read the red state laws, not what MSNBC says.

Which states? Be specific!

Show me which states do allow exceptions for rape and incest. Texas and Oklahoma's new laws sure as hell don't.

 

[KnighttimeJoe]

Show me which states do allow exceptions for rape and incest. Texas and Oklahoma's new laws sure as hell don't.

Alabammer as well. In fact, didn't shithole Alabammer try to add another bit that would make it illegal for someone to leave the fukcing state to get an abortion? I seem to remember that, too.

Stop being eating the sheep, UCFoBeSe.

 

[DaShuckster]

didn't shithole Alabammer try to add another bit that would make it illegal for someone to leave the fukcing state to get an abortion?

Just think about the implications of such nonsense.

Screw the fact that we're ALL Americans regardless of which State we happen to reside in, "Alabammer"'s legislators are damned determined to put a country-wide leash on all its pregnant women.

I also think it's interesting that the draft decision from the SCOTUS implies this isn't a civil rights issue but a states' rights issue. Wasn't THAT the old argument that led to the nation's Civil Rights Act of 1964?

 

[goodknightfl]

At least 2 flat out lied about it during their hearings too (and I think Barrett did too, which would be 3). How can we trust a our judicial system when the highest court has 3 people that are simply liars? We know politicians lie, but that is why we have courts so they can make sure the politicians dont pass crazy laws. But doesnt it now feel like our courts are just part of the crazy? And yes, McConnell's stunt also makes the court appear partisan, because one of the three wouldnt be on the court if McConnell actually governed like he was supposed to. This is going to end up being one of the most famous supreme court cases in history, and this decision was made because Republicans stole a SC seat.

The Scotus has always been political. When liberal judges would quote international law in deciding if something was constitutional rather than the constitution, that was political. As for Mc Connells stunt, 29 times a justice has been put up in last year of a presidency, 19 times same party held prez and senate. 17 of 19 were confirmed.
10 times senate was held by opposition party, 1 of 10 were confirmed. The republicans did exactly what is normal and not something outside of what has been done. If the roles were reversed, Dems would have done the exact same thing and those crying here would be cheering them on for saving the court from a right of center swing.

Abortion is a gut wrenching decision for most people to go thru, because like it or not most people know it isn't a bundle of tissue, but a baby involved. I was part of that decision 50 years ago, and the would be mom and I have had to live with the guilt that we killed our baby,, and rarely does a day go by that I don't think of him or her and what kind of amazing person they could have been. I look at my 2 kids and who they are and wonder who my other kid may have been, My oldest has 3 degrees, is a great mom, has been a music director for a number of churches as well as an adjunct professor. My youngest lives on their own, owns their own home and is 90% self sufficient despite being disabled.