Roe v Wade

2456715

Comments

  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 32,376
    lol I wonder how many abortions TFG paid for? 
    conservatives don't give a fuck. all they care is that he was their vessel to their end game: controlling women. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • Cropduster-80Cropduster-80 Posts: 1,608
    edited June 24
    Here we go 

    Justice Clarence Thomas, concurring with the majority ruling, explicitly called on the Supreme Court to overrule Griswold, which protects the right to contraception, Lawrence, the right to same-sex intimacy and Obergefell, the right to same-sex marriage.

    He wants to 
    1. Allow states to ban birth control
    2. Allow states to make gay sex a crime punishable by prison 
    3. Allow states to outlaw same sex marriage 

    He said it right in the opinion… in writing 
    and you can bet many states will do all 3 as soon as they can 
    since when is the SCOTUS an activist organization? they are supposed to rule/opine on things brought forth to them, not issues they deem worthy of exploration. unbelievable. 
    You can’t deny the demographic and social issue shifts 

    I really think the speed and radicalisation occurring is on purpose. It’s to do everything they can as fast as they can before they are a permanent minority party

    that day is coming, absolutely.  When my kids are my age I am 100 percent convinced all this will get changed.  These social issues are the last gasps of a dying generation 

    the key is keeping the country together until then. That I’m less confident of 
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 37,703
    Here we go 

    Justice Clarence Thomas, concurring with the majority ruling, explicitly called on the Supreme Court to overrule Griswold, which protects the right to contraception, Lawrence, the right to same-sex intimacy and Obergefell, the right to same-sex marriage.

    He wants to 
    1. Allow states to ban birth control
    2. Allow states to make gay sex a crime punishable by prison 
    3. Allow states to outlaw same sex marriage 

    He said it right in the opinion… in writing 
    and you can bet many states will do all 3 as soon as they can 
    since when is the SCOTUS an activist organization? they are supposed to rule/opine on things brought forth to them, not issues they deem worthy of exploration. unbelievable. 
    You can’t deny the demographic and social issue shifts 

    I really think the speed and radicalisation occurring is on purpose. It’s to do everything they can as fast as they can before they are a permanent minority party

    that day is coming, absolutely.  When my kids are my age I am 100 percent convinced all this will get changed.  These social issues are the last gasps of a dying generation 

    the key is keeping the country together until then. That I’m less confident of 

    I wish I had the faith to believe what you're saying here is true.  As much as it sounds hopeful, the problem is that it's the fundamentalist Christians and hard core right wingers who are reproducing at a higher rate.  Intelligent people understand that the world is overpopulated.  Stupid ignorant people don't believe it or don't care and reproduce like rabbits and mice.

    I'm sorry, I can find no hope for this country anymore.  I feel like I wasted most of my adulthood giving a shit.
    "I believe in the mystery, and I don't want to take it any further than that. Maybe what I mean by that is love."
    -John Densmore











  • Cropduster-80Cropduster-80 Posts: 1,608
    edited June 24
    brianlux said:
    Here we go 

    Justice Clarence Thomas, concurring with the majority ruling, explicitly called on the Supreme Court to overrule Griswold, which protects the right to contraception, Lawrence, the right to same-sex intimacy and Obergefell, the right to same-sex marriage.

    He wants to 
    1. Allow states to ban birth control
    2. Allow states to make gay sex a crime punishable by prison 
    3. Allow states to outlaw same sex marriage 

    He said it right in the opinion… in writing 
    and you can bet many states will do all 3 as soon as they can 
    since when is the SCOTUS an activist organization? they are supposed to rule/opine on things brought forth to them, not issues they deem worthy of exploration. unbelievable. 
    You can’t deny the demographic and social issue shifts 

    I really think the speed and radicalisation occurring is on purpose. It’s to do everything they can as fast as they can before they are a permanent minority party

    that day is coming, absolutely.  When my kids are my age I am 100 percent convinced all this will get changed.  These social issues are the last gasps of a dying generation 

    the key is keeping the country together until then. That I’m less confident of 

    I wish I had the faith to believe what you're saying here is true.  As much as it sounds hopeful, the problem is that it's the fundamentalist Christians and hard core right wingers who are reproducing at a higher rate.  Intelligent people understand that the world is overpopulated.  Stupid ignorant people don't believe it or don't care and reproduce like rabbits and mice.

    I'm sorry, I can find no hope for this country anymore.  I feel like I wasted most of my adulthood giving a shit.
    Not any more 

    conservatives just sped up their own “replacement”
    they just don’t know it yet 
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 32,376
    brianlux said:
    Here we go 

    Justice Clarence Thomas, concurring with the majority ruling, explicitly called on the Supreme Court to overrule Griswold, which protects the right to contraception, Lawrence, the right to same-sex intimacy and Obergefell, the right to same-sex marriage.

    He wants to 
    1. Allow states to ban birth control
    2. Allow states to make gay sex a crime punishable by prison 
    3. Allow states to outlaw same sex marriage 

    He said it right in the opinion… in writing 
    and you can bet many states will do all 3 as soon as they can 
    since when is the SCOTUS an activist organization? they are supposed to rule/opine on things brought forth to them, not issues they deem worthy of exploration. unbelievable. 
    You can’t deny the demographic and social issue shifts 

    I really think the speed and radicalisation occurring is on purpose. It’s to do everything they can as fast as they can before they are a permanent minority party

    that day is coming, absolutely.  When my kids are my age I am 100 percent convinced all this will get changed.  These social issues are the last gasps of a dying generation 

    the key is keeping the country together until then. That I’m less confident of 

    I wish I had the faith to believe what you're saying here is true.  As much as it sounds hopeful, the problem is that it's the fundamentalist Christians and hard core right wingers who are reproducing at a higher rate.  Intelligent people understand that the world is overpopulated.  Stupid ignorant people don't believe it or don't care and reproduce like rabbits and mice.

    I'm sorry, I can find no hope for this country anymore.  I feel like I wasted most of my adulthood giving a shit.
    all societies either progress or they die, brian. sure, there's always hiccups along the way. but this aggression shall not stand. it may be the law of the land for the next while, but it won't stay that way. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 25,661
    My daughter who’s 25 just texted me she’s in Colorado, she texted Supreme Court just overturned Roe we need to leave this country! I’m thinking if she really wants too I’ll oblige her and will look at how to get it done Chile is not a bad option for us! 
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • Cropduster-80Cropduster-80 Posts: 1,608
    My daughter who’s 25 just texted me she’s in Colorado, she texted Supreme Court just overturned Roe we need to leave this country! I’m thinking if she really wants too I’ll oblige her and will look at how to get it done Chile is not a bad option for us! 
    She needs to vote

    this needs to be the only issue in the midterms.
    the economy is cyclical this isn’t 

    just wait until she can’t get birth control either 
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 37,703
    brianlux said:
    Here we go 

    Justice Clarence Thomas, concurring with the majority ruling, explicitly called on the Supreme Court to overrule Griswold, which protects the right to contraception, Lawrence, the right to same-sex intimacy and Obergefell, the right to same-sex marriage.

    He wants to 
    1. Allow states to ban birth control
    2. Allow states to make gay sex a crime punishable by prison 
    3. Allow states to outlaw same sex marriage 

    He said it right in the opinion… in writing 
    and you can bet many states will do all 3 as soon as they can 
    since when is the SCOTUS an activist organization? they are supposed to rule/opine on things brought forth to them, not issues they deem worthy of exploration. unbelievable. 
    You can’t deny the demographic and social issue shifts 

    I really think the speed and radicalisation occurring is on purpose. It’s to do everything they can as fast as they can before they are a permanent minority party

    that day is coming, absolutely.  When my kids are my age I am 100 percent convinced all this will get changed.  These social issues are the last gasps of a dying generation 

    the key is keeping the country together until then. That I’m less confident of 

    I wish I had the faith to believe what you're saying here is true.  As much as it sounds hopeful, the problem is that it's the fundamentalist Christians and hard core right wingers who are reproducing at a higher rate.  Intelligent people understand that the world is overpopulated.  Stupid ignorant people don't believe it or don't care and reproduce like rabbits and mice.

    I'm sorry, I can find no hope for this country anymore.  I feel like I wasted most of my adulthood giving a shit.
    Not any more 

    conservatives just sped up their own “replacement”
    they just don’t know it yet 

    brianlux said:
    Here we go 

    Justice Clarence Thomas, concurring with the majority ruling, explicitly called on the Supreme Court to overrule Griswold, which protects the right to contraception, Lawrence, the right to same-sex intimacy and Obergefell, the right to same-sex marriage.

    He wants to 
    1. Allow states to ban birth control
    2. Allow states to make gay sex a crime punishable by prison 
    3. Allow states to outlaw same sex marriage 

    He said it right in the opinion… in writing 
    and you can bet many states will do all 3 as soon as they can 
    since when is the SCOTUS an activist organization? they are supposed to rule/opine on things brought forth to them, not issues they deem worthy of exploration. unbelievable. 
    You can’t deny the demographic and social issue shifts 

    I really think the speed and radicalisation occurring is on purpose. It’s to do everything they can as fast as they can before they are a permanent minority party

    that day is coming, absolutely.  When my kids are my age I am 100 percent convinced all this will get changed.  These social issues are the last gasps of a dying generation 

    the key is keeping the country together until then. That I’m less confident of 

    I wish I had the faith to believe what you're saying here is true.  As much as it sounds hopeful, the problem is that it's the fundamentalist Christians and hard core right wingers who are reproducing at a higher rate.  Intelligent people understand that the world is overpopulated.  Stupid ignorant people don't believe it or don't care and reproduce like rabbits and mice.

    I'm sorry, I can find no hope for this country anymore.  I feel like I wasted most of my adulthood giving a shit.
    all societies either progress or they die, brian. sure, there's always hiccups along the way. but this aggression shall not stand. it may be the law of the land for the next while, but it won't stay that way. 

    Much respect for the optimism to you both, but I just can't see it.  My generation was going to change the world.  We really believed things would get better in our lifetime.  They haven't.  It's all going down the toilet.  I don't know how to be hopeful anymore except that I hope I am surprised that my cynicism and pessimism  is proven unjustified.
    "I believe in the mystery, and I don't want to take it any further than that. Maybe what I mean by that is love."
    -John Densmore











  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 32,376
    so when they say "contraception" is that only the ones that apply directly to females? cuz guys are not going to stop doing the deed just because they can't buy a condom. 

    if so, expect the next generation to be called Baby Boomers 2. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • GlowGirlGlowGirl New York, NYPosts: 5,796
    so when they say "contraception" is that only the ones that apply directly to females? cuz guys are not going to stop doing the deed just because they can't buy a condom. 

    if so, expect the next generation to be called Baby Boomers 2. 
    Why is there no talk of banning Viagra?

  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 25,661
    My daughter who’s 25 just texted me she’s in Colorado, she texted Supreme Court just overturned Roe we need to leave this country! I’m thinking if she really wants too I’ll oblige her and will look at how to get it done Chile is not a bad option for us! 
    She needs to vote

    this needs to be the only issue in the midterms.
    the economy is cyclical this isn’t 

    just wait until she can’t get birth control either 
    She does every election even local levels! Like I said I have no problem moving the fuck outta here! 
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • Cropduster-80Cropduster-80 Posts: 1,608
    edited June 24
    so when they say "contraception" is that only the ones that apply directly to females? cuz guys are not going to stop doing the deed just because they can't buy a condom. 

    if so, expect the next generation to be called Baby Boomers 2. 
    Texas is attempting to pass laws that basically say companies can’t offer reproductive health on insurance plans.  And companies who leave the state as a result are discriminating against Texas citizens and subject to lawsuits.  They are basically trying to make companies already with operations  in Texas make all their their insurance compliant with Texas and to trap them in Texas if they disagree…which will also affect the insurance they can now offer in Colorado or California to their employees working there. 

    So people living in blue states aren’t necessarily safe

    they  are also going after companies who will help their employees leave the state to obtain an abortion.  They are trying to regulate the activities of other states… the opposite of being “states rights”

    if you think about it it’s like passing a law in Texas that makes traveling to Colorado to smoke a joint a felony.  You didn’t break a single law while in the jurisdiction of Texas.  Making what you do legally while in Colorado a violation of Texas law is insane 

    they have already done the same thing with social media.  Social media can’t moderate content in Texas… if the company then choose not to operate in Texas that’s illegal too. It’s a way to make Texas law apply in the other 49 states. That one is in court now 


    Post edited by Cropduster-80 on
  • jerparker20jerparker20 St. Paul, MNPosts: 2,255
    I don't know that RBG "refused" to do anything. was there a strong advocacy by the Obama admin for her to resign?
    Yes. Obama asked her to step down in 2013. Numerous other liberal/dem legal and congressional officials and advisors had done the same. She was 80 at the time and in poor health. 

    Still doesn’t get to a majority with the bs surrounding the Scalia seat, but it would have put a younger replacement on the bench and given the progressive side more of a chance.
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 7,340
    And let’s not forget RGB’s selfish refusal to step down under Obama when the Dems controlled Congress. 
    The focus should be on the stolen seat....RGB didn't know she was going to die
    I wouldn’t call it selfish. But did she think she was going no to live to be 137? Her death surprised no one. 
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 32,376
    I don't know that RBG "refused" to do anything. was there a strong advocacy by the Obama admin for her to resign?
    Yes. Obama asked her to step down in 2013. Numerous other liberal/dem legal and congressional officials and advisors had done the same. She was 80 at the time and in poor health. 

    Still doesn’t get to a majority with the bs surrounding the Scalia seat, but it would have put a younger replacement on the bench and given the progressive side more of a chance.
    wow. I didn't know that. thank you. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 32,376
    image
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • HobbesHobbes Pacific NorthwestPosts: 5,785
    GlowGirl said:
    so when they say "contraception" is that only the ones that apply directly to females? cuz guys are not going to stop doing the deed just because they can't buy a condom. 

    if so, expect the next generation to be called Baby Boomers 2. 
    Why is there no talk of banning Viagra?

    Hands off my boner!

    Oh wait.
  • Spiritual_ChaosSpiritual_Chaos Posts: 26,362
    What the fuck is. 
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • tempo_n_groovetempo_n_groove Posts: 32,643
    Hobbes said:
    First time the court has overturned a constitutional right. Thomas now taking aim at contraception, same sex relationships, and same sex marriage. Hey, CT, wonder what originalists think about interracial marriage.
    It was never a constitutional right though was it?  It was a ruling that set a precedent.  It never did become a law or amendment.
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 32,376
    Hobbes said:
    First time the court has overturned a constitutional right. Thomas now taking aim at contraception, same sex relationships, and same sex marriage. Hey, CT, wonder what originalists think about interracial marriage.
    It was never a constitutional right though was it?  It was a ruling that set a precedent.  It never did become a law or amendment.
    depends how you interpret it. some argue this is a direct contradiction of the 14th ammendment (equality)
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • tempo_n_groovetempo_n_groove Posts: 32,643
    Hobbes said:
    First time the court has overturned a constitutional right. Thomas now taking aim at contraception, same sex relationships, and same sex marriage. Hey, CT, wonder what originalists think about interracial marriage.
    It was never a constitutional right though was it?  It was a ruling that set a precedent.  It never did become a law or amendment.
    depends how you interpret it. some argue this is a direct contradiction of the 14th ammendment (equality)
    That is a far stretch though.  A man can't get an abortion so I don't see the equality part?

    I am shocked that this overturned in the first place.  If they can do this who knows what else they'll be looking to overturn.
  • dankinddankind I am not your foot. Posts: 20,703
    dankind said:
    Thanks Bernie. Nice job.
    Is this a joke? I don't know about where you live, but Bernie wasn't on the ballot here. I suppose folks could've written him in...?
    Would Hillary have given us the three stooges of SCOTUS appointments? Don’t know where you live but Bernie’s failure to endorse Hillary and pretending he could beat POOTWH and be elected as a socialist certainly bears responsibility for today’s and future decisions. The Bernie protest voters own this.
    I thought that he did endorse Hillary, albeit coldly, similar to his Biden endorsement. So I Googled it, and the headlines on July 12, 2016, were that that this endorsement did indeed take place in an effort to “unite” the party. 

    Anyway, I never considered voting for him because of my ageism. But I didn’t know that there was a large contingent of Bernie protest voters, so I Googled it. Turns out, there wasn’t. A weak queef of 0.08% of the vote tally was Bernie write-ins. Not even a dent. Maybe a scratch? The Nader shamers (and Nader voter shamers) maybe kinda sorta had a political point to make in 2000 because he was on the ballot and received an earth-shattering 2.74% of the vote, not even enough to get his fledgling party federal funding. 

    Is this more of an influence in the zeitgeist/cult of personality thing that you’re blaming him for? Because that seems misdirected. The media (Russian-tainted social media included, of course, in 2016) and the electorate play larger roles than the individual politician there, I’d argue.

    And I genuinely thought you might be joking in the old “thanks, Obama” vein, but I saw other posters pointing the finger in his (and his supporters’) general direction as well and then began to wonder if you were. 

    Thanks for the explanation. 
    I SAW PEARL JAM
  • Cropduster-80Cropduster-80 Posts: 1,608
    edited June 24
    Hobbes said:
    First time the court has overturned a constitutional right. Thomas now taking aim at contraception, same sex relationships, and same sex marriage. Hey, CT, wonder what originalists think about interracial marriage.
    It was never a constitutional right though was it?  It was a ruling that set a precedent.  It never did become a law or amendment.
    It is/was a constitutional right depending on if you are referring to abortion or interracial marriage 

    The  court affirmed that right exists in the constitution 

    same way the right for an individual to own a gun is a constitutional right. Except that right wasn’t actually confirmed until 2008

    Thats the thing about the constitution.  Stuff like “equal protection” under the law is open for debate.  Equal protection to who? Christians, black people, women, gay people or everyone?  They can take a more narrow or expansive view of what that means depending on their agenda 

    the right to privacy was a constitutional right derived from the due process clause in the 14th amendment. That right affects both contraception and abortion. Abortion was overturned which means a constitutional right to privacy technically no longer exists.  Roe v Wade isn’t about a right to an abortion specificity. It’s about a right to privacy that the government has no business interfering with you and your doctor 
    Post edited by Cropduster-80 on
  • OnWis97OnWis97 St. Paul, MNPosts: 4,331
    So in three years, the GQP will probably have both houses and the presidency. Do they pass/sign a bill to make all forms of abortion illegal nationwide?

    Probably...though they might be concerned with how that impacts the fervor of their voters and the opposition's voters...that is, assuming voting is even a thing by then.
    1995 Milwaukee
    1998 Alpine, Alpine
    2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston
    2004 Boston, Boston
    2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty)
    2011 Alpine, Alpine
    2013 Wrigley
    2014 St. Paul
    2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley
    2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley
    2021 Asbury Park
  • hedonisthedonist standing on the edge of foreverPosts: 24,459
    Hobbes said:
    First time the court has overturned a constitutional right. Thomas now taking aim at contraception, same sex relationships, and same sex marriage. Hey, CT, wonder what originalists think about interracial marriage.
    It disgusts me. I thought that, in 2022 for fuck’s sake, we had moved past such Neanderthal-like thinking.

    Fuck the Supreme Court and their backwardsness.
  • HobbesHobbes Pacific NorthwestPosts: 5,785
    Hobbes said:
    First time the court has overturned a constitutional right. Thomas now taking aim at contraception, same sex relationships, and same sex marriage. Hey, CT, wonder what originalists think about interracial marriage.
    It was never a constitutional right though was it?  It was a ruling that set a precedent.  It never did become a law or amendment.
    In their dissent, the three judges wrote, "Roe and Casey were from the beginning, and are even more now, embedded in core constitutional concepts of individual freedom, and of the equal rights of citizens to decide on the shape of their lives."
  • Cropduster-80Cropduster-80 Posts: 1,608
    edited June 24
    TBH if stuff like gay marriage is back on the table now as Thomas has indicated it’s up to the most liberal states (Massachusetts, California, Hawaii) to ban heterosexual marriage and specifically allow homosexual marriage just to make a point

    at some point the liberals need to pass laws directly aimed at conservatives 

    Heterosexuals  being targeted as second class citizens drives that point home.  If gay marriage isn’t a protected right according to Thomas, you can’t then argue heterosexual marriage is as what they are saying is marriage itself isn’t a protected right and it’s up to states to determine what marriage even is 

    liberals need to do the exact same thing conservative are 

    I would rather a law banning heterosexual marriage get to the Supreme Court than a law banning gay marriage as it forces them to actually  decide if marriage is a right or not and I’m sure they would then say states can’t restrict who can get married if that happened. Thus protecting gay marriage 


    Post edited by Cropduster-80 on
  • PP193448PP193448 Springboro, OHPosts: 4,255
    Hobbes said:
    Hobbes said:
    First time the court has overturned a constitutional right. Thomas now taking aim at contraception, same sex relationships, and same sex marriage. Hey, CT, wonder what originalists think about interracial marriage.
    It was never a constitutional right though was it?  It was a ruling that set a precedent.  It never did become a law or amendment.
    In their dissent, the three judges wrote, "Roe and Casey were from the beginning, and are even more now, embedded in core constitutional concepts of individual freedom, and of the equal rights of citizens to decide on the shape of their lives."
    Sad thing is that statement is so generic that it could be applied to people carrying guns for protection, even more now with increase in crime and defunding of police. 
    2006 Clev,Pitt; 2008 NY MSGx2; 2010 Columbus; 2012 Missoula; 2013 Phoenix,Vancouver,Seattle; 2014 Cincy; 2016 Lex, Wrigley 1&2; 2018 Wrigley 1&2
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 32,376
    if the constitution doesn't explicitly state abortion, making it overturnable, the constitution doesn't explicitly state what type of arms either, making that overturnable. 

    muskets only. fuck em. everyone else? 10 year prison term. or castration. you choose. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • jimjam1982jimjam1982 TexasPosts: 692
    edited June 24
    Between this and guns it's disgusting.

    I have to vote all blue for the first time since the bush era. I dont like the fiscal progressive agenda but this assault on women and the assaults on children is too much. These fuckers have to go. Fuck. What a sad day.

    and Missouri banned abortions moments after this. Tragic for women
    Post edited by jimjam1982 on
Sign In or Register to comment.