SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[s_bushido]

In one sense it becomes a bit less polarizing for rebulucans because they can chalk this up as a win so maybe some of them are complacent now. They're usually pretty good at firm mongering though.

I guarantee that they'll find something new to fearmonger about. "They™ are coming for Trump, so they're coming for you too!" seems a popular one currently, but I doubt that will have legs in local races, or with persist much beyond when/if his legal issues catch up to him.

[Xyonai]

I guarantee that they'll find something new to fearmonger about. "They™ are coming for Trump, so they're coming for you too!" seems a popular one currently, but I doubt that will have legs in local races, or with persist much beyond when/if his legal issues catch up to him.

It looks like 'Woke' issues will be their rallying cry this year, focusing on LGBT (Emphasis on T) communities. Because stupid culture war bullshit is all these people can run on anymore.

[Rasulis]

Coincidence? Probably coincidence. Out of the blue, women suddenly started to register to vote for no particular reason. They just felt like it.

[Edge-]

Coincidence? Probably coincidence. Out of the blue, women suddenly started to register to vote for no particular reason. They just felt like it.

Man, no wonder Republicans like Glenn Youngkin (Virginia governor) are so afraid of repeating Kansas's "mistake" and putting abortion access up to a popular vote, instead saying that it should be decided in the legislature. It's way easier to deny women a voice on that issue by going through the Legislature.

I just hope it forces a lot of these conservative women to start asking how much their political party of choice is actually looking out for their interests. I don't pretend that every woman registering to vote suddenly is pro-bodily autonomy, especially in each one of those states, but I do imagine that they likely make up an overall majority of the new registered voters across the board in those states.

[Xyonai]

In more 'The Forced-Birth Folks in Kansas are sore fucking losers' news, we've got a twofer:

Unsurprisingly, the guys who funded the previous recount refuses to pay for portions of it but also want to waste everyone's time and force yet another recount. (important bit quoted below)

Kansas law requires a recount if those who ask for it prove they can cover the counties’ costs. The counties pay only if the outcome changes.

Leavitt and Gietzen provided credit cards to pay for the nearly $120,000 cost, according to the secretary of state’s office. Leavitt has an online fundraising page. Gietzen also said he is getting donations from a network built over three decades in the anti-abortion movement.

Gietzen said Sunday he doesn’t accept the results of the Sedgwick County recount because of the discrepancy about the way the ballots were sorted and because some of the recount happened Saturday without outside observers present to watch.

“We still don’t know what happened in Sedgwick County. I won’t pay for Sedgwick County,” he said.

He said he’s also concerned about the results statewide because of a report out of Cherokee county in southeast Kansas about the results of one county election being transposed between two candidates when the results were transferred on a thumb drive from one voting machine to a tabulating machine.

Gietzen said he plans to file a lawsuit Monday seeking a full statewide recall.

Gietzen said he won’t publicly report the names of private donors helping him finance the recount, even though a state ethics official says it’s required. Gietzen, who leads a small GOP group, the Kansas Republican Assembly, argues that he’s not campaigning for the anti-abortion measure but is instead promoting election integrity.

In addition to that, Gietzien is threatening to send out Anti-Abortion activists to carry out a door-to-door investigation in countries where the provision lost because these people are sore losers.

“The next step is to check the registrations of the people who they say voted,” Gietzen said. “I don’t care whether they voted yes or no, it doesn’t make any difference to me. I want to know if a human being voted. So we’ll be visiting homes to see if anyone lives there – maybe 10 out of every precinct.”

[Rasulis]

In addition to that, Gietzien is threatening to send out Anti-Abortion activists to carry out a door-to-door investigation in countries where the provision lost because these people are sore losers.

Isn't Kansas a "stand your ground" state? Time to put the doctrine to good use.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Only reminder #90879012342 that Republicans hate Democracy when it isn't in their favor.

[s_bushido]

Only reminder #90879012342 that Republicans hate Democracy.

Fixed that for you.

[Edge-]

In addition to that, Gietzien is threatening to send out Anti-Abortion activists to carry out a door-to-door investigation in countries where the provision lost because these people are sore losers.

I do wonder if folks like Tehdang are still going to pretend that this is a reasonable position and that the "pro-life" movement hasn't largely been co-opted by these types of extremists. Just like the Republican party and American conservative movement as a whole.

Really though, the stories about girls and women being forced to carry their rapists child as a 10 year old until they get an abortion out of state, the woman who had to carry a fetus missing half its skull, the other women denied abortions for miscarriages that had to "birth" the dead fetus and deal with that trauma.

All of those things are the legacy of Republicans. Of Donald Trump. Of Mitch McConnell. Of Amy Coney Barrett. Of Brett Kavanaugh. Of Samuel Alito. Of Niel Gorsuch. Of John Roberts. Their legacy is the unnecessary and cruel suffering women were forced to endure, or potentially endure if they couldn't get access to health care in another state, because of them.

[tehdang]

I do wonder if folks like Tehdang are still going to pretend that this is a reasonable position and that the "pro-life" movement hasn't largely been co-opted by these types of extremists. Just like the Republican party and American conservative movement as a whole.

Just as soon as you admit the "pro-choice" has been co-opted by no-restrictions-ever extremists on the issue, just like the Democratic party and American progressive movement as a whole.

The Kansas Democrats should be going to Democrat headquarters to teach them a thing or to about how to run a successful movement. The campaign that ended the amendment barely even mentioned the word abortion, talked about the amendment as a "strict government mandate" as in "Kansans don't want another government mandate" (alongside signs of coronavirus mask mandates, and a church closure announcement). They had a winning strategy for a red state. The national movement writes off these states and speaks openly about robbing their current political power in national elections.

[Edge-]

Just as soon as you admit the "pro-choice" has been co-opted by no-restrictions-ever extremists on the issue, just like the Democratic party and American progressive movement as a whole.

I won't, because that's a strawman. You have no Democrats pushing for "abortions right up until the moment of birth" in the same way you have both state-wide and national Republican pushing for "no-exception bans on abortion".

So no, I don't think I will. - Steve Rogers

The Kansas Democrats should be going to Democrat headquarters to teach them a thing or to about how to run a successful movement. The campaign that ended the amendment barely even mentioned the word abortion, talked about the amendment as a "strict government mandate" as in "Kansans don't want another government mandate" (alongside signs of coronavirus mask mandates, and a church closure announcement). They had a winning strategy for a red state. The national movement writes off these states and speaks openly about robbing their current political power in national elections.

The winning strategy was simply letting people vote on the issue. Something that, as pointed out, Republicans seem very disinclined to allow again because it would be terrible for their interests in banning abortion outright to appease their parties extremists - https://apnews.com/article/abortion-...b5bc1548518cf6

West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice scoffed Monday at a suggestion by Democratic lawmakers to let voters decide whether abortion should continue to be allowed in the state.

The Republican governor said the state’s abortion law falls under the scrutiny of the Legislature and the attorney general.

Because they know, especially after Kansas, that leaving the issue up to voters - you know, democracy - is just terribly inconvenient for the goals they want to achieve.

[Endus]

Just as soon as you admit the "pro-choice" has been co-opted by no-restrictions-ever extremists on the issue, just like the Democratic party and American progressive movement as a whole.

Respecting women's basic human dignity and self-ownership is in no way an "extreme" point of view.

But kudos on telling on yourself.

[tehdang]

I won't, because that's a strawman. You have no Democrats pushing for "abortions right up until the moment of birth" in the same way you have both state-wide and national Republican pushing for "no-exception bans on abortion".

So no, I don't think I will. - Steve Rogers

I, too, consider your post detached from reality. Framing it in opposite ideologies helps to illustrate it. Let me know when you don't consider it a strawman, because that's just about the point I'll be willing to do the same.

The winning strategy was simply letting people vote on the issue. Something that, as pointed out, Republicans seem very disinclined to allow again because it would be terrible for their interests in banning abortion outright to appease their parties extremists - https://apnews.com/article/abortion-...b5bc1548518cf6

Hmm, not a word in here about how to persuade and motivate people's votes ahead of a major issue. Democrats win a vote in Kansas, other Democrats have nothing to say beyond the Republican response.

Because they know, especially after Kansas, that leaving the issue up to voters - you know, democracy - is just terribly inconvenient for the goals they want to achieve.

Elected representatives write and vote on the laws. This includes which processes, if any, should be made to mimic direct democracy. This has turned out to be quite problematic for people that write off the states and call the voters stupid for not electing their preferred candidates.

[Edge-]

I, too, consider your post detached from reality. Framing it in opposite ideologies helps to illustrate it.

It doesn't, because that's a flat-out lie. The reverse is not happening, as desperately as you want it to.

Meanwhile, the actual horror stories of children being potentially forced to carry the fetus of their rapist and be forced to risk their life to give birth to it, stories of girls/women carrying failed pregnancies that have no chance of survival and will simply risk the health of the girl/mother, and more that Republicans keep denying are real, keep happening.

You're just simply rejecting reality because it's terribly inconvenient for your political ideology and its view of the world.

Let me know when you don't consider it a strawman, because that's just about the point I'll be willing to do the same.

When you have examples to show of serious pushes at the state and/or federal level for similar levels of extremism from Democrats.

We have examples of Republicans doing this, so surely you also have examples, right?

Hmm, not a word in here about how to persuade and motivate people's votes ahead of a major issue. Democrats win a vote in Kansas, other Democrats have nothing to say beyond the Republican response.

Democrats won? No sir, the voters of Kansas won. That's who voted, everyone in Kansas who wanted to. Republicans, Democrats, independents, non-party affiliated, and probably some folks for fringe third parties too.

That they happened to vote to support bodily autonomy for girls/women, which also happens to be a Democratic platform position, is a happy coincidence.

And as a reminder: Kansas is a largely Republican state. Though again, this doesn't address the Republican fear of voters actually being able to decide on positions because Republicans know that their official party positions are deeply unpopular nationally, and often even within their own states.

Elected representatives write and vote on the laws. This includes which processes, if any, should be made to mimic direct democracy. This has turned out to be quite problematic for people that write off the states and call the voters stupid for not electing their preferred candidates.

No, again. It just highlights how scared Republicans continue to be of actual voters. Because again, they know that even within red states, their party positions. Sure Kansas may have a fairly conservative Democratic governor, but a look at their legislature shows that it's 2:1 (or more) in favor of Republicans in both the House and the Senate.

Almost like they're relying on gerrymandering and property to enforce their ideology writ-large, even when their own voters don't support certain party positions like he current extremists position on girls/womens bodily autonomy.

[Endus]

When you have examples to show of serious pushes at the state and/or federal level for similar levels of extremism from Democrats.

We have examples of Republicans doing this, so surely you also have examples, right?

Even entertaining that possibility as actual "extremism" is pretty objectionable, frankly.

Is Canada an extremist country? Because we've had no restrictions on abortions since 1988.

[Edge-]

Is Canada an extremist country? Because we've had no restrictions on abortions since 1988.

Well, to hear the people still upset about the vaccine mandates in Canada...or whatever it is they're upset about now, if they even know...yeah, apparently. It's a communist country according to them!

[Dontrike]

Just as soon as you admit the "pro-choice" has been co-opted by no-restrictions-ever extremists on the issue, just like the Democratic party and American progressive movement as a whole.

That's a really shitty argument that brings in a bit of "herp derp both sides" into the equation.

- - - Updated - - -

Hmm, not a word in here about how to persuade and motivate people's votes ahead of a major issue. Democrats win a vote in Kansas, other Democrats have nothing to say beyond the Republican response.

Imagine the voters actually choosing something and you think it's a win for democrats. We get it, if the state decides against abortion you think it's amazing, but when the people decide the other way you believe it's evil. Air is less transparent than you.

[Jastall]

I, too, consider your post detached from reality. Framing it in opposite ideologies helps to illustrate it. Let me know when you don't consider it a strawman, because that's just about the point I'll be willing to do the same.

Hmm, not a word in here about how to persuade and motivate people's votes ahead of a major issue. Democrats win a vote in Kansas, other Democrats have nothing to say beyond the Republican response.

Elected representatives write and vote on the laws. This includes which processes, if any, should be made to mimic direct democracy. This has turned out to be quite problematic for people that write off the states and call the voters stupid for not electing their preferred candidates.

You used to at least seem like you had thought-out arguments for your positions on this subject, but the more time goes the more you simply resort to "nu-uh, both sides, also Democrats bad!" at every available opportunity.

[Nymrohd]

I don't see how no restrictions is extremism. If your approach to pro-choice is deontological and based on the pregnant person's right to control their body, restrictions are irrational. You either respect that people have an absolute right to control their own bodies or you don't.

[s_bushido]

I don't see how no restrictions is extremism.

Because when your position on this issue is as abhorrent as those of conservatives, you have to pretend that everyone else is just as bad as you are.