SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[Cthulhu 2020]

Can't wait for conservatives to start crying about abortion clinics built on state lines around the oppressive red states. "SOMETHING SOMETHING WAHHH WAHHH ABORTION TOURISM" Then we've got 10 year olds needing to travel to get an abortion because they were the victim of rape and their home state just makes it illegal before one might even know they're pregnant.

[Endus]

And the Vatican (a theocratic elective absolute monarchy without female suffrage) clearly sees it differently
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...rights_en.html
Their opinion matters as they are permanent observers in the UN, and they are promoting that agenda.

No one but a Catholic should give the slightest whiff of a shit what the fucking Vatican thinks about anything. They're an institution that has, on the whole, been at the forefront of a great deal of human misery and suffering from the early Medieval period all the way through to the current day, with harms still ongoing and unaddressed.

I won't say they're "evil", but they sure as shit don't want to take any responsibility for their own actions and history, while still getting to dictate to millions. They're authoritarian assholes, at best. And that includes Francis.

Their positions are also religious in nature, and thus of absolutely zero relevance to any government.

The simplest idea would be to actually have abortion (and other bodily autonomy) as a human right, instead of trying to "interpret" that from the document. But the "universal human rights" is even less open for amendments than the US constitution, and the ones interpreting it are even less democratic.

Why would you ever pick out a small subset of health procedures and declare those to be a human right, unto themselves, when it's already covered under "health" and "bodily autonomy"?

The idea of human rights is to make the categories as broad and inclusive as possible, precisely to avoid cherry-picking little loopholes.

[cubby]

I mean the gop said the same thing a decade ago. Times change the pendulum swings it will sway back in time.

The GQP says a whole bunch of things that have nothing to do with reality. You're reference is one of them.

Just as quick and topical "for instance" on the difference between the parties:

A 10-year-old was forced to cross state lines for an abortion after Ohio's ban went into place. The Indiana doctor who helped her will soon be unable to assist others.

Let us know if you have any questions.

- - - Updated - - -

Isn't it the most fun when Americans have to become state immigrants to get healthcare? The US is the upper lower class of countries pretending to be upper upper class.

And the worst part, GQP parents would have found access to an abortion for their 10-year-old daughter.

[Santti]

And the worst part, GQP parents would have found access to an abortion for their 10-year-old daughter.

Oh yeah, this is only really a problem for those who don't have the money. If you do, you are fine. Inconvenienced perhaps, but nothing major. We will hear news stories about how people opposing abortions are getting abortions themselves, or for their family members, for sure.

[Mayhem]

So if women have fewer rights than men, fewer rights than a fetus because life is sacred and begins at impregnation, what's the argument against rape being legal?

[Captain N]

So if women have fewer rights than men, fewer rights than a fetus because life is sacred and begins at impregnation, what's the argument against rape being legal?

You missed the part 5 years ago where Ohio (gee this place is fucked when it comes to women's rights) couldn't find any Republican backing to a bill making drugging your wife and raping her illegal?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a7601411.html

[Mihalik]

You missed the part 5 years ago where Ohio (gee this place is fucked when it comes to women's rights) couldn't find any Republican backing to a bill making drugging your wife and raping her illegal?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a7601411.html

Also known as foreplay in the Cosby household.

Good ol' family values.

[Forogil]

No one but a Catholic should give the slightest whiff of a shit what the fucking Vatican thinks about anything.

Possibly, but that's not how it currently is.

Their positions are also religious in nature, and thus of absolutely zero relevance to any government.

Which part of theocratic is unclear?

Why would you ever pick out a small subset of health procedures and declare those to be a human right, unto themselves, when it's already covered under "health" and "bodily autonomy"?

Why would you let judges instead of medical professional decide on matters of health with vague interpretations?

Considering that the current 'universal human rights' don't explicitly list 'bodily autonomy' and spend times on stating that children are protected whether born in and out of wedlock, and the health-protection gives special considerations for 'widows' adding abortion-rights would have fit right in - if the signatories had intended to include it (which they clearly didn't at that time).

We have seen that viewing it as covered by other clauses leads to current compromise from HRC, and SCOTUS deciding and undeciding such matters; do you find that working as intended?

The idea of human rights is to make the categories as broad and inclusive as possible, precisely to avoid cherry-picking little loopholes.

The practice of human rights is different; as an outdated compromise it's combination of vague language for some parts, and specific language for others.

[Twdft]

So if women have fewer rights than men, fewer rights than a fetus because life is sacred and begins at impregnation, what's the argument against rape being legal?

/s (mentioning this right from the start)

Does rape really exist though, when abortion is outlawed? Let's say some creep fancies a woman and really is dtf and tells her so. Can she legally say no to him? That would prevent a potential life!

[Nymrohd]

/s (mentioning this right from the start)

Does rape really exist though, when abortion is outlawed? Let's say some creep fancies a woman and really is dtf and tells her so. Can she legally say no to him? That would prevent a potential life!

That would also include masturbation then.

[Poopymonster]

That would also include masturbation then.

They've been trying to do that for decades now.

[Nymrohd]

They've been trying to do that for decades now.

I think you mean millennia.

[Poopymonster]

I think you mean millennia.

I stand corrected, Onan and all that ̶f̶a̶p̶p̶e̶r̶y̶ frippery.

[Dontrike]

Tweet skips all the shit she says about "its a total tragedy, it'll keep me up at night" before she gets to the bit about the law. Generally tried to deflect to "forget this, we should do something about these rapists" instead of "one tragedy leading to another tragedy." So, she's "upset" over this, but not upset enough to actually fucking do anything. Standard republican.

Does the word "multitasking" not exist in the US?

It doesn't for them because she will not be kept up at night, they want kids knocked up.

[Beefhammer]

If already posted I apologize, but now these conservative pieces of shit want the states they reside in to pass anti 1st ammendment laws so they won't have picketers outside their homes. Fuck these assholes. They do not deserve a moments peace for the rest of their lives.

[Nymrohd]

Therein lies the problem. If nothing else, just stop it being a lifetime appointment. That's the dumbest shit ever.

See if you get down to it the issue is not the SCOTUS. It's that you use a Common Law system. Under the civil law system used by the majority of the planet outside Commonwealth or former Commonwealth countries and the few places using customary or religious law, judges simply do not have this level of authority
Though to be fair, abolishing past precedent and deciding what is and is not settled law is against the very principle of common law itself.

[s_bushido]

These people are just garbage.

Not having an exception for rape follows "logically" from the pretense that "abortion is murder" (because a child's father being a monster shouldn't mean the child has to die), so they pretty much have to go that route if they want to pretend that this horseshit has some basis in reality.

But I don't want to hear about what "over 90% of abortions" are from these fuckers who refuse to acknowledge that "over 90% of abortions" are done before the fetus is...what...the size of a grape?

[Captain N]

But I don't want to hear about what "over 90% of abortions" are from these fuckers who refuse to acknowledge that "over 90% of abortions" are done before the fetus is...what...the size of a grape?

The size of a grape and if you ask them to verify the picture of said grape is human they'll vehemently claim it is -- when in reality it's an elephant or dog fetus.

[Forogil]

See if you get down to it the issue is not the SCOTUS. It's that you use a Common Law system. Under the civil law system used by the majority of the planet outside Commonwealth or former Commonwealth countries and the few places using customary or religious law, judges simply do not have this level of authority

Exactly, but for a long time people still revered SCOTUS.

Though to be fair, abolishing past precedent and deciding what is and is not settled law is against the very principle of common law itself.

True, but the judges figured out that they could grabgive themselves that power.

[tehdang]

I'm sure @tehdang will be right along to tell us, why this is fine because Ohio as a state has the perfect size to decide that children have to give birth to children now.

Ohio has the right to restrict abortion, just as Indiana has the right to pass less strict restrictions. Maybe you'd prefer if the states had to ask you first? Or maybe, in a representative democracy, you're trying to skip the stage where a change in the law would be debated and voted on, based on age of the mother, or 6 weeks being far too early. Maybe, I don't know, use this case to argue that a compromise beyond 8 weeks is more suited to address rare situations, or some exception in the case of these rare situations.