SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[Cthulhu 2020]

Man that Varx guy had the weirdest fucking breeding kink. Listen I'm not gonna kink shame, but when you let your kinks spill over into terrible law, that's gonna be shamed.

[Nurasu]

...did you just really Godwin me?

Do you want to go back and read my reasons for why I've taken this stance or just throw out Nazi references?

- - - Updated - - -

*shrug* Perhaps. But I'm also running under the assumption they are aware of how such a ruling could backfire for conservatives. I've acknowledged several times I could be wrong about this but i don't think I am. I don't think the political will is the same, nor the issue so easily decided as Roe v Wade.

Time will tell who is right.

I think these decisions, as far as the Supreme Court go, are far more fragile than Roe now since they were based on Roe's precedent. How many states will ban homosexuality after the Supreme Court cases fail on the new merits? I know at least Idaho would have to take action to repeal their sodomy laws, and the governorship was nearly taken by the Q party just recently.

[Endus]

How? I hear all this outrage at how weak the Dems are...but there is still the reality that they don't have the political strength to do anything major. That's the reality and not a factor at how tough or aggressive they are.

Maybe Biden has some path via executive orders - I don't know. But it would need to be something that would survive a legal challenge otherwise literally all they have left is rhetoric, meaningless gestures, and fundraising.

Prosecute Congressional lawbreakers, particularly those which would fall afoul of the 14th Amendment.
Call out their opponents in plain language, rather than just bland disappointment. To their faces, too, not just the press.
Take action on things you can do. You don't need much to expand the Supreme Court's bench size.
Put bills forward to effect meaningful change. Not the half-assed version that won't achieve the goal. If Republicans shoot it down, blame them. That's better than passing something so watered-down that it's meaningless, which is actively worse than doing nothing.

There's gonna be legal challenges. There's gonna be pushback. That's true no matter what. So stop wringing your hands and get to fuckin' work.

I fundamentally do not accept the idea that nothing can be done. If that's seriously the reality, then we're talking about a nation that's already systemically failed and is in the process of inevitable and complete collapse. You're telling me the United States of America will shortly no longer exist as a nation, not in the form it currently takes at least. That's certainly possible, but I'm not that defeatist. Particularly not when Democrats are not even fighting. They're hemming and hawing and saying "gosh that's terrible" rather than doing anything meaningful.

[Darththeo]

*shrug* Perhaps. But I'm also running under the assumption they are aware of how such a ruling could backfire for conservatives. I've acknowledged several times I could be wrong about this but i don't think I am. I don't think the political will is the same, nor the issue so easily decided as Roe v Wade.

Time will tell who is right.

Here is the thing, they don't really have to strike down the full faith and credit clause directly.
There are ways around it. Conservative already want to privatize governmental services, and they believe private businesses can choose their own associates. So the "state" can recognize it, but this former governmental service is now run by a private business and that business is perfectly allowed to choose what is a recognized marriage.

Even my very blue state has former government jobs done by private companies.

[Lenonis]

I think these decisions, as far as the Supreme Court go, are far more fragile than Roe now since they were based on Roe's precedent. How many states will ban homosexuality after the Supreme Court cases fail on the merits? I know at least Idaho would have to take action to repeal their sodomy laws, and the governorship was nearly taken by the Q party just recently.

Well I think we have two questions on the table then.

1) Will the SCOTUS take action to overturn gay marriage? Sure - I don't disagree the odds of that went up substantially after today. I'm still not convinced one justice saying it should be reconsidered means it's a death knell for this. But definitely a warning sign.
2) Will states then try to outlaw gay marriages, including voiding those from other states? This is where I think the fallout from these decisions will make them tread carefully. I also think they'll face more potential backlash from their voters than the abortion question. Not to mention we don't even know if they legally can.

[Darththeo]

Well I think we have two questions on the table then.

1) Will the SCOTUS take action to overturn gay marriage? Sure - I don't disagree the odds of that went up substantially after today. I'm still not convinced one justice saying it should be reconsidered means it's a death knell for this. But definitely a warning sign.
2) Will states then try to outlaw gay marriages, including voiding those from other states? This is where I think the fallout from these decisions will make them tread carefully. I also think they'll face more potential backlash from their voters than the abortion question. Not to mention we don't even know if they legally can.

Prior to it being ruled on, gay married couples that relocated to another state were denied recognition as being married. This wasn't even that long ago.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Did I say we should stand idle?

I mean...you didn't think I'd take offense to being compared to a nazi apologist?

Do better.

I mean, if I was really calling you a nazi apologist...do you think I would be particulary concerned about whether or not you'd take offense to it?

I'm just stating your attitude that the GOP won't go after other things now that they've put RvW down because you don't think there is enough political will to do it reminds me of that quote.

[Lenonis]

Prosecute Congressional lawbreakers, particularly those which would fall afoul of the 14th Amendment.

Not sure what this has to do with abortion?

Call out their opponents in plain language, rather than just bland disappointment. To their faces, too, not just the press.

Sure - but that's empty rhetoric. I'm not disagreeing they should, but it's not going to change anything. But yes, they absolutely should.

Take action on things you can do. You don't need much to expand the Supreme Court's bench size.

You know they don't have the power to do that. you know that.

Put bills forward to effect meaningful change. Not the half-assed version that won't achieve the goal. If Republicans shoot it down, blame them. That's better than passing something so watered-down that it's meaningless, which is actively worse than doing nothing.

So back to empty rhetoric then?

I fundamentally do not accept the idea that nothing can be done.

Right know it's not that nothing can be done but the political reality is there is very little of meaning that can be done.

If that's seriously the reality, then we're talking about a nation that's already systemically failed and is in the process of inevitable and complete collapse.

Eh. It also means the republicans can't get anything done (talking congress and POTUS here).

I'm not arguing for one second that the Dems shouldn't get loud. Or shouldn't try. Or shouldn't fight.

I'm just saying there is little they can actually ​do.

- - - Updated - - -

Here is the thing, they don't really have to strike down the full faith and credit clause directly.
There are ways around it. Conservative already want to privatize governmental services, and they believe private businesses can choose their own associates. So the "state" can recognize it, but this former governmental service is now run by a private business and that business is perfectly allowed to choose what is a recognized marriage.

And then this swings around to my point that the more complicated and difficult something is the more political willpower it takes and I just don't know that this is where the conservatives are going to try.

[Cthulhu 2020]

This whole "Ok, so they went after abortion...but that doesn't mean they'll be coming for Gay Marriage et al next" position you've taken really stinks of this:

Republicans have already stated that their eyes are on "the sanctity of marriage".

And just imagine, abortion is now no longer a guaranteed right all because Republicans got people riled up over some silly harmless emails.

[Lenonis]

Prior to it being ruled on, gay married couples that relocated to another state were denied recognition as being married. This wasn't even that long ago.

I guess here is the issue - I don't see how they could overturn the ruling without resolving the underlying issue of the full faith and credit clause that caused this ruling to happen in the first place. And I don't see how they would do so in a way that would allow states to invalidate marriage contracts forged in other states without causing an enormous amount of other issues.

Although....I would kinda like to see this happen and then blue states declare any marriages of registered republicans invalid. Seems like a sweet way to get revenge.

[Darththeo]

And then this swings around to my point that the more complicated and difficult something is the more political willpower it takes and I just don't know that this is where the conservatives are going to try.

Prior to gay marriage being recognized by a court decision they were revisiting, state were not recognizing gay marriage. A gay couple moving to a state that did not recognize it had to get a power of attorney (something straight couples don't need) in order to insure they had similar but not the same rights as a straight couple.

Again, this wasn't that long ago.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Republicans have already stated that their eyes are on "the sanctity of marriage".

And just imagine, abortion is now no longer a guaranteed right all because Republicans got people riled up over some silly harmless emails.

Well, that's exactly what I'm getting at. This whole "there isn't enough political will..." attitude is exactly what a lot of people used to say about RvW.

[Endus]

Not sure what this has to do with abortion?

Changes the landscape of Congress and the Senate, potentially allowing legislation to get passed. You wanted to talk about functional realities, so I responded in kind.

You know they don't have the power to do that. you know that.

As I wrapped that post; if you can't pass legislation, your country's already a failed system, the plug has already been pulled, and it's just a matter of waiting for the last gasps of air to escape the lungs.

Don't keep pointing to complete systemic failure and pretending that's just business as usual.

If you actually mean this, then it's time to tear the entire system down. By force, if it won't go quietly. It means you've had a quiet civil war, and you've lost, and the country died in the night, and nobody's quite noticed.

Again; I'm not that defeatist. I think things can be done. I just think Democrats can't be fucked to try.

[Darththeo]

I guess here is the issue - I don't see how they could overturn the ruling without resolving the underlying issue of the full faith and credit clause that caused this ruling to happen in the first place. And I don't see how they would do so in a way that would allow states to invalidate marriage contracts forged in other states without causing an enormous amount of other issues.

Although....I would kinda like to see this happen and then blue states declare any marriages of registered republicans invalid. Seems like a sweet way to get revenge.

Again, it was kind of what it was before the ruling.

[Lenonis]

I'm just stating your attitude that the GOP won't go after other things now that they've put RvW down because you don't think there is enough political will to do it reminds me of that quote.

Sorry - long week and I think I misread your intent there.

I mean - there is definitely such a thing as political will. Both sides don't tackle issues as vigorously as they could because of this very issue - so it's a real thing. And, again, I'm by no means advocating inaction. I'm just saying the political price to pay for banning gay marriage or even worse outlawing homosexuality would be enormous - likely far more than the abortion ruling.

And again, I could be wrong (I should probably just put this in my sig).

- - - Updated - - -

Prior to gay marriage being recognized by a court decision they were revisiting, state were not recognizing gay marriage. A gay couple moving to a state that did not recognize it had to get a power of attorney (something straight couples don't need) in order to insure they had similar but not the same rights as a straight couple.

Again, this wasn't that long ago.

Attitudes have changed drastically even in that short of time. That's what makes the topic of LGB rights so much different than others.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, that's exactly what I'm getting at. This whole "there isn't enough political will..." attitude is exactly what a lot of people used to say about RvW.

Except I'd argue the political will about abortion has been pretty constant in the last couple decades. Not the same story for gay rights.

- - - Updated - - -

Don't keep pointing to complete systemic failure and pretending that's just business as usual.

We got a lot of problems. So please don't take this as me trying to paint us as some great system...cause it ain't.

But our political system has always been designed to be...well...incremental. Now it's gotten so much worse with the extreme partisanship to the point where...yeah, it's probably broken and no longer working as intended.

But I don't know that I'd say we've reached the point where we are a doomed state and the decline is inevitable and it's all unsalvageable.

If you actually mean this, then it's time to tear the entire system down. By force, if it won't go quietly. It means you've had a quiet civil war, and you've lost, and the country died in the night, and nobody's quite noticed.

Are we at this point? I dunno - I think the next decade is going to be crucial to seeing if things are gone beyond repair or we are at a low point to recover from. Some of this will depend on if the GOP can actually break the system enough to essentially become a dictatorship before they lose power.

I just think Democrats can't be fucked to try.

This is one thing we'll agree on. Why the Dems seem to insist on playing nice, trying to be bipartisan, and just accepting the abuse is beyond me.

- - - Updated - - -

Again, it was kind of what it was before the ruling.

You do realize my point is those issues were what caused it to require a ruling in the first place? And those issues will just remain unresolved without some ruling? This needs to be settled in a constitutional manner and no one has pointed out a way it could be without some pretty major consequences that aren't likely acceptable to the SCOTUS.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Not sure what this has to do with abortion?

If we prosecuted every legislative lawmaker who has broken a law, we'd lose a few democrats and nearly every Republican. And as he said, falling afoul of the 14th amendment, let's not forget all of the recent revelations at just how much Republicans tried to swing the election in Trump's favor, all the way down to sending Trump hats and pennants to Georgia election poll watchers. Like literally trying to break election fraud laws without shame, because they know that if they're caught, they'll not be punished anyway.

Why should Republicans NOT try to break electoral laws, when not getting caught means they stand to gain, and getting caught means they lose nothing?

And this all comes back to Republicans trying to change far more than abortion. I said it earlier in this thread and I'll say it again, if you think Roe vs Wade is "the line" where they're going to stop, you're horribly mistaken, because they are coming for gay marriage soon.

[Mayhem]

That map is fucking insane

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...-wade-00037695

[Katchii]

Republicans have already stated that their eyes are on "the sanctity of marriage".

And just imagine, abortion is now no longer a guaranteed right all because Republicans got people riled up over some silly harmless emails.

"Sanctity of marriage," from a cult that unironically practically worshipped and followed a well known adulterer, and who are represented by senators who haven't really done much to hide their infidelities and marital indiscretions.

Fuck these people.

It doesn't take "political will" it just takes people in power willing to do whatever the fuck they want regardless of the laws and consequences. It's the same thing as the bootstrap fallacy that people born with a silver spoon in their mouth. If you work really hard, earning an honest wage, diligently doing your job you'll eventually be just as wealthy as these other wealthy people with absolutely zero scruples to fuck over their fellow man for a dollar. The Dems are currently the honest hard working person with the Republicans as the already wealthy people...in this example anyway.

[david0925]

I hope people that choose to abstain from voting or vote Red because the blue candidate is not good enough for them learn that because of how shitty of a system the SC is (life term so they can be "non-Partisan", when it's going to take Partisan effort to put one in it), you can't ever afford to put a red President in office, EVER. If you are actually horrified by what they're doing, vote blue.

It's probably too late for the next few decades due to life term, but that's the best you can do.

[Fugus]

This is one thing we'll agree on. Why the Dems seem to insist on playing nice, trying to be bipartisan, and just accepting the abuse is beyond me.

I have a theory, much of it consists on what the Democrats SAY versus what they actually want. Remember how old these people are and what values they grew up in. What their values are based more on that versus what they actually say to their voters and what their voters want. Again, I differ to gay marriage and how the DNC didn't lift a finger and just supported it without action till the Supreme Court took that political football from them.

Many in the DNC want the exact same thing the RNC want, they just can't say it because of their voters, so they mainly just try and stay out of the way of it happening while throwing a wrench into slowing progress if they think they can and get away with it.

Explains their intentional weakness pretty well through the decades and makes sense when you are talking about people who are largely 60+ years old and grew up in the time where being a minority meant you weren't human and me being left handed was reason enough to look down on me.

Also why I said much of this stuff won't be fixed until they and their voters largely die off.

- - - Updated - - -

Slave labor, basically. They want an easily manipulated and impoverished workforce to fight their wars and sustain the lifestyles enjoyed by the economic elite.

Also a huge thing, why they attack minorities, gays and anyone else they can. A weakened lower class who doesn't have support is a good source of cheap labor who can also be used to attack the wages of majority while lying to that same majority and blaming those same lower class people to keep them from looking up and watching you steal their children's futures from them before they are even old enough to have it.