Supreme Court will overturn Roe v Wade

[Gouvernail]

I disagree with all this shit about viability and heartbeats.

fuck all that

A fetus grows inside a real human being’s body. 
 

If a human being does not wish to have another human being growing inside her body, it is absolutely her right to get the unwanted resident out of her body. 
 There is no “Right to grow inside another person.”

in fact….. There is no right to force ANYTHING on another person.

 

[Se7en]

And THAT was rude, nasty, and uncalled-for.  You could have expressed your opinion without being a complete asshat.

Yeah you are right.

Meli's constant misandry gives me the shits sometimes.

I don't think it should go unchallenged, but I could have been less of an asshat about it.

 

[Gouvernail]

While we are considering alternative sets of rights:

* who says it is your RIGHT to create a human being and force it to reside in your body for nine months?

* Does the new human have the RIGHT to decide to stay inside The woman for an extra few months??

* Do women have the RIGHT  to have chiggers removed? What RIGHTS  does the chigger have?? 

* What stops the logical extension of fetus rights to unfertilized egg rights? We certainly have the technology to fertilize every egg. Eggs are half a human and by volume WAY MORE  than half 

Must all women try to fuck enough to fertilize every “almost an entire human” egg?? 

* Are miscarriages a criminal event?? 

 

[Amati]

Since it was inevitable that this be posted, I may well be the one to post it:

 

[[email protected]]

And gov, you and I both agree that there reaches a point in time where the human growing in her body achieves a stage of growth where it gains rights, no? 

obviously if she's due to give birth in a week and she intentionally kills the healthy/viable baby inside her, that's murder in your eyes, correct? we all agree with that ("we" being the sane and rational amongst us)? Thats of course an extreme example, but it does happen.  working in the law you see extreme examples of everything-- business, behaviour, ethics, bad luck, etc.  Point being, of course there needs to be a legal point in time where the baby gets rights-- partial birth abortion is a thing, parents killing their kids happens, etc.  you have to account for the 1% of cases that arent anything remotely close to the many very appropriate circumstances for the abortion procedure that accounts for 99% of them.

Thus, many would argue, we must have a set of laws governing this procedure, and its limits (if any).  There's all sorts of laws that tell all of us what we can and cant do with our bodies at various intervals of life (incapacity, terminal illness, death, etc).   One more reason that the legal arguments are a lot more interesting than the "get your hands off my body" irrational hysterics... those of us in the law have to run the process that decides if people live or die, if they are put in a cage for a half-century or not, if all their money, property or children are taken away from them.  thats how the system works.  you can hate the system but its lame to hate those of us that take part in it, its a necessary evil of an organized society based on law and order.

 

[Clove Hitch]

Here is an outstanding ad.  Stuff like this will run all the time to November.  The Regressives may have flipped the script on the midterms, and not in a good way for them. 

 

[Clove Hitch]

And gov, you and I both agree that there reaches a point in time where the human growing in her body achieves a stage of growth where it gains rights, no? 

obviously if she's due to give birth in a week and she intentionally kills the healthy/viable baby inside her, that's murder in your eyes, correct? we all agree with that ("we" being the sane and rational amongst us)? Thats of course an extreme example, but it does happen.  working in the law you see extreme examples of everything-- business, behaviour, ethics, bad luck, etc.  Point being, of course there needs to be a legal point in time where the baby gets rights-- partial birth abortion is a thing, parents killing their kids happens, etc.  you have to account for the 1% of cases that arent anything remotely close to the many very appropriate circumstances for the abortion procedure that accounts for 99% of them.

Why not let her and her doctor make medical decisions? Why should some plonker of a lawyer get a say in it? 

 

[Sailor Y]

https://www.newsweek.com/ruth-bader-ginsburg-roe-wade-abortion-scotus-1702948


Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Warning About Roe v. Wade Came True


BY EWAN PALMER ON 5/3/22 AT 8:57 AM EDT
 
The misgivings from late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg regarding Roe v. Wade and its susceptibility to come under attack may have ultimately been proven right given the revelations around a leaked opinion draft from the Supreme Court.

The alleged internal document, obtained by Politico, shows that the conservative-majority SCOTUS has provisionally approved to strike down the landmark 1973 ruling that ensures abortion is a constitutional right across the country, along with a subsequent 1992 decision, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which largely upheld the decision.

While it may seem unlikely, Ginsburg, the pioneering advocate for women's rights who died in September 2020 at age 87, was a frequent critic of Roe v. Wade, especially its framing and the speed in which it was pushed through.

In a much-quoted lecture she gave at New York University in 1992, Ginsburg noted how Roe was an example of how "Doctrinal limbs too swiftly shaped...may prove unstable."

Ginsburg was in essence disagreeing with Roe's base argument that the right to abortion was based on the privacy of a woman with her doctor, and not a violation of equal protection as guaranteed by the Constitution.

The majority draft opinion, which may still change ahead of the Supreme Court's final ruling around late June, was written by Justice Samuel Alito, who states that the sweeping decision to legalize abortion nationwide was "egregiously wrong from the start."

"Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division," Alito added.

Speaking to The New York Times in September 2020, Mary Hartnett, a law professor at Georgetown University who co-wrote the Ginsburg biography My Own Words, said Ginsburg believed "it would have been better to approach it under the equal protection clause" so Roe v. Wade would be less vulnerable to attempts to have it disbarred.

"Roe isn't really about the woman's choice, is it?" Ginsburg told the University of Chicago Law School in May 2013. "It's about the doctor's freedom to practice...it wasn't woman-centered, it was physician-centered."

Ginsburg also expressed concerns in the 1992 NYU lecture that the sweeping nature of Roe v. Wade should have originally focused on striking down a Texas law that "intolerably shackled a woman's autonomy" by only allowing abortion to be performed if the mother's life is in danger.

"Suppose the Court had stopped there, rightly declaring unconstitutional the most extreme brand of law in the nation, and had not gone on, as the Court did in Roe, to fashion a regime blanketing the subject, a set of rules that displaced virtually every state law then in force," Ginsburg said.

"Would there have been the twenty-year controversy we have witnessed, reflected most recently in the Supreme Court's splintered decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey? A less encompassing Roe, one that merely struck down the extreme Texas law and went no further on that day, I believe and will summarize why [it] might have served to reduce rather than to fuel controversy."

If the draft opinion is confirmed and not changed, it would mean each state would be free to decide whether to restrict or ban abortion.

As noted by The Washington Post in August, a number of anti-abortion activists have since used Ginsburg's comments to argue that Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey should be overturned.

"Far from bringing peace to the controversy over abortion, Roe and Casey have made matters worse," Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch wrote in a brief attempting to pass a law that would ban virtually all abortions in the state after just 15 weeks while citing Ginsburg's own words.

Speaking to The Post, Mary Ziegler, a law professor at Florida State University and author of Abortion and the Law in America: Roe v. Wade to the Present, suggested that the attempts to use Ginsburg's objections to oppose the 1973 ruling would never have occurred while the judge was still alive.

"Can you imagine the dissent she would write?" Ziegler added.

During her talk to the University of Chicago Law School in May 2013, Ginsburg was asked what she believed would happen if Roe v. Wade was overturned.

The judge added that several states in the U.S. would never ban the procedure, which means that poor women from anti-abortion states would be the ones who suffer the most.

"If you have the sophistication and the money, you're going to have someplace in the United States where your choice can be exercised in a safe manner," Ginsburg said. "It would mean poor women have no choice. That doesn't make sense as a policy."








 

 

[Sea warrior]

10 hours ago, Voyageur said:

I only have one hardcore republican in my immediate family. She is the only one, that I know, who has had an abortion, by choice. Because of her poor choices, she has had 3 abortions, yet strongly she supports the fundamentalist evangelical wing of the once GOP. She also has 4 kids that she allowed to live. 

Blacks and Hispanics disproportionately vote for Democrats and they also have a disproportionate number of abortions.

Just saying…

 

[[email protected]]

Why not let her and her doctor make medical decisions? Why should some plonker of a lawyer get a say in it? 

I dont know but plonkers like me and my colleagues routinely take lots of money in litigation/bankruptcy/etc from wanker doctors who may be great at their specialty but all seem to also be experts at being terrible businessmen (which creates disputes and litigation), and surprisingly often guilty of malpractice, plus all their divorces and estate issues and terrible driving...  America has all sorts of laws that dictate what is legal in the medical field (and what the standard of care is, although the doctors sort of decide that in a way).  Thats how the system works.  The politicians are the ones writing these laws, the lawyers are simply playing by the rules that our elected pols put into place... that said, of course these bounties in TX, OK, etc are despicable.

 

[Sea warrior]

Amazing you can't answer a simple question. How much jail time should an abortion consumer receive? 

I believe your initial question was “how much jail” time should you get as an accomplice to your wife who had an abortion. 
Or some such.

Truthfully, as an opponent of abortion, I admit that I’d hate to have been faced with the choice you both had to make, and truthfully, I possibly could or even would have made a similar decision. 

That said, where I will call you out is in your use of your very own flesh and blood and the outlier that your experience represents to justify the horrendous and disgusting act of using the slaughter of the very most vulnerable among us as a form of contraception.

 

[phillysailor]

That said, where I will call you out is in your use of your very own flesh and blood and the outlier that your experience represents to justify the horrendous and disgusting act of using the slaughter of the very most vulnerable among us as a form of contraception.

Back the fuck up, sewer

He and his wife going through this experience gives them the right to pontificate on this issue and you’re gonna have to deal with his issues with a bit more sensitivity and thoughtfulness.

His experience is similar to many thousands of other Americans. Those forced into late term abortions are finding restrictive laws limiting their medical choices or forcing them to deal with harsh and unforgiving policies costing them time, money and exacting an emotional cost during an extremely traumatic experience.

If you don’t have @Raz'rs history thank your stars and apologize , you heartless prick.

 

[Raz'r]

The ruling. Have you heard any elected Republican discussing the draft opinion? Not a one. They are all feigning outrage over the release. The Trumpenjugen are releasing the name of a Breyer clerk to send the outrage her way. All bullshit. 

The Chief isn’t pissed about the ruling, he’s passed it leaked before the end of the court calendar and he’ll have to listen to protestors till the court wraps shit up. In normal times, they drop it and go on holiday and the protests lose steam before they return.

 

[phillysailor]

Ok, for the first time I wish I had a cancel button. 

what disgusting human would compare a shattering, terrifying experience to slaughter?

Fucking Gilead Commanders. They deserve castration.

 

[Raz'r]

Back the fuck up, sewer

He and his wife going through this experience gives them the right to pontificate on this issue and you’re gonna have to deal with his issues with a bit more sensitivity and thoughtfulness.

His experience is similar to many thousands of other Americans. Those forced into late term abortions are finding restrictive laws limiting their medical choices or forcing them to deal with harsh and unforgiving policies costing them time, money and exacting an emotional cost during an extremely traumatic experience.

If you don’t have @Raz'rs history thank your stars and apologize , you heartless prick.

 Thanks Philly, I’ve got that guy on ignore but find that most anti-abortion folks, when confronted with real situations (not as much an outlier as we’d like) usually mumble something and wander away. They really do think it’s just little brown whores getting abortions. Not their mom, wife, partner or kid.

 

[Sea warrior]

Back the fuck up, sewer

He and his wife going through this experience gives them the right to pontificate on this issue and you’re gonna have to deal with his issues with a bit more sensitivity and thoughtfulness.

His experience is similar to many thousands of other Americans. Those forced into late term abortions are finding restrictive laws limiting their medical choices or forcing them to deal with harsh and unforgiving policies costing them time, money and exacting an emotional cost during an extremely traumatic experience.

If you don’t have @Raz'rs history thank your stars and apologize , you heartless prick.

It most certainly doesn’t give them the right to use an exception to make a rule.

The vast majority of abortions in the US have nothing to do with medical issues and everything to do with selfishness and unwillingness to accept responsibility for poor decisions.

 

[Mrleft8]

Where did you get that from?

My points in this thread have been that R vs W is a poor way of legalising abortion, it would be better to have it unambigously legal. And that in a healthy long term relationship the male's opinion should be of some value to the partnership. If the woman is just saying "my body, fuck off" in every discussion, then that's not my idea of a healthy partnership.

A supreme court decision has usually had the effect of making something unambiguously legal, or illegal.

 

[Raz'r]

It most certainly doesn’t give them the right to use an exception to make a rule.

The vast majority of abortions in the US have nothing to do with medical issues and everything to do with selfishness and unwillingness to accept responsibility for poor decisions.

So does lung cancer, but we allow smokers to get treatment.

 

[Sea warrior]

So does lung cancer, but we allow smokers to get treatment.

What an imbecilic correlation to make.

According to the data, less than 3% of all abortions are for medical reasons or are of medical necessity.

But don’t let that fact stop you from using your child’s tragic demise as a tool to further your up agenda.

 

[Fah Kiew Tu]

Where did you get that from?

His rectum.

When Doug finds someone with a position that differs from his and doesn't want to address the actual argument, he assigns you a position you haven't ever stated then proceeds as if it were yours.

It's very dishonest and every time he does it, it makes me think the less of him, which is a pity because we've known each other for over 20 years and I generally have a great deal of respect for him.

This place often brings out the worst in people.

FKT