SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[cubby]

/snip for forgettable typical GQP minion spew

Notice how he can't refute the accusations, and just goes on the attack. Note also the attacks include claims of no cites, where I had provided them (the required GQP misinformation/lie), AND he continues to provide zero cites. GQP tot the core. We can also see by the length of response the depth that he's been emotionally affected by the exposed truth in his hypocrisy and lies. The lack of any self-introspection or ability to admit he could be wrong is also clearly present. This is how the GQP and Conservative Neo-Nazi-Right wants him and his ilk to respond.

Trump wouldn't be proud, but tehdang thinks he would.

The fact is that with SCOTUS rolling back Roe, we're in for a hell of a fight to win back the morality of the United States. Expect the fight to include all privacy, women's rights, same sex marriage, merging state and religion, and, well, more to come. The above is just a miniscule example of what we can expect from these immoral minions.

[Dezerte]

I consider myself a pragmatic person, but it's becoming harder and harder to not think that we are truly seeing the rise of fascism in the US. It has been a worry for decades, but I always hoped/assumed that the US would overall improve.

I believe that anyone that calls themselves a GOP supporter today can, without hyperbole, also probably be called a fascist - the lines are becoming less blurred, and anyone who supports the GOP today and is offended by that should take a long hard look at themselves and at their party, at other fascist movements across the world today and throughout history. Recognize the rot before it's too late, before you are too sucked into fascism.

[Tentim]

I consider myself a pragmatic person, but it's becoming harder and harder to not think that we are truly seeing the rise of fascism in the US. It has been a worry for decades, but I always hoped/assumed that the US would overall improve.

I believe that anyone that calls themselves a GOP supporter today can, without hyperbole, also probably be called a fascist - the lines are becoming less blurred, and anyone who supports the GOP today and is offended by that should take a long hard look at themselves and at their party, at other fascist movements across the world today and throughout history. Recognize the rot before it's too late, before you are too sucked into fascism.

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

[Forogil]

Agree. I think the phenomenon is more about the way the issues change than the people.

You agree with false statements. That isn't what has happened with abortion in the US (it differs in other countries - the abortion travel will now go from the US to Mexico instead of the opposite https://edition.cnn.com/2021/09/13/a...ntl/index.html ).

I understand that many don't want this folk wisdom to be true, since it would indicate that either they have become more "conservative" themselves or that they will do so in the future. It's more convenient to falsely claim that you stayed true (and will stay true) and the world changed.

But the abortion-question hasn't fundamentally changed since Roe v. Wade - at least not until this new ruling, and 50+-year old views stayed fairly constant from 1980 to 2019; and in comparison 30-49 year olds have consistently been more pro-abortion during that time (with some peak in the 1990s).

https://news.gallup.com/poll/246206/...rends-age.aspx

Obviously for this question it may be that it depends on your life-situation which depends on age - but the same is true for many other questions; people might be more pro-choice if they think they might use the choice themselves.

[Dontrike]

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.

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.

[s_bushido]

Isn't it the most fun when Americans have to become state immigrants to get healthcare?

Working as intended. Clearly, 10 year-olds who don't want to get pregnant should have thought about the consequences and take responsibility for looking so sexy to the people who want to rape them.

and now I need to take a shower after saying that...

[david0925]

There are a lot of things that are frankly outdated at best and outright asinine in the constitution or "how the founding father intended".

Too bad all you have to say is "FoUnDiNg FaThErS" and then people will push back against changes.

It's too bad we can't take away any technology not available in the 18th century from those idiots. Surely these new witchcraft is also not what the founding fathers intended right?

[Nymrohd]

That and the fact it can even be touched by either political party. No political party should be involved.

How would you avoid that though? Who appoints them?

[david0925]

Yeah, it's impossible to remove political affiliations from judges, or really anything.

All you can do is give them limited terms. My understanding is that SC judges are given life terms so they would not be influenced by politics. If that was the original intention these founding fathers are actually just tripping, because people going into politics ARE going to be politic-minded and all you give them is just all the power with zero the accountability.

[Forogil]

Or they are pro-choice because being able to have bodily autonomy is a basic human right?

Whoosh!

The question was why it depends on age where people 50 and up are more against abortion than the 30-49 year olds; and the rather obvious answer was that maybe people are more likely to be pro-choice when they might use the choice themselves. You don't give any explanation for why that changes with age (for some).

If you believe that people stop supporting basic human rights as the age you need to explain why.

Remember that historically less than a third of the population in the US has been in favor of this, even though you consider it a 'basic human right'. It seems to have changed after 2019 - I don't know why.

Note that it isn't listed as one of the "30 Universal Human Rights" (which was a compromise document that shows its age). There are some interpretations of that document indicating that in some cases abortion is a human right (especially when life and health of the pregnant
woman or girl is at risk) - but that seems like a strenuous interpretation and in other cases right to life overrules bodily autonomy. The HRC (who makes such rulings) is similarly as the SC subject to political biases so we don't know how long it will last, and several members are fairly autocratic (going with the ignoble principle of: you can't be judged if you are the judge).

[Endus]

All human beings are free and equal; women are human beings, foetus' are not.

No discrimination

SEX is in there as well as, since abortions are pretty much

Right to life: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and SECURITY OF PERSON.

If someone doesn't want to grow another person inside of them, they should be able to not do that, same with donating organs even in death.

Pretty simple stuff: If you are anti-abortion, you are anywhere from a misogynist to a fascist. You can argue about "late term", however, where safe induced birth is done if possible.

And before anyone tries to resurrect the religious bullshit of fetuses being people and thus also having rights (they're not and they don't), that wouldn't argue against abortion rights. It just specifies which style of abortions you'd have to use, removing the fetus without direct harm, even if it dies immediately because it's non-viable.

Abortion rights would remain untouched even if a fetus was a legal person and had human rights. It isn't an argument, it's just religious extremism that seeks to control and subjugate women and is too chickenshit and dishonest to come right out and say that.

[Dezerte]

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.

This is unfortunately a consequence of their rigid belief in "all life is sacred" (when it comes to being born at least). They have to oppose abortion for the 10-year old rape victim because otherwise their belief would be hypocritical. Any "all life is sacred"-person who makes an exception for this would be exposing their hypocrisy (of their belief, that is).

[Mekh]

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.

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.

[D3thray]

All human beings are free and equal; women are human beings, foetus' are not.

No discrimination

SEX is in there as well as, since abortions are pretty much

Right to life: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and SECURITY OF PERSON.

If someone doesn't want to grow another person inside of them, they should be able to not do that, same with donating organs even in death.

Pretty simple stuff: If you are anti-abortion, you are anywhere from a misogynist to a fascist. You can argue about "late term", however, where safe induced birth is done if possible.

If a fetus isn’t a human then why bother arguing ‘late term’ abortion? Just food for thought, I’m not interested in getting dragged into a debate over fetal personhood, but this exception seemed at odds with your first assertion.

[Forogil]

It could also be that older people grew up with different. . . Let's say "values" in strong quotations, that is absolutely possible, as well as younger generation coming to terms that "hey right to bodily autonomy is kind of cool".

Wrong again, as that was already covered.

The older people has had roughly the same opinion from 1980 to 2019 despite the older people being different persons that grew up in different times during that time and their younger counterpart had different opinions - that was the point; people change opinions as they age; and there seems to be a consistent trend in those changes.

Obviously not everyone, and obviously some change in the other direction (and it is different in other countries); but the general trend is clear - and there have a potential clear explanations for why. There can also be a change in the mind-set for all ages, there was the start of increased pro-abortion support in the US during the 1990s but then it disappeared - I don't know why.

So almost 3/4 of the american people have a wrong opinion. It's okay, people used to think African-americans weren't equal to whites, or LBGTQ+ weren't people worth even rights.

The point was that abortion-opinions in the US haven't changed much over time - until 2019; it's not that people kept their old views as they grew up - it's that people adopted the views of the older generation as they grow older.

For the rest of America it's a more complicated issue where several countries have recently legalized abortion; and many now have higher public support for abortion than the US (and some have legalized through courts it with lower support; I don't know how that will play out).

In the US we can compare with same-sex marriage that during a shorter time went from 27% accepting it to 67% (and now even higher) - https://news.gallup.com/poll/350486/...-marriage.aspx
That change happened faster than people aged, but still the older age-group is less supportive.

However, it seems that abortion-opinion has now (as in this year - or possible last years) changed significantly in the US. I don't know if it is a reaction to the SC decision (if so why it changed - were many ignorant and just regurgitating someone else opinion during all those years; or has there been an actual change in recent months), or something else and whether it will stay.

Taking the "30 universal human rights", abortion is easily covered in the first 3:

That is an interpretation of a flawed compromise that wasn't intended to be interpreted that way (e.g. Argentina and the US clearly didn't intend that when the voted for it); and thus HRW only recently sees that it legalizes some abortions.

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.

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.

- - - Updated - - -

This is unfortunately a consequence of their rigid belief in "all life is sacred" (when it comes to being born at least). They have to oppose abortion for the 10-year old rape victim because otherwise their belief would be hypocritical. Any "all life is sacred"-person who makes an exception for this would be exposing their hypocrisy (of their belief, that is).

It's not even "all life is sacred", as there's a significant portion that say they oppose abortion regardless of viability and mother's health (polling has it at about 10% in the US - significantly less in most western countries).

However, the current state laws in the US don't go that far, but it's still not entirely clear - https://www.healthline.com/health-ne...s-what-to-know

[Blur4stuff]

Republicans arguing that being anti-abortion is about preserving life will never work. It doesn't matter how much they claim that a fetus is a person with a soul. On just about every other issue they show a complete disregard for life.

What would have been much easier to get away with is imposing a more sensible time limit above six weeks with clear exceptions for medical issues. It may would have still angered some voters into coming out for dems this year, but not as many. By handling the issue this way they have given dems their absolute best chance to keep control of congress when they probably wouldn't have otherwise.

[Rasulis]

Pointing fingers at this point is an exercise in futility. If people want to preserve whatever rights they have left and expand on those in the future, they have to vote for candidates that will advance their cause. The same way the pro-life did for the last 50 years.

[DarkTZeratul]

This is unfortunately a consequence of their rigid belief in "all life is sacred" (when it comes to being born at least). They have to oppose abortion for the 10-year old rape victim because otherwise their belief would be hypocritical. Any "all life is sacred"-person who makes an exception for this would be exposing their hypocrisy (of their belief, that is).

I believe the way they phrased it was that this is an opportunity for this 10-year old girl to raise her baby as a productive member of society.

[Paranoid Android]

Clarence Thomas cites claim that Covid vaccines are ‘developed using cell lines derived from aborted children’

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in a dissenting opinion Thursday cited claims that Covid-19 vaccines were “developed using cell lines derived from aborted children.”

The conservative justice’s statement came in a dissenting opinion on a case in which the Supreme Court declined to hear a religious liberty challenge to New York’s Covid-19 vaccine mandate from 16 health care workers. The state requires that all health care workers show proof of vaccination.

Yes, this is a different case but this is one of our justices people. A justice who pins his abortion ideology on other rulings.

[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.