SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[Fugus]

This boy is completely unaware of gerrymandering or the fact a minority of this country has more power than the majority.

Pretty much, I still like to bring up North Carolina in 2018. We have 13 districts. The Republicans had 1 district that they run unopposed in.

Out of the 12 contested districts, the Republicans lost by over 164,000 votes and got 9 of them while the Democrats who won only got the other 3.

[Shadowferal]

4 judges currently on the Court all said that Roe was settle law and all of them now said "Nah, Roe was wrong!"
There are five justices that have reasons to be impeached, but there is no way to get them removed at the moment.

If we can outfit the two in orange coveralls I'm willing to call it even.

[szechuan]

It really doesn't matter which side you stand on with this. It was the correct ruling. Even bade Ginsburg, champion of women, thought it was bad law and should have been approached a different way.

Ginsburg wanted to expand Abortion Rights.

Turns out now, though, with it returning to a states rights issue, where people vote in representatives who represent THEIR views and make laws for their constituents, people hate democracy.

Donald Trump and George W. Bush lost the popular vote and were able to elect Republican Extremist SCOTUS judges.

[Lenonis]

Turns out now, though, with it returning to a states rights issue, where people vote in representatives who represent THEIR views and make laws for their constituents, people hate democracy.

Can we not pretend this is a states rights issue? That argument went out the window when the hypocrites on the right immediately turned around and declared they were going to try to enact a federal ban.

[Dead Moose Fandango]

It really doesn't matter which side you stand on with this. It was the correct ruling. Even bade Ginsburg, champion of women, thought it was bad law and should have been approached a different way.

Throwing the baby out with the bathwater (Ooooh, see what I did there?) is a terrible idea. We should have prepared a replacement before repealing Roe vs Wade.

[Lenonis]

How do you see this as a packed court? The justices orange man appointed were within his limits to appoint. Packing a court is what people are calling for now.

Incorrect. Educate yourself please.

[szechuan]

Can we not pretend this is a states rights issue? That argument went out the window when the hypocrites on the right immediately turned around and declared they were going to try to enact a federal ban.

states rights to be a POS forced birth fascist.

[Moadar]

So what happens to places where abortions are done in states that ban it? Do the police go and shut it down or what?

[fwc577]

For those who aren't yet aware, Donald Trump Jr. has taken to instagram to imply that Roe v Wade was overturned because Obama made fun of Trump at the 2011 correspondence dinner: https://www.instagram.com/p/CfMVK3mO...f-07751cbb0b61


Everyone who voted in 2020 MUST show up and vote in 2022 and 2024 and make these fucking idiots irrelevant.

[jonnysensible]

For those who aren't yet aware, Donald Trump Jr. has taken to instagram to imply that Roe v Wade was overturned because Obama made fun of Trump at the 2011 correspondence dinner: https://www.instagram.com/p/CfMVK3mO...f-07751cbb0b61


Everyone who voted in 2020 MUST show up and vote in 2022 and 2024 and make these fucking idiots irrelevant.

they wont be irrelevant if they people you vote for dont do anything

[Lenonis]

So what happens to places where abortions are done in states that ban it? Do the police go and shut it down or what?

Each law laid out the penalties for abortion providers. It differs state to state

[Gestopft]

So what happens to places where abortions are done in states that ban it? Do the police go and shut it down or what?

Presumably, but probably court injunctions first, loss of business/medical licenses, and whatever prescribed criminal charges for the providers involved. A whole, shitshow, I'm sure.

[Moadar]

Presumably, but probably court injunctions first, loss of business/medical licenses, and whatever prescribed criminal charges for the providers involved. A whole, shitshow, I'm sure.

This will definitely be a shit show. I want to say this will be where people learn the danger of going too far with something but no one ever really learns.

[Mihalik]

So what happens to places where abortions are done in states that ban it? Do the police go and shut it down or what?

Most bans carry significant jail sentences both on those providing it and the people having it. So essentially yes.

[Draco-Onis]

Most bans carry significant jail sentences both on those providing it and the people having it. So essentially yes.

Only a matter of time before a pregnant woman gets carried to jail or worse in those states.

[Gestopft]

This will definitely be a shit show. I want to say this will be where people learn the danger of going too far with something but no one ever really learns.

Reminds me of the old quote: “You can depend upon the Americans to do the right thing. But only after they have exhausted every other possibility.”

[Shadowferal]

Only a matter of time before a pregnant woman gets carried to jail or worse in those states.

And that is what needs to be seen. Make that sort of thing a public display. Force her to have a child against her will.

[Lenonis]

Most bans carry significant jail sentences both on those providing it and the people having it. So essentially yes.

I thought for the most part they weren't going after women. Just the providers. No?

[tehdang]

Actually it's really easy to keep up the Bodily Autonomy defense if someone wants to use this retort.

As I said to that Walsh-lookin'-dude earlier: I, with my hypothetical liver issues, cannot compel you, a hypothetical liver haver, to give me a chunk of your liver even if it means I'll die. You cannot force someone to give someone else blood, organs, or other tissues. You cannot force someone to fuck you, or to be your slave.

And in that same vein a woman shouldn't be compelled to incubate a life she has no intention on incubating.

The case of bodily autonomy here suffers after viability. The baby can be delivered alive, no more "forced liver donor" necessary, so proceeding to kill anyways just shows disrespect for life. At the even worst end of defending an extremist bodily autonomy argument, the moment just before birth, usually we don't give alternative of "continue to donate your liver, or just wait 30 minutes and nothing more is required."

Damn ya'll really love feelings over facts don't ya?

I'm not going to force you to contend with the logic of treating actual arguments, instead of just the pro-choice spin on arguments. Remember that the more pro-choice activists dismiss the heart of the conflict, the less they're able to persuade and legislate their preferred abortion rules into law.

Yeah the pro-lifers really come over as the rational ones.

Compared to the post I responded to, and ones on the same page, absolutely that's how they come across. They're grappling with the harder arguments on the legislative stage, and the sampling shown here of their opponents is dedicated to peremptory dismissal.

People are absolutely free to mourn miscarriages, to think a fetus is the same as a human being, to cordially detest abortion for any and all reason they might have, as much as they might like.

What's less understandable is why those holding these opinions should be able to force them unto others.

The classic "People are free to detest slavery, so just don't buy slaves ... please don't force your views of slavery on others." That's probably the only example of moral wrong that will break through here.

Back to the actual post context: A user was trying to point out a point of hypocrisy--asserting that a previous post showed a different user didn't truly believe abortion is killing children. The response was to remind him that people can and do mourn miscarriages. Logically, if nobody made an assertion that opposite arguers didn't actually believe what they said, then no argument would be necessary to retort to it. However, some people are not satisfied in saying they're right, but must go further to demand people who disagree even partially (pro-abortion, but admits that his side doesn't grapple enough with the reality of "Its a shitty situation for everyone") are actually arguing in bad faith. I have no problem with you saying "People are absolutely free to mourn miscarriages," because you're not personally accusing anyone of secretly admitting abortion doesn't end the life of an unborn baby.

[Edge-]

The response was to remind him that people can and do mourn miscarriages

I mourn my cup of spilled coffee in the morning. That doesn't mean it's a baby.