Roe vs. Wade

Post Reply
PAL
Posts: 1264
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by PAL »

Yes. I am from Kansas and I was so hoping the MAJORITY of Kansas women would do the right thing to keep their reproductive rights and they spoke loud and strong.
Pearl Cherrington
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1322
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by mister_coffee »

Sure looks like a pretty strong majority of folks in Kansas think that obnoxious big government should butt out of women's health care. Kudos for them.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

Generally, the last thing on a rapist's mind is birth control.
Read the article and comment on its contents rather than just repeat your off topic opinions.
dorankj
Posts: 785
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by dorankj »

Maybe DoD should focus more on killing any bad guys! And if soldiers can’t figure out where babies come from and how to prevent them (if unwanted) we can explain that too! These arguments are so specious, it pre-disposes that people aren’t smart enough to change their behavior if something is no longer allowed in society. It’s interesting how we changed peoples’ behavior and attitudes about smoking by shaming and frowning on that choice and now it’s really not acceptable maybe attitudes on abortion will be changed over time.
Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

Good article on the impact of the Dobbs decision in the DoD

https://www.csis.org/analysis/overturn- ... nt-defense
just-jim
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2022 8:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by just-jim »

?…gibberish…! you obviously didn’t comprehend what I wrote. Nor can you form a cogent response.
dorankj
Posts: 785
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by dorankj »

Well since SCOTUS determined there is not in fact a constitutional ‘right’ to abortion (something you guys lie about constantly) like Dredd Scott it was overturned. You DO think slavery should have been found unconstitutional don’t you old, white landowners?!
just-jim
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2022 8:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by just-jim »

Just realized ‘Mothers Against Greg Abbott’ acronym is : MAGA

Wonder if that was deliberate…!
just-jim
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2022 8:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by just-jim »

dorankj wrote: Tue Jul 26, 2022 6:40 pm …..will be determined by the voters representatives in the respective states (exactly like the framers intended!) Sorry that you all don’t like that DEMOCRACY thing but……
Except, you don’t understand history.

‘determined by the states’ led us to slavery and miscegenation (look it up) in some states and not others. And ‘determined by the states’ didn’t work, either, for; civil rights, housing, voting and the protection of the things we all own, and value, in common - air, water, national parks and forests.

It is EXACTLY why we have the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution, all from the 1860’s. Because… a bunch of white old guys - rich landowners - holding a majority of legislative positions in a few sparsely populated, poor, rural southern states couldn’t be trusted to have ANYONE’s interest in mind but their own.

It is EXACTLY why we have a strong Federal system. One that the Supreme Court has affirmed and re-affirmed repeatedly for over 150+ years. Until now.

But…You don’t “do” history…do you?
Last edited by just-jim on Tue Jul 26, 2022 9:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

Texas laws are in place, the voters haven't voted on them, they were implemented by the Rep state Congress and Gov Abbott. The people of TX have not had a say on these laws. While Texans may have voted for this set of politicians those votes were before Dobbs and before Uvalde.
dorankj
Posts: 785
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by dorankj »

Well since you guys and that commercial are such idiots! The determination from SCOTUS is that the decisions around this difficult issue will be determined by the voters representatives in the respective states (exactly like the framers intended!) Sorry that you all don’t like that DEMOCRACY thing but……
Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

Excellent.
just-jim
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2022 8:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by just-jim »

Mothers against Greg Abbott commercial.
They are going after him….hard!

https://twitter.com/i/status/1551693570523992064

(I don’t think you need a twitter acct to view)
Last edited by just-jim on Tue Jul 26, 2022 8:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

Amy Comey Barrett affiliation with this website was well known. The threats of kidnapping the doctor was a warning from the FBI. And this was before Dobbs.
https://www.rawstory.com/a-2657682099/
Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

Yes, US Border patrol owes her an apology as she was just passing through on her way up to Canada, but the 2x questioning her whether she'd had an abortion is way over the top wrong.
just-jim
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2022 8:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by just-jim »

Australian woman questioned - about her abortion status - by US Immigration officials in L.A., then deported.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... n-deported

Welcome to the 19th century, ladies….
Last edited by just-jim on Wed Jul 13, 2022 9:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

The story of the 9/10 yr old who whose rape resulted in a pregnancy brings up so many heartbreaking branches of the same tree. I wondered if the 10 year old child would even have been able to give birth.

Life isn't as black and white as Ken likes to think it is or should be. If the 10 year old girl lived in another state that was banning abortions outright she may have been forced to carry the baby to term. This Country has seen the advent of capital punishment over the years with the premise that a death penalty surely would make any murderer think twice, but that never put a dent in the murder rates.

While we argue about the individual cases there still looms the larger picture of personal liberties and rights and flat out prohibition of abortion ignores. Religions are weighing in and filing suits, transgender persons are filing suits, prohibitions of travel are being looked at as reasons for lawsuits, contraception and invitro are in the mix. The Dobbs case demonstrated that it is on feeble ground when Alito focused on the history, which did not exist in this Country to prohibit abortion. Historians, Constitutional law professors and ethicists have all reacted with horror at not just the decision but how it was reached. How it was reached is most certainly the most dangerous red flag to our democracy.

Prof Jack Balkin, Balkinization: the 3rd part of his Dobbs' essays

'Getting Rid of Fundamental Rights -- Discussion Questions for Dobbs, Part Three

JB


Here is the third of three sets of discussion questions on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization that will appear in this year’s Levinson Balkin Con Law supplement.


In this segment I discuss Justice Alito's assertion that there has been no substantial reliance on the right to abortion by women, and what Alito's reasoning in Dobbs portends for other implied fundamental rights such as the right to contraception, gay rights, and the right to same-sex marriage.

* * * * *

10. “Generalized assertions about the national psyche.” Justice Alito argues that stare decisis should not require the Court to keep Casey, because, among other reasons, there has been no reliance on the right to abortion in the United States.

When it upheld Roe on stare decisis grounds, the Casey Court declared that “To eliminate the issue of reliance ....would be simply to refuse to face the fact that, for two decades of economic and social developments, people have organized intimate relationships and made choices that define their views of themselves and their places in society, in reliance on the availability of abortion in the event that contraception should fail. The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.”

Alito disagrees. The kind of reliance that matters, he argues, is “very concrete reliance interests, like those that develop in ‘cases involving property and contract rights.’” By contrast, women’s expectation in organizing their lives that they will be able to obtain abortions if contraception fails and they become pregnant is simply too diffuse and abstract. Alito describes Casey’s account of women’s reliance as no more than “generalized assertions about the national psyche”—not the kind of concrete reliance that the Court has concerned itself with.

Do you agree with Alito’s characterization of the interests at stake? Why isn’t women’s ability to plan their economic, social, and family lives a very important form of reliance?

11. Eliminating fundamental rights. The Supreme Court has, in the past, eliminated constitutional protection for rights, for example, when it removed special protection from freedom of contract in West Coast Hotel v. Parrish. It has greatly limited the effect of Contract Clause from early 19th century decisions. It has watered down the procedural guarantees of the Due Process Clause from where they stood in the early 1970s. Over the past fifty years the Court has significantly cut back on criminal procedure protections and eliminated much of the Establishment Clause’s guarantees. But in Dobbs the Court removes constitutional protection from a right which it had previously declared important to women’s equal participation in the “economic and social life of the Nation” Is this different in kind?


12. The fate of other implied fundamental rights after Dobbs. In Dobbs, Justice Alito adopts the standard for determining the scope of protected liberties advocated by the dissenting Justices in Lawrence and Obergefell. At the same time, he goes out of his way to insist that nothing in his opinion endangers the Court’s other decisions protecting gay rights, the right to marriage (including same-sex marriage) or the right of married and single persons to purchase and use contraceptives. The reason, he explains, is that only in the case of abortion is there destruction of unborn life. “None of the other decisions cited by Roe and Casey involved the critical moral question posed by abortion. They are therefore inapposite. They do not support the right to obtain an abortion, and by the same token, our conclusion that the Constitution does not confer such a right does not undermine them in any way.”

The issue is somewhat more complicated than Alito lets on, however, for three reasons.

First, Alito’s argument for why Roe and Casey were clearly incorrect is Glucksberg’s test of whether a right is deeply rooted in our Nation’s history and traditions. But rights to contraception (by married or single persons), gay rights, and the right to same-sex marriage also fail this test. (In his dissent in Obergefell, Alito makes clear that he believes that “it is beyond dispute that the right to same-sex marriage is not among those rights [deeply rooted in our Nation's history and traditions].”).

In Dobbs, Alito distinguishes these cases from abortion on a different ground: none of these rights creates the same kind of harm as abortion—the destruction of a fetus. Therefore a great deal depends on whether what really matters to the Court in the long run is whether a right is deeply rooted in our Nation’s history and traditions (Glucksberg) or whether one must also show that the exercise of the right also causes a distinctive kind of harm. Note, however, that if harm is the concern, some abortion opponents argue that some forms of contraception—for example, Plan B emergency contraception—may prevent a fertilized ovum from attaching to the uterus, guaranteeing its eventual destruction. In addition, opponents of same-sex marriage argue that it does cause deep societal harm.

Second, some of the Justices may change their minds about whether to keep these precedents. Equally important, the Court’s composition may change. In 2016 the Court vigorously reaffirmed Roe and Casey in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, 579 U.S. 582 (2016). Six years later, Dobbs overturned both. So a lot can happen to Supreme Court doctrine in a very short time if new Justices have different views and priorities than older ones did. And, not to put too fine a point on it, Justice Thomas has already made clear that he is ready to overturn all of the precedents Alito says are untouched by Dobbs.

Third, there are many ways to cut back on contraceptive rights, gay rights, and same-sex marriage without overturning existing decisions. The Justices may read these decisions narrowly or refuse to extend them in later cases. They may use the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses to limit their impact. Thus, one should not assume that Dobbs is the furthest the Court will go in cutting back on implied fundamental rights any more than one should assume that Bruen is the furthest the Court will go in protecting Second Amendment rights.'
PAL
Posts: 1264
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by PAL »

But this child is not having a baby. Child abuse, if she were forced to have the baby.
Pearl Cherrington
dorankj
Posts: 785
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by dorankj »

Maybe the above story should be posted under crime and criminal behavior and we should focus on the heinous act of a horrible rapist and how to best punish him (also so no one else will think of committing such an act!) and not about how insistent we are to kill the baby. We should also work to provide care for this child who’s having a child and protect all children from these monsters. I pray the best care (medical and spiritual) is provided to the children and in my opinion the rapist is castrated in the most horrible way possible and then hung from a tall tree!
User avatar
pasayten
Posts: 2414
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by pasayten »

Arrest made in rape of Ohio girl that led to Indiana abortion drawing international attention
Bethany Bruner
Monroe Trombly
Tony Cook
The Columbus Dispatch
A Columbus man has been charged with impregnating a 10-year-old Ohio girl, whose travel to Indiana to seek an abortion led to international attention following the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v Wade and activation of Ohio's abortion law.

Gershon Fuentes, 27, whose last known address was an apartment on Columbus' Northwest Side, was arrested Tuesday after police say he confessed to raping the child on at least two occasions. He's since been charged with rape, a felony of the first degree in Ohio.

Columbus police were made aware of the girl's pregnancy through a referral by Franklin County Children Services that was made by her mother on June 22, Det. Jeffrey Huhn testified Wednesday morning at Fuentes' arraignment. On June 30, the girl underwent a medical abortion in Indianapolis, Huhn said.


Huhn also testified that DNA from the clinic in Indianapolis is being tested against samples from Fuentes, as well as the child's siblings, to confirm contribution to the aborted fetus.

10-year-old girl's abortion:Ohio AG Dave Yost cast doubt on 10-year-old rape victim case, now 'rejoices" at arrest

Franklin County Municipal Court Judge Cynthia Ebner said the case did not warrant Fuentes — who is believed to be undocumented — to be held without bond.

Ebner said a high bond was necessary, however, due to Fuentes being a possible flight risk and for the safety of the child involved. Before being arrested, Huhn and Det. David Phillips collected a saliva sample from Fuentes, according to a probable cause statement.

Ebner set a $2 million bond for Fuentes, who is being held in the Franklin County jail.


Charges further confirm story, which that has become abortion debate flash point
The criminal charges and testimony from the Columbus detective further confirm the disturbing story that has become a key flash point in the national furor over the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

The Indianapolis Star, a Gannett sister paper of The Dispatch, first reported earlier this month that a 10-year-old rape victim traveled from Ohio to Indiana for abortion services after most abortions became illegal in her home state. The account was attributed to Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an Indianapolis physician who provides abortion services.


The story quickly went viral, appearing in outlets across the globe, and became a top talking point for abortion rights supporters, including President Joe Biden.

"Imagine being that little girl," Biden said Friday as he decried the high court’s decision. "I’m serious. Just imagine being that little girl."

But in recent days, some abortion opponents, Republican politicians and news outlets had criticized the story as unproven.


Story was questioned by Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost on Fox News
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost questioned the validity of the account during an appearance on Fox News this week.

Yost, a Republican, told Fox News host Jesse Watters that his office had not heard "a whisper" of a report being filed for the 10-year-old victim.

"We have regular contact with prosecutors and local police and sheriffs — not a whisper anywhere," Yost said on the show.

Yost doubled down on that in an interview with the USA TODAY Network Ohio bureau on Tuesday, saying that the more time passed before confirmation made it "more likely that this is a fabrication."

"I know the cops and prosecutors in this state," Yost said. "There's not one of them that wouldn't be turning over every rock, looking for this guy and they would have charged him. They wouldn't leave him loose on the streets ... I'm not saying it could not have happened. What I'm saying to you is there is not a damn scintilla of evidence."

On Wednesday, once news of the arraignment of the Columbus man accused in the child's rape came, Yost issued a single sentence statement:

"We rejoice anytime a child rapist is taken off the streets."


Hearing details investigation, concerns about suspect
During Wednesday’s hearing, Assistant Franklin County Prosecutor Dan Meyer requested Fuentes be held without bond. He said Fuentes is not believed to be in the country legally and there are questions about his identity.

Huhn testified that detectives spoke to Fuentes, through an interpreter, and Fuentes admitted to having sexual contact with the girl. An interpreter was also used during Wednesday's hearing.


The 10-year-old also told police Fuentes was the father of the pregnancy, Huhn testified. Meyer said the girl had just turned 10 recently, meaning she was likely impregnated at 9 years old.

Clark Torbett, an attorney with the Franklin County Public Defender’s office, said it was unconstitutional to hold Fuentes without bond, especially with DNA confirmation of the pregnancy’s father still pending.

He said Fuentes had lived in Columbus the last seven years and had a steady job at a café. He also had an address where he could live that was not at the same location as the 10-year-old.

If convicted, Fuentes would face a potential life sentence in prison.

Data shows frequency of reports of sexual abuse of children
An analysis of Columbus police reports filed since May 9 found 50 reports of rape or sexual abuse involving a person 15 years or younger. That number of reports may also be underreported because of restrictions on public records related to reports initiated by mandated reporters. The report involving the 10-year-old girl falls into that category.

In 2020, there were 52 abortions in children 15 or younger in Ohio, accounting for .3% of the 20,605 abortions performed that year, according to the Ohio Department of Health. Data from the health department shows there were 63 such procedures in 2019, 54 in 2018, 61 in 2017 and 76 in 2016.

Data from 2021 is not yet available.

Indiana lawmakers expected to enact abortion ban
The ability of Ohio residents to seek abortion services in Indiana could soon be curtailed.

Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb, a Republican, has called a special legislative session that is scheduled to convene on July 25. Republicans, who hold supermajorities in both chambers of the Indiana General Assembly, have pledged to enact new abortion restrictions.

Legislative leaders have been tight-lipped about what the legislation will look like. They haven't said whether their abortion proposal will allow for exemptions for rape, incest or life of the pregnant person, or at what point in a pregnancy they'll ban abortion.

Reporters asked Holcomb about the case of the 10-year-old rape survivor on Tuesday. He called it a "horrific example," but declined to say whether he was comfortable banning abortions in cases involving young rape victims.

"I am reserving comment until we see a bill," he said.

Will Ohio Republicans ban nearly all abortions? Can anyone stop it?
A ban on nearly all abortions in Ohio is likely coming.

Ohio's GOP-controlled General Assembly is expected to ban abortions even earlier than the current six-week ban, with no exceptions for victims of rape or incest.

Lawmakers are still crafting language on when abortions would be banned, but past proposals barred the procedure after fertilization, which could prohibit some birth control.

Republicans, who hold veto-proof majorities in the Ohio House and Senate, have the votes to pass such a ban without any Democratic support.
pasayten
Ray Peterson
Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

Link to the regs? I ask out of curiosity only because it's obvious that an EMT's role has nothing to do with the right of a woman to have an abortion.
By putting this out there you're instead deflecting from the larger issues

From Constitutional law professor Jack Balkin:

'The problem is that the history that Alito recounts—going back to the 13th century—is deeply connected to the subordinate status of women, and to laws and practices that kept women subservient and denied them equal opportunities. Abortion laws were among many others that regulated women’s sexuality and autonomy, and the authors Alito quotes reflect the assumptions of their day. Therefore it is not clear why the Glucksberg test should have any legitimacy with respect to women’s sexual freedom, since it grounds the test for constitutional liberty in deeply unjust and inequitable practices. Put another way, a reason why women’s reproductive rights likely would not be deeply rooted in the Nation’s traditions is that traditionally the country was committed to keeping women from having very many rights. Conversely, it is no accident that reproductive justice claims start to get taken seriously as soon as women start to win a broad range of equal rights in American society. Indeed, abortion and contraceptive rights were key demands of the women’s movement in the 1970s.'
dorankj
Posts: 785
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by dorankj »

When I provide emergency care for a pregnant woman I’m required to also care for the baby or my license can be pulled, why is that you think?
dorankj
Posts: 785
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by dorankj »

Yes, yes but of course we have a concerning issue about another life that deserves consideration at a minimum!
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests