1. #3641
    Scarab Lord Nymrohd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    4,556
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    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.

  2. #3642
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    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?

  3. #3643
    Old God Captain N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Resident of Emerald City
    Posts
    10,403
    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    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.
    “You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it.”― Malcolm X

    I watch them fight and die in the name of freedom. They speak of liberty and justice, but for whom? -Ratonhnhaké:ton (Connor Kenway)

  4. #3644
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    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.

  5. #3645
    Quote Originally Posted by Mekh View Post
    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.
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  6. #3646
    nothing about a six week ban with no exceptions is a representation of what most people want

    no sane, decent human being would force a child to give birth to her own sibling/cousin

    if anyone claims to support this then you immediately know they are an evil piece of shit that should have absolutely no authority over anyone's life, let alone an entire state or country
    Last edited by Blur4stuff; 2022-07-03 at 07:58 PM.

  7. #3647
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    74,569
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Ohio has the right to restrict abortion, just as Indiana has the right to pass less strict restrictions.
    Literally the same argument as someone saying in 1858 that "Virginia has the right to enslave and commit atrocities against blacks".

    Skips right over whether doing so is ethical or not, which is the point. You're just bragging that Ohio has the "right" to be abusive and misogynist towards women. Why is that laudable, again?

    Maybe you'd prefer if the states had to ask you first?
    Maybe just "not beholden to 19th Century views of womanhood and not pushing religious doctrine on everyone who doesn't want to follow it, against their wills".

    They don't have to ask any of us, specifically. Just maybe choose not to be monsters who pursue abuse of innocents as their intended policy outcome.

    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.
    "Oh, a lot of our voters support monstrously evil things, so it's totes fine that we're monsters!"

    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.
    Or maybe no "compromise", because allowing some evil abuse of women is still pro-abuse-of-women.

    Maybe just don't do that. Maybe get called out for being misogynist theocratic trolls for wanting it, until you stop fucking doing so.


  8. #3648
    Herald of the Titans D Luniz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    The Coastal Plaguelands
    Posts
    2,676
    Im wondering what all these "state's rights" people will say when after the midterms, the GOP/GQP push for a federal ban
    "Law and Order", lots of places have had that, Russia, North Korea, Saddam's Iraq.
    Laws can be made to enforce order of cruelty and brutality.
    Equality and Justice, that is how you have peace and a society that benefits all.

  9. #3649
    Quote Originally Posted by D Luniz View Post
    Im wondering what all these "state's rights" people will say when after the midterms, the GOP/GQP push for a federal ban
    "Elections have consequences"

    "something something late-term abortions"

    "it's about life, we never said it was about state's right"

    "democrats just mad they can't kill babies anymore lulz"

    Pick argument at random or make a soup of it. That's likely what it'll look like.
    It is all that is left unsaid upon which tragedies are built -Kreia

    The internet: where to every action is opposed an unequal overreaction.

  10. #3650
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Omelas
    Posts
    57,948
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    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.
    Remember kids: it's totally okay for "representative democracy" in Ohio to pass legislation restricting women's bodily autonomy, but it's totally not okay for "representative democracy" in New York to pass legislation restricting guns. /s

    You're really telling on yourself with these shitty little double standards. Rofl. And I'm not even gonna get started on your nonsense supporting SCOTUS restricting state courts' ability to conduct judicial review of state legislation while also not questioning Marbury v. Madison at all.
    Last edited by Elegiac; 2022-07-03 at 09:12 PM.
    holy shit, we actually have the nofly list. holy fucking bingle. what?! :3

  11. #3651
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Literally the same argument as someone saying in 1858 that "Virginia has the right to enslave and commit atrocities against blacks".
    You'd more likely find someone saying that in 1958 than 1858. States' rights as it pertained to slavery wasn't a thing before the war, and pro-slavery advocates did things like demand Federal legislation protecting the personal right to own slaves from state intervention, as was the case with both the Fugitive Slave Act, which conscripted citizens of Free States to uphold the rights of slaveowners from other states, as well as the Confederate constitution, which banned its member states from abolishing slavery within their territory.

    That's the thing about Federalism: it's purpose is to give its advocates the ability to move between different jurisdictional levels, like it was a ladder, until they find the one where as a practical matter of legislative politics they can most easily get their way. They do this all the time with stuff like minimum wage laws.

  12. #3652
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    These people are just garbage.
    Why do you have to insult garbage?

  13. #3653
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Ohio has the right to restrict abortion, just as Indiana has the right to pass less strict restrictions.
    "It's Ohio's right to take rights away from people" Holy shit......

    You gonna start saying "It's okay for Ohio to treat blacks as 3/5ths a person" next?

    Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866

  14. #3654
    Legendary! Darththeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away
    Posts
    6,589
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Remember kids: it's totally okay for "representative democracy" in Ohio to pass legislation restricting women's bodily autonomy, but it's totally not okay for "representative democracy" in New York to pass legislation restricting guns. /s

    You're really telling on yourself with these shitty little double standards. Rofl. And I'm not even gonna get started on your nonsense supporting SCOTUS restricting state courts' ability to conduct judicial review of state legislation while also not questioning Marbury v. Madison at all.
    Those two decisions show the hypocrisy in the SCOTUS.

    Right to Privacy does not exist because it hasn't been around long enough.
    However, the founders and for most of the US existence, believed states had the powers to place restrictions on guns and that the 2nd Amendment was a collective right not an individual one. It was in 2008 where it became recognized by a court case as an individual right.

    So, 2008 is long enough for guns, but 1973 is too soon for abortion.
    Peace is a lie. There is only passion. Through passion I gain strength. Through strength I gain power.
    Through power I gain victory. Through victory my chains are broken. The Force shall set me free.
    –The Sith Code

  15. #3655
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Omelas
    Posts
    57,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Darththeo View Post
    Those two decisions show the hypocrisy in the SCOTUS.

    Right to Privacy does not exist because it hasn't been around long enough.
    However, the founders and for most of the US existence, believed states had the powers to place restrictions on guns and that the 2nd Amendment was a collective right not an individual one. It was in 2008 where it became recognized by a court case as an individual right.

    So, 2008 is long enough for guns, but 1973 is too soon for abortion.
    Well yeah, it's just funny that tehdang is still pretending the conservative majority on SCOTUS is issuing genuinely well-reasoned legal opinions (they aren't) and any instance of them not doing so is basically the same thing as broad constructionist civil rights cases so therefore it's okay (it isn't).

    Like I said, it's all obfuscation; conservatives hide behind thought-terminating arguments like originalism or what is basically the equivalent of judicial whataboutism because they know their positions are indefensible on the merits.
    holy shit, we actually have the nofly list. holy fucking bingle. what?! :3

  16. #3656
    The Woman Whose Abortion Ban Death Lead to Two-Third Referendum in Predominantly Roman Catholic Ireland to Legalize Abortion.

    Back pain first sent Halappanavar to Galway University Hospital on Oct. 21, 2012. She was sent home but returned just hours later after she “felt something coming down” and said she had “pushed a leg back in.” A midwife confirmed no fetal parts could be seen, according to the official report. Later that day, she described the pain as “unbearable,” according to the official report.

    She was admitted and on Oct. 23, a doctor told her a miscarriage was “inevitable” due to the rupturing of the membranes that protect the fetus in the womb, despite the fact that her baby was a normal size and was registering a heart beat. The medical team had decided to “monitor the fetal heart in case an accelerated delivery might be possible once the fetal heart stopped,” the official report said.In Halappanavar’s case, an accelerated delivery would likely have meant a medically induced miscarriage.

    When, on Oct. 23, Halappanavar and her husband, Praveen, asked about medically inducing the miscarriage instead of delaying the inevitable, a doctor told them: “Under Irish law, if there’s no evidence of risk to the life of the mother, our hands are tied so long as there’s a fetal heart[beat],” the official report said.

    The report added that once their waters have broken, pregnant women are at very high risk of infection, which in some cases can be fatal.

    On Oct. 28 at 1:09 a.m., having caught an infection and gone into septic shock, Halappanavar was pronounced dead.

    “It was a life-threatening condition but they took the view of not doing anything because of the legal framework,” Arulkumaran said in the interview.



    Irish law in 2012 allowed abortion to prevent a “potential major hazard or threat to the mother’s life.” But the Halappanavar report said a doctor decided the point at which an abortion was “allowable in Irish law” had not been reached.

    This is not a theoretical scenario in the U.S., said Dr. Jen Gunter, an OB-GYN based in California and the author of “The Vagina Bible.”

    “I’ve personally been in a situation where due to the state law, abortion was illegal at our medical center and we had a patient who needed one,” she said in an interview, declining to share any further details of the case aside from the fact that it was in Kansas, where abortion is legal up to 22 weeks with some restrictions.

    “It wasn’t a pregnancy complication, her organs were failing because of the extra burden of pregnancy due to her underlying condition,” she added.

    The attorneys at the medical center in Kansas told Gunter she couldn’t perform the abortion unless the woman was in “imminent danger.”

    “I was like, ‘What does that mean?’ And their interpretation was that she was going to die in the next three minutes,” she said. Gunter said the hospital attorneys set up a call with the state politician involved in the legislation, who told her, “Do what you think is best, doctor.”

    “So I thought, ‘Then why do we have this law?’” she said.



    Gunter is unsparing in her prediction for what tighter abortion laws could mean in the U.S.

    She said women could die despite better antibiotics to treat septic abortions

    “Halappanavar? That won’t ever change things in the States when that happens here, and it will happen.”

    Lawmaker Ivana Bacik, leader of the Irish Labour Party and a long-standing advocate of abortion rights, led a protest against the Supreme Court decision outside the American Embassy in Dublin on Monday “in solidarity for American women and girls.”

    “Our experience here is that banning and criminalizing abortion puts women’s lives in danger. It’s very clear that’s the appalling reality now for American women,” she said.

    “If you remove the right to abortion from women and girls, you endanger lives. The reality is that there will be life-threatening conditions in pregnancy that will threaten lives and health.”

    Bacik said Halappanavar’s story was instrumental in turning public opinion toward a “yes” vote in 2018. As was the case of a brain-dead woman in Ireland whose life support machine was only turned off more than three weeks after she was declared clinically dead in 2014 following a protracted legal battle because she was 18 weeks pregnant.


    It will be 100 times worse in the US. Ireland maternal mortality rate when Halappanavar died in 2012 was 6 per 100,000 live births. Current maternal mortality rates in pro-life states range between 27 to over 60 per 100,000 live births. We may be looking at triple digit maternal mortality rates in some US states.

  17. #3657
    Scarab Lord Nymrohd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    4,556
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasulis View Post
    The Woman Whose Abortion Ban Death Lead to Two-Third Referendum in Predominantly Roman Catholic Ireland to Legalize Abortion.









    It will be 100 times worse in the US. Ireland maternal mortality rate when Halappanavar died in 2012 was 6 per 100,000 live births. Current maternal mortality rates in pro-life states range between 27 to over 60 per 100,000 live births. We may be looking at triple digit maternal mortality rates in some US states.
    I think I said it earlier. You may well lose more women to botched abortions than you lost men in Vietnam. So maybe you need an equal response.

  18. #3658
    One of the strongest motivations behind these bans is to increase white population (so they believe). What they fail to understand, as others have pointed out, is that it's likely to reduce the white population. Not just from women's deaths, but from the extra effort people will put into not getting pregnant in the first place. Not just women, but men too.

    The two younger generations have already been avoiding parenthood. That way of life is only going to get more popular.
    Last edited by Blur4stuff; 2022-07-04 at 10:46 PM.

  19. #3659
    Quote Originally Posted by Blur4stuff View Post
    One of the strongest motivations behind these bans is to increase white population (so they believe). What they fail to understand, as others have pointed out, is that it's likely to reduce the white population. Not just from women's deaths, but from the extra effort people will put into not getting pregnant in the first place. Not just women, but men too.

    The two younger generations have already been avoiding parenthood. That way of life is only going to get more popular.
    You want us to have kids?

    Fucking pay us enough to do that.
    Blessed are the fornicates, may we bend down to be their whores. Blessed are the rich, may our labor deliver them more.
    Blessed are the envious; bless the slothful, the wrathful, the vain. Blessed are the gluttonous, may they feast us to famine and war.
    What of the pious, the pure of heart, the peaceful, the meek, the mourning, and the merciful? All doomed, all doomed

  20. #3660
    Quote Originally Posted by Blur4stuff View Post
    the extra effort people will put into not getting pregnant in the first place. Not just women, but men too.
    Already happening.
    https://www.fatherly.com/news/one-te...l-abortion-ban

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •