SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[Nymrohd]

The issue here is that legislators and politically motivated DAs generally know basically nothing about medicine, and that the result of legislating based on "only most necessary" scares doctors into making "cover my ass" decisions instead of "best medical practice" decisions, and the result is that more women die.

I'd say this is also unique to the US? Because many western countries have several restrictions to abortion but medical professionals freely apply the exceptions. And it is not like the laws are so much better written; there is inherent ambiguity in what risk to health or life is that comes to a doctor making a call and cannot truly be defined by law. Which effectively means that any legislation that is in some way restrictive will be problematic. It will be so for an ever smaller number of pregnancies that require termination but will still be so the same.
MY idea of an acceptable compromise would be unrestricted abortion up to the point of fetal viability so up to the 24th week.

[Taifuu]

Feisty now, aren't we? I try to be clear and communicate exactly my full views on what I believe, why I believe it, the evidence supporting it, and what I find missing and illogical from others.

Corrected that for you since not only do you rarely provide anything to back up your assertions, you also STILL have not provided any evidence regarding the Gallup poll.

Your previous post cited % in "favor as being legal under certain circumstances" and you have thus far showed no interest on what those circumstances are.

I have already answered this, but the Gallup poll does not elaborate further on that. And as I also have stated previously, I don’t care what most of America’s opinion is on this. A person’s opinion does not make it a factual statement. I base it off the research and studies done by doctors on the actual medical procedures and treatment surround the abortion process.

Guess what: they asked the same cohort a bunch of different circumstances question to help elaborate on their beliefs. You're choosing to ignore it. There's no reason to choose to believe a general question about circumstances, then choose to ignore the set of particular questions about circumstances.

They asked 3 questions for one part of the survey and 4 questions for the other and not all the questions were unique. That’s hardly a “bunch of different circumstances questions”. If you have evidence otherwise, feel free to provide it any time. I posted mine from Gallup, where is yours? Is that too recent of an event for your ChatGQP software to provide?

Their ability to predict candidate wins and losses is worse, on average. Here's a reminder that social viewpoints can be tracked throughout time for stability among cohorts, but each politician matchup gets one point of history and *boom* gone. And then there's the trouble on generating the likely electorate that you never see until the actual election; not everybody registered to vote votes, not everybody that says they're gonna vote in this election does vote. Not so in social views.

People vote for candidates based off the SOCIAL VIEWS and platform of the party for whom they cast their ballots.

I have some qualified concerns with ultimately calling two thirds or three quarters of the population "misogynist," combining that perspective with the reasoning that "it's obvious" what a non-misogynist would think about the issue.

Do you think that there is a maximum amount of people that can be assholes?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/misogyny

misogyny
noun
mi·sog·y·ny mə-ˈsä-jə-nē
: hatred of, aversion to, or prejudice against women

That is the dictionary definition of misogyny. Do you see anything in there about how only a certain percentage of a population can be mysogynists? Are you entirely ignorant of basically all of European history and how they treated women? It is very possible for all or most of a society to engage in a bad practice IF THAT BAD PRACTICE IS A PART OF THE CULTURE.

The man declared that "All states, including ultra blue states, only had allowances for voluntary abortions up to 16 weeks at the latest." Please, do comment on that if he will not. You're quoting my reaction to that statement.

This is what you posted:

Point me to the pro-choice person in this forum speaking a defense of any status quo abortion law regarding 1) elective abortions 2) performed after a certain gestational age. It would be a welcome discovery for me. No joke, I'd appreciate learning it. I would be quite happy to hear a pro-choice person say "[INSERT BLUE STATE HERE] makes abortion generally legal up until [16 weeks/18 weeks/"viability"/20 weeks/24 weeks] and I support such a restriction on abortion.

I stated that I am for it being legal at all times. I did not say only for blue states or red states because that would mean there are times where abortion is not legal. Regarding the original poster, there are multiple states that allow for abortion past 20 weeks, including Arkansas. A not-ultra blue state.

You are genuinely getting worse at this. Take a break until the next patch update and then come back to us.

[PosPosPos]

Let me know if you're going to quote and respond to things I write in the future.

I did, you just too intellectually dishonest to admit your statements are anything but the usual conservative drivel that holds 0 respect for science and democracy.

[Cthulhu 2020]

You've stated a claim

Yes I get it, it was legal beyond 16 weeks in several states. You seem to refuse to acknowledge the fact that abortions past the second trimester are vanishingly rare, and continue to insist that people will get third trimester pregnancies for funsies WITHOUT PROOF.

Fuck off with your "You failed to prove a claim" considering nearly every single one of your posts is filled to the brim with unsourced claims and degenerate moral panicks that you can't justify or back up properly.

Also hey, look what your side is getting up to.



Republicans continue to support child marriage and child rape. Can you kindly explain to us why they're doing this? Considering you're so worried about children.

[cubby]

I'm afraid that I think this is precisely your intention from what you've just wrote, and our past interactions rather sustain the impression. ACB is a handmaid might as well be KBJ doesn't know what a woman is or JK Rowling wants a trans genocide. However, if there's ever some DMZ portion of this website where we go to the gutters of Breitbart and Daily Kos, PM me because I can stand a little gutter disinformation fighting from time to time.

It's not my intention. It's literal fact - she was a Handmaid in her religious organization, here is the link and the story proving it.

[Taifuu]

It's not my intention. It's literal fact - she was a Handmaid in her religious organization, here is the link and the story proving it.

This was also trending topic at the time of her confirmation; so if you've really been following the political landscape like tehdang claims that they are, they would have already known this. Of course, that applies to just so much (all?) of their posts, so no surprise their. At least their ChatGQP is consistent at that point.

[unfilteredJW]

Did he really actually type out “you have yet to prove a claim”? Looooool

[Edge-]

In some good news

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/supr...ry?id=98726537

Mifepristone still legal while the case works its way through the courts.

In some other news - https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...abortion-pill/

U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, who suspended government approval of the drug mifepristone in a case that has reached the Supreme Court, lists his most valuable investment as a holding in a single stock worth at least $5 million. The name of the company, however, is blacked out.

Kacsmaryk said in a statement Friday that the redactions were approved by the Administrative Office of the Courts “after reviewing the relevant rules and applicable threats.”

The private company, he said, is not headquartered or operated in Texas and has never been a party in the Northern District of Texas, where he sits. “The Clerk’s Office has the name of the entity, actively screens incoming cases, and I would be automatically recused from any cases involving this entity,” Kacsmaryk said.

Why is he worried about disclosing that stock?

Legal ethics experts characterized Kacsmaryk’s redactions as highly unusual and said withholding the name of a stock undermines the purpose of the disclosure system. Stephen Gillers, an ethics expert at New York University Law School, said litigants need to know the identity of the investments a judge holds to decide whether they should seek that judge’s recusal from a case.

“Removing that name is exactly contrary to the reason we want it revealed,” Gillers said. “If there’s one thing you want to know in a financial disclosure form, it’s where the judge has his or her investments.”

And before any Very Honest People try to argue this is commonplace and happens all the time. It doesn't.

I continue to hope Collins and Murkowski are very concerned that they allowed themselves to be lied to by really obvious and transparent liars.

[Paranoid Android]

Idk if posted but this stay for the pill by SC is maybe not the best.

Next stop for the mifepristone case is the 5th Circuit who is all but certain to issue a positively batshit ruling.

The antis are going to force the Comstock Act issue before SCOTUS one way or another.

https://twitter.com/Hegemommy/status...nkLN0Nxhg&s=19

Thread in link.

Johnathan Mitchell, architect of Texas' bounty hunter abortion ban in particular wants a court to bite on his argument that Comstock functions as a full federal criminal ban on mailing abortion pills AND ALSO a means to attack state laws that affirmatively protect abortion

So the 5th will give some bad ruling, kicking it down road where SC will rule again. I think the SC conservative want to kill the pill, just trying to find a way.

[Fugus]

Question, with this case on mifepristone, what is keeping the FDA from just fast tracking it and officially approving it now?
We have over 20 years of data and research on the drug.

[DarkTZeratul]

Question, with this case on mifepristone, what is keeping the FDA from just fast tracking it and officially approving it now?
We have over 20 years of data and research on the drug.

Because the FDA already approved it 20 years ago, and this judge is trying to say "nuh-uh."

[Rasulis]

Question, with this case on mifepristone, what is keeping the FDA from just fast tracking it and officially approving it now?
We have over 20 years of data and research on the drug.

It was approved in 2000 in the US. Even then FDA had plenty of data since it was approved in France in 1988, and subsequently in Great Britain.

There have been changes since. The original approval was for up to 10 week gestational period. It is up to 12 weeks now. The dosage is now one-third of the original. Prescription through teleconsulting, and acquiring the medication through mail and from pharmacies were the most recent amendments. All based on over 40 years of available worldwide data.

The anti-choice crowd is simply trying to find excuses to ban Mifepristone nationwide.

Correction, FDA is still 10 weeks. WHO recommendation of up to 12 weeks is not approved yet.

[Endus]

Question, with this case on mifepristone, what is keeping the FDA from just fast tracking it and officially approving it now?
We have over 20 years of data and research on the drug.

The FDA already slow-tracked it and gave it triple the scrutiny it typically uses before officially approving it over 20 years ago.

https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket...eeks-gestation

Then a shithead extremist judge with his head all the way up his own ass said "nuh" in a slack-jawed refusal and somehow that was enough to overrule the FDA.

[Fugus]

Thanks for the input guys, from the stories it sounded like this turd of a judge was saying something about it being fast tracked or something then.

Could the FDA just state this drug has been officially authorized this entire time and we reiterate that the FDA still authorizes its use as it has passed every stage of testing for it?

Basically put the whole Supreme Court on its butt because there is no case to be had when the FDA has officially stated it has passed all requirements to authorize it.

Doubly so if they can state that if the standard they used for this wasn’t enough than insulin would not be authorized yet either.

[Sunseeker]

Thanks for the input guys, from the stories it sounded like this turd of a judge was saying something about it being fast tracked or something then.

Could the FDA just state this drug has been officially authorized this entire time and we reiterate that the FDA still authorizes its use as it has passed every stage of testing for it?

Basically put the whole Supreme Court on its butt because there is no case to be had when the FDA has officially stated it has passed all requirements to authorize it.

Doubly so if they can state that if the standard they used for this wasn’t enough than insulin would not be authorized yet either.

No.

Fundamentally, the judge's argument relies on the Comstock Act being in full effect. The Pill is one of the many things the Comstock Act banned, and therefore the FDA could never have approved it, because that would be in violation of the Comstock Act.

Ultimately, the SCOTUS ruling won't be on the Pill itself, it will be on the Comstock Act (and there are several of them, some federal, some state).

[Fugus]

No.

Fundamentally, the judge's argument relies on the Comstock Act being in full effect. The Pill is one of the many things the Comstock Act banned, and therefore the FDA could never have approved it, because that would be in violation of the Comstock Act.

Ultimately, the SCOTUS ruling won't be on the Pill itself, it will be on the Comstock Act (and there are several of them, some federal, some state).

Thanks, but that only seems to ban it through the mail, the pharmacies could still sell it and people could still travel out of state to grab it then.

And an easy way to address this if they get their way, that also bans playboy and hustler through the mail along with any “toys” from Amazon or other places.

Watch the fallout from their base and the businesses when they cant get them anymore either.

Actually, the pharmacy could actually start their own delivery services to get them or even taxis like Uber or Lyft doing deliveries to get around that one.

[Sunseeker]

Thanks, but that only seems to ban it through the mail, the pharmacies could still sell it and people could still travel out of state to grab it then.

And an easy way to address this if they get their way, that also bans playboy and hustler through the mail along with any “toys” from Amazon or other places.

Watch the fallout from their base and the businesses when they cant get them anymore either.

Actually, the pharmacy could actually start their own delivery services to get them or even taxis like Uber or Lyft doing deliveries to get around that one.

It bans delivering it by any means. Again, there are multiple Comstock Laws(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock_laws), one of which applies to the mail, one of which applies to "express" transport, ie: private delivery. It also bans using the same means to provide any information about it. Hell the Comstock Act applies to personal letters with "indecent" writings in them.

The real win here isn't the Pill, it's the Comstock Act. Since most things in the USA are produced somewhere else, they must be shipped. Via the Comstock Act, conservatives can effectively shut down trade across the entire nation of anything they deem "indecent" and the supplying of any information about it. This is their door into shutting down basically the internet.

[Fugus]

It bans delivering it by any means. Again, there are multiple Comstock Laws(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock_laws), one of which applies to the mail, one of which applies to "express" transport, ie: private delivery. It also bans using the same means to provide any information about it. Hell the Comstock Act applies to personal letters with "indecent" writings in them.

The real win here isn't the Pill, it's the Comstock Act. Since most things in the USA are produced somewhere else, they must be shipped. Via the Comstock Act, conservatives can effectively shut down trade across the entire nation of anything they deem "indecent" and the supplying of any information about it. This is their door into shutting down basically the internet.

Oops, my bad. Was looking over it on the phone. Checking it now. Yeah, messed up.

If I am reading this correctly, Birth Control is protected due to parts being ruled unconstitutional but plan b I don't see anything about that so they might have a case.

So basically they can't prevent it from being made or used, just mailed correct?

Edit: Sorry if this sounded redundant, just splitting hairs between it being declared illegal to have versus declared illegal to deliver.

[Rasulis]

Oops, my bad. Was looking over it on the phone. Checking it now. Yeah, messed up.

If I am reading this correctly, Birth Control is protected due to parts being ruled unconstitutional but plan b I don't see anything about that so they might have a case.

So basically they can't prevent it from being made or used, just mailed correct?

Edit: Sorry if this sounded redundant, just splitting hairs between it being declared illegal to have versus declared illegal to deliver.

Basically. The biggest problem for them will be enforcement. If the US can't stop the flow of illegal drugs across the border. How do they expect to stop 5 small pills (1 mifepristone and 4 misoprostol are required for the protocol) mailed in plain brown envelopes from EU, India, Mexico and Canada. The same with blocking access to abortion care information and sale through the internet.

The only way to do that is to turn the US into a police state not unlike China.

[Fugus]

Basically. The biggest problem for them will be enforcement. If the US can't stop the flow of illegal drugs across the border. How do they expect to stop 5 small pills (1 mifepristone and 4 misoprostol are required for the protocol) mailed in plain brown envelopes from EU, India, Mexico and Canada.

I have said it before and I will say it again, the moment the Republicans ban this stuff, whether it be Plan B or Birth Control, every drug dealer on every street corner will have a new best selling product.

And as an extension to that, they will also have more police willing to look the other way when they are selling these things while the police as a whole will make themselves into even bigger enemies to the general public when they arrest someone selling them.