Roe vs. Wade

Post Reply
User avatar
pasayten
Posts: 2414
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by pasayten »

unborn2.jpg
pasayten
Ray Peterson
Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

It's interesting to watch the responses that are building. Corporations are lining up to offer support for employees who will need abortion health care and want to travel to a state that offers the care. With now 26 states in the process of banning abortion, the remaining who will codify pro choice options are also facing a strain on their health care systems. Washington, Oregon & California are joining together to framework a response in a set of large packages to fund and accept for care the women who will arrive at our doors.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/24/tech/com ... index.html
PAL
Posts: 1264
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by PAL »

If Only.png
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 »

pasayten wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 12:17 am This turn of events will bring out a heavy anti-GOP vote pressure this fall in the mid-term elections.
Possibly.

I'm wondering about the headwinds the GOP is creating for itself going into this election. This court decision doesn't help, but neither do the Jan 6th committee hearings, and the fact that more Republicans that Democrats have died of COVID.

That last one is a fairly small number distributed around the country, but when you have statewide races decided by mere thousands of votes I suspect it will move the needle.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

Pence and GOP leadership are calling for a nation wide ban on abortion. A fetal personhood case is how they get there.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdliQ5fVYKo
User avatar
pasayten
Posts: 2414
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by pasayten »

Be lots of women that will have to travel to states that still allow abprtions... Washington, that leans heavily democratic now, will still allow them and I see no reversal in the near future... In fact whole west coast will still allow the right for women to choose an abortion. I support this... It is a private decision and choice between a women, her creator, and her doctor.

This turn of events will bring out a heavy anti-GOP vote pressure this fall in the mid-term elections. Will stop the pendulum from swinging further right regardless of the economic pressures... Whatever it takes to keep Trump out of office will be fine with me. Hoping both parties will come up with younger and better POTUS candidates for the 2024 election...
pasayten
Ray Peterson
PAL
Posts: 1264
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by PAL »

Mr. Smug, Ken, if Thomas is talking about taking measures further, then it could happen. We as women, have to be prepared, because the men ain't gonna do it. So we have to fight.
Now maybe the Supreme Court shouldn't be involved with my body; maybe that's what these jerks are trying to say.
And maybe no court in the land or any Representatives should have any say what goes on between my doctor and I.
Laws were created to protect those that were being persecuted for having abortions and to create safe abortions.
But what if there were no law, no interference and it is, I say again, between a woman and her doctor.
There is a great article in The Atlantic Monthly about the Underground for abortions. And it exists. I think I heard that some prosecutors will not prosecute cases in some of the states.
And we must vote. The majority of Americans support legal abortion. The minority wants to rule us. They are Taliban. They want it all to go back to white men only, and only they vote.
Pearl Cherrington
dorankj
Posts: 785
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by dorankj »

Boy, you guys spin up your tinfoil hats immediately! The decision specifically states it only addresses abortion, but hyperbole and histrionics are you far lefties stock and trade.
Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

Justice Thomas: 'For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is “demonstrably erroneous,” Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U. S. ___, ___ (2020) (THOMAS, J., concurring in judgment) (slip op., at 7), we have a duty to “correct the error” established in those precedents, Gamble v. United States, 587 U. S. ___, ___ (2019) (THOMAS, J., concurring) (slip op., at 9). After overruling these demonstrably erroneous decisions, the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions guarantee the myriad rights that our substantive due process cases have generated. For example, we could consider whether any of the rights announced in this Court’s substantive due process cases are “privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Amdt.

I guess he needs something to rile up the brownshirts going forward.

………………………………………………………………….

Okay, bmaz here with an add on update.

Okay, I have a couple things to add here. First, Marcy hit on exactly the most important thing today. We knew Alito’s opinion was coming, and we knew what it was going to be. But the Thomas part is terrifying. They are coming for all of it. Thomas wants the Supreme Court to overrule Griswold (right to contraception), Lawrence (right to same-sex intimacy), and Obergefell (right to same-sex marriage).

That is the whole kit and kaboodle. And make no mistake, this Coney Barrett court will give it to him. Stare decisis is officially dead. I know for a fact that the test cases for accomplishing this are already long in the works by a myriad of conservative groups in anticipation of today’s Dobbs decision. And that was even before the leak of Alito’s craven draft opinion. They knew it was coming after Amy Coney Barrett replaced RBG non the Court. They think ahead in ways that Democrats and their feckless octogenarian leadership never do.

Notable what prior decision Clarence Thomas did NOT call out. The Loving decision that allows his interracial marriage to the hideous Ginni Thomas. He conveniently stands mute on that one. Funny that.

And Justice Kavanaugh, in his concurring opinion, tries to preemptively declare that states cannot prohibit and prevent, and theoretically criminalize, interstate travel to obtain an abortion because of the constitutional right to interstate travel. I actually think that is right, so credit for trying Beer Boy. But that is not at all clear, because interstate travel is yet another right not specifically delineated in the Constitution, so is very much in the lurch under the Thomas attack discussed above. So that is not bankable in the least.

Second, back to the main force of today’s Dobbs decision, a lot of states have trigger laws that make the ban on abortions effective, or easily effective after certification, after this decision. Other states, like Arizona for instance, have statutes totally banning abortion still on their books, that are effective and can be enforced immediately. Today. This morning. Now. This is not something about to take effect, it is effective right now.

All in all, the Dobbs opinion puts all healthcare for women in peril, not “just” abortion. There is about no health issue a woman can face that cannot impinge on fertility or pregnancy. Southern and deeply red states either have already or in the process of creating laws that criminalizes medical professional in this regard. Some want the death penalty for it. It is hard to imagine that most citizens really grasp the hell the Supreme Court has unleashed today. (EmptyWheel)
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 »

My guess is that the mess caused by the implications of this decision are going to be huge. While I doubt the ruling will be reversed in anything like the near term, I suspect the practical end results after a few years of chaos and progressing insanity will be that abortion will be available pretty much anywhere but women who wish to have one will have to jump through some odd hoops.

I see no possibility of a federal ban (the filibuster works for both sides) and I see no possibility that deep blue states will implement abortion bans or cooperate with states with abortion bans. Any rules against "medication abortions" run up against the challenge that the most common drugs used also have other medical uses, so you can't ban the medications. That leaves you with an unenforceable law.

And if you have two states, A and B, and in state A X is illegal but in state B X is legal state A can't prosecute someone who travels to state B for X. There are a whole pile of rules about jurisdiction, freedom to travel, full faith and credit that make that impossible as a matter of law.

I think the combination of the ridiculous implications of these abortion bans and their extreme unpopularity will make them politically untenable in the very near future. In a way the Supreme Court decision has kind of forced the issue.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
Rideback
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Roe vs. Wade

Post by Rideback »

It's a hard day to process how our world changed with this ruling. The ruling of the majority itself indicates this is just the beginning. Gay rights, marriage equality rights, invitro fertilization, birth control...the door is now open.
SharonLaVonne
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2021 2:53 pm
Contact:

Roe vs. Wade

Post by SharonLaVonne »

I suggest that a proof of having had a vasectomy should be required before men are allowed to penetrate a woman. Or ladies - just say no! Chastity belts may be the newest thing in women's wear.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests