SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[Nurasu]

You don't actually think that will change anything or persuade anyone, right? Who are you "calling out" to? The majority of the country (especially minorities) are religious! Feels like a big portion of the left is constantly trying to get the attention of a referee that doesn't exist.

Anyway it sometimes feels like y'all weren't around in the 00s (maybe you weren't?) when we had effectively one political party for many years and theocrats seemed utterly invincible. The country is actually far less religious now and things have probably gotten worse.

African Americans in particular tend to be very religious but also pretty pro-abortion, while latinos tend to be religious and pro-life. This is about way more than religion.

The right has systematically kept its eye on the prize (in plain sight!) for decades. It's a genuinely incredible feat and act of political organizing over generations.

There is absolutely no equivalent on the left since there's no consensus position, no unifying principle, no firm ideological core on anything. And worst of all, no demonstrated ability to actually organize on a meaningful level.

Abortion is only a relatively recent issue for the religious right. Their unification is based on nothing more than "anti-Democrat".

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/08/10975...eligious-right

[Tyris Flare]

Why would I give any shits about "persuading" these people? I'm perfectly satisfied with marginalizing and condemning them openly.

I similarly don't presume I can "persuade" a Nazi to stop being an antisemitic abuser. I'm perfectly satisfied making sure everyone around him knows he's a Nazi and having his life be ruined as a result. That's plenty for me, thanks. I couldn't care less if he changes his ways.

I wasn't talking about/to "religious people". See the whole first line, there; if your religion dictates how you, a follower, should conduct yourself, I don't care what it would have you choose for yourself. Whether that's wearing restrictive religious garb, fasting or other dietary constraints, refusing certain medical treatments, whatever. I really don't care; it's your life, I just hope you're happy, and I'll fully support your freedoms to do so.

I was commenting on religious extremists, theo-fascists. The Christian Nationalist types. A very specific subgroup who are wildly abusive and bigoted towards any and all who don't share their views.

That's not remotely descriptive of "all religious people", nor even "all Christians". Not even "most" of either. It's a specific very loud set of minorities.

Do you believe this has been an effective tactic for the left in TYOL 2022 when Republicans have solidified a generational 6-3 majority in the court and are on the cusp of potentially taking total control of the government soon?

This reads like "I don't care about winning as long as I feel good."

Which, I mean, knock yourself out. I support your freedom to have a defeatist religion.

- - - Updated - - -

Abortion is only a relatively recent issue for the religious right. Their unification is based on nothing more than "anti-Democrat".

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/08/10975...eligious-right

Uh...the right has been working to repeal Roe since it was decided, chief. They have never been quiet about this my entire life.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think you can persuade anyone on the issue and you are incorrect the pro-choice movement has been pretty strong on the left for decades. The problem is and remains the democratic party which takes joy in spitting in the face of the base when it comes to issues. We are here today in no small part due to democrats running on codifying Roe V. Wade for 50 years and doing nothing once in power.

Considering that abortion has been getting consistently more difficult to access for a generation, I don't know how anyone would call the pro-choice movement strong. Like nearly all left movements, it has been consistently on defense for decades

[Endus]

Do you believe this has been an effective tactic for the left in TYOL 2022 when Republicans have solidified a generational 6-3 majority in the court and are on the cusp of potentially taking total control of the government soon?

Given that the status of the SCOTUS is entirely down to a single election cycle and the following election cycle saw a record-breaking surge for Democrats in direct response, yeah.

The long-term systemic issues that are likely to result are problems with the US governmental system and have absolutely fuck-all to do with "persuading" anyone of anything.

Also, I'm not American.

[Draco-Onis]

Considering that abortion has been getting consistently more difficult to access for a generation, I don't know how anyone would call the pro-choice movement strong. Like nearly all left movements, it has been consistently on defense for decades

Because the right wing has been constantly winning by passing laws while democrats have been content sitting on their ass. The movement moved public opinion but to the party it has been nothing more than something to run on every election cycle.

[Nurasu]

Uh...the right has been working to repeal Roe since it was decided, chief. They have never been quiet about this my entire life.

Compared to the length of time they had no issues with it in America, that's frankly not very long. It gives away their game that it's related to their politics, not their religion (the former of which has superseded the latter for American Conservative Christians).

[Endus]

Compared to the length of time they had no issues with it in America, that's frankly not very long. It gives away their game that it's related to their politics, not their religion (the former of which has superseded the latter for American Conservative Christians).

This really is the core of what I was saying, but phrased less . . . intentionally offensively.

If you're trying to push for laws to be passed enshrining your religious views into law, you're not acting as a religious person. You're acting as a political person, and we're talking about your political views.

Which not only means that things like "protecting your religious freedoms" doesn't apply to that particular discussion, at all, but also means that, in the USA, if your faith group is pushing you on this, their tax-exempt status should be revoked as they are not a religious organization, but a political one. And the leadership should potentially be investigated for the potential fraud they've been committing by claiming otherwise.

And before anyone says "but they're religious and you can't say they're not!"; I'm talking about the definitions of types of non-profit groups under tax laws, not personal beliefs, with that last couple bits there.

[Poopymonster]

Compared to the length of time they had no issues with it in America, that's frankly not very long. It gives away their game that it's related to their politics, not their religion (the former of which has superseded the latter for American Conservative Christians).

Can't wait for the True America to form. Adam-Troy Castro covered it decently in his short stories The Truth About The Boy and The Proscribed Words. The third, Blood Relations, is the happy ending that won't happen in reality.

[Shadowferal]

Attorney for Indiana doctor tells AG to cease and desist ‘false’ statements

And the set up for the lawsuit begins.

[cubby]

Attorney for Indiana doctor tells AG to cease and desist ‘false’ statements

And the set up for the lawsuit begins.

That should just be a civil one, for damages. Good case, too, if they [are allowed to] pursue it to trial.

[Varx]

This case is a perfect example as to why there needs to be exceptions to abortion.

But rest assured this is not a case to justify blanket legal abortion, nothing will ever justify that.

The life of the mother, and rape. Those are the only exceptions.

Otherwise, wrap it up people or put them babies up for adoption.

A 1 month old fetus is just as human as a 1 year old.

If the fetus ended up turning into a banana then pro choicers might have an argument, but obviously that's not the case.

That's the only justification they got, the fact that they can somehow convince themselves that a fetus somehow isn't human.

If it wasn't for that psychotic line of reasoning then there wouldn't be a leg to stand on.

But as for this case, again there are exceptions. It's up to us as a society to recognize them on a case by case basis.

[Poopymonster]

This case is a perfect example as to why there needs to be exceptions to abortion.

But rest assured this is not a case to justify blanket legal abortion, nothing will ever justify that.

The life of the mother, and rape. Those are the only exceptions.

Otherwise, wrap it up people or put them babies up for adoption.

A 1 month old fetus is just as human as a 1 year old.

If the fetus ended up turning into a banana then pro choicers might have an argument, but obviously that's not the case.

That's the only justification they got, the fact that they can somehow convince themselves that a fetus somehow isn't human.

If it wasn't for that psychotic line of reasoning then there wouldn't be a leg to stand on.

But as for this case, again there are exceptions. It's up to us as a society to recognize them on a case by case basis.

Control the costs of the pregnancy* from the first moment until some point after it is legally declared a human (Birth) and it might be considered after fixing the costs and assorted bullshit** with trying to adopt.

*Doctor's visits, nutrition, the actual birth, and things someone who's had a kid can add.
**Families being denied adopting a kid because they don't belong to The Right Religion or other made up bullshit reasons even though the person have the means financially and emotionally to raise a child.

Edit: If you want to call it human, then let's pull it out now and remove as much of the trauma and stress and bullshit of being pregnant.

Besides, do you really think forcing someone to give birth will magically make them a good parent able to financially, emotionally, and such take care of a child they don't want/aren't ready for?

[Jtbrig7390]

But rest assured this is not a case to justify blanket legal abortion, nothing will ever justify that.

What Justifies blanket legal abortion is that no one has the right to tell another what they can and can't do with their body.

You can't focus me to donate organs when I die and you shouldn't be allowed to force someone to give birth to a child they don't want.

Period end of discussion, Their body their right.

[postman1782]

This case is a perfect example as to why there needs to be exceptions to abortion.

But rest assured this is not a case to justify blanket legal abortion, nothing will ever justify that.

The life of the mother, and rape. Those are the only exceptions.

Otherwise, wrap it up people or put them babies up for adoption.

A 1 month old fetus is just as human as a 1 year old.

If the fetus ended up turning into a banana then pro choicers might have an argument, but obviously that's not the case.

That's the only justification they got, the fact that they can somehow convince themselves that a fetus somehow isn't human.

If it wasn't for that psychotic line of reasoning then there wouldn't be a leg to stand on.

But as for this case, again there are exceptions. It's up to us as a society to recognize them on a case by case basis.

With a Matt Walsh Avatar, no one should listen to you.

There is over 400,000 children in the already overloaded adoption system, and some of them for YEARS. Adding 600k-1m children to that a year won't do anything but destroy it.

Also, it is funny how you don't mention incest, apparently you love them incest babies?

You going to enjoy paying the ginormous increase in taxes that are going to be needed for not only the adoption systems, but the welfare, food stamps, WIC, Section 8 housing, and every other program? Because that is certainly going to end up happening.

Also, all birth control fails.

[Varx]

Control the costs of the pregnancy* from the first moment until some point after it is legally declared a human (Birth) and it might be considered after fixing the costs and assorted bullshit** with trying to adopt.

*Doctor's visits, nutrition, the actual birth, and things someone who's had a kid can add.
**Families being denied adopting a kid because they don't belong to The Right Religion or other made up bullshit reasons even though the person have the means financially and emotionally to raise a child.

Edit: If you want to call it human, then let's pull it out now and remove as much of the trauma and stress and bullshit of being pregnant.

Besides, do you really think forcing someone to give birth will magically make them a good parent able to financially, emotionally, and such take care of a child they don't want/aren't ready for?

All I read out of that is, "this is why liberals think it's okay to murder unborn children and deprive them of a chance at life"

Look man, life ain't perfect, but that don't take away the right of a baby to live and try.

[Endus]

This case is a perfect example as to why there needs to be exceptions to abortion.

But rest assured this is not a case to justify blanket legal abortion, nothing will ever justify that.

Women are human beings and self-ownership is the bedrock on which all other human rights are predicated.

That's the only justification anyone needs for blanket legalizing abortion.

Anything short is a dehumanization of women to some extent or another, in support of religious viewsd that have no business being enshrined into punitive laws that harm those who don't follow that faith.

- - - Updated - - -

All I read out of that is, "this is why liberals think it's okay to murder unborn children and deprive them of a chance at life"

Look man, life ain't perfect, but that don't take away the right of a baby to live and try.

They aren't "children".

There is no "murder".

You're just lying and pushing fantasies as if they're reality.

You can believe whatever your religion asks of you, when it comes to your choices. Not when it comes to forcing your choices onto others.

[Varx]

What Justifies blanket legal abortion is that no one has the right to tell another what they can and can't do with their body.

You can't focus me to donate organs when I die and you shouldn't be allowed to force someone to give birth to a child they don't want.

Period end of discussion, Their body their right.

"I want to kill old ladies by beating them to a pulp with my body, my body my right" somehow isn't the same as abortion?

Why?

Because liberal women have been conditioned to think that a fetus isn't human by money hungry liberal politicians.

It's all money money money.

[Infracted]

[Jtbrig7390]

--snip--

A fetus isn't a human, its a clump of cells. It can't breath, It can't think it can't do anything without the host body. By ur logic cancer is a human because it grows in the body.

Person X could live if I allowed my lung to be donated after death, I don't so they won't. Its my body and my right and the same applies to abortion. You don't have the right to tell someone what they can and can't do with their body.

[Varx]

Women are human beings and self-ownership is the bedrock on which all other human rights are predicated.

That's the only justification anyone needs for blanket legalizing abortion.

Anything short is a dehumanization of women to some extent or another, in support of religious viewsd that have no business being enshrined into punitive laws that harm those who don't follow that faith.

- - - Updated - - -



They aren't "children".

There is no "murder".

You're just lying and pushing fantasies as if they're reality.

No they're not children, they're fetuses. Two different stages of development for a HUMAN BEING.

the only ones who are lying are liberals.

And btw, my pro life views are non religious, I'm super agnostic, borderline atheist.

It's all about what's right and wrong. And killing a human regardless of their stage of life is wrong.

Instead of crying about bodily autonomy how about they practice said autonomy to practice safe sex.

[Endus]

"I want to kill old ladies by beating them to a pulp with my body, my body my right" somehow isn't the same as abortion?

Why?

Because a woman, old or not, is an actual human person, and you're harming their body against their will.

As opposed to an abortion, where the only human persons involved are the pregnant person and their doctor.

No one disputes this legal fact, and we really don't give any shits what your religious views on the subject may be, because those views don't apply to anyone but you, regarding your own decisions.

[Varx]

A fetus isn't a human, its a clump of cells. It can't breath, It can't think it can't do anything without the host body. By ur logic cancer is a human because it grows in the body.

Cancer is a growth of cells that is part of the body. Like any other mass of tissue. That's like saying a liver is human, nice try.

A fetus however is the entire thing. Just at the earliest part of life.

Once again, does a fetus turn into a banana.

This is the great lie that democrats have deceived you with and the only leverage they have. That a fetus somehow isn't human.

- - - Updated - - -

Because a woman, old or not, is an actual human person, and you're harming their body against their will.

As opposed to an abortion, where the only human persons involved are the pregnant person and their doctor.

No one disputes this legal fact, and we really don't give any shits what your religious views on the subject may be, because those views don't apply to anyone but you, regarding your own decisions.

See what I mean. The lie that keeps on giving.

It's almost as perfect as faith.