Same way they did when they had those votes before.
Agree to disagree.Their voters aren't THAT stupid
Meh this country was founded by slavers and engaged in two genocides, this ruling is as American as mass shootings.
Same way they did when they had those votes before.
Agree to disagree.Their voters aren't THAT stupid
Sorry this is happening to you.
Sure they are. CRT became the new abortion and the GOP cleaned up in Virginia running on it.
You’re not sorry. You’re ignorant and have nothing of value to contribute.
I laughed.
ducks seems like a failed abortion that lived tbh
You can still have your babies murdered for half the price in Mexico. Canada might not let you in if you have a criminal history so be mindful of that.
So predictable, it’s boring. Why are you here? Isn’t there some special Olympics race you should be gearing up for?
I’m not arguing for the benefits of abortion. I’m arguing for compromise and against the lack of any thought when it comes to the consequences of being an absolutist who thinks this country should reflect a singular view rooted in controlling the free will of other people at the expense of the entire country to win an imaginary moral victory.
Sounds like god can’t count, figured you’d be a fan
How your parents doing Chris? They're both pro-abortion and watched a long Maddow rant tonight, I assume.
Sounds like another Plessy v. Ferguson moment, tbh... that took half a century to get undone.
On the other hand, this is great news for the (D) party...
Not really. Conservatives will just take a flight to a state with abortion clinics and do the procedure.
Poor folks, on the other hand, will have to use the ol' rusty hanger like you mom tried and failed to do, tbh...
Been reading the draft, just a terrible take all around.
It held that the abortion right, which is not mentioned in the Cons ution, is part of a right to privacy, which is also not mentioned. See 410 U.S, at 152-153. And that privacy right, Roe observed, had been found to spring from no fewer than five different cons utional provisions—the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
The right to privacy is not mentioned? What is this?
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Then he makes the whole argument about the Fourteenth Amendment only applying to liberties "deeply rooted in [our] history and tradition” and whether it is essential to our Nation's “schemeof ordered Liberty.”
However, to claim Roe doesn't fall in that category, the claim is:
Right until shortly before Roe, but abortion had long been a crime in every single State. At common law, abortion was criminal in at least some stages of pregnancy and was regarded as unlawful and could have very serious consequences at all stages. American law followed the common law until a wave of statutory restrictions in the 1800s expanded criminal liability for abortions. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, three-quarters of the States had made abortion a crime at any stage of pregnancy, and the remaining States would soon follow. Roe either ignored or misstated this history, and Casey declined to reconsider Roe faulty historical analysis. It is therefore important to set the record straight.
This is a tacit admission that abortion was deeply rooted in our history and tradition. You wouldn't criminalize something if it didn't happen or exist. He just simply moved the goalposts from "deeply rooted in [our] history and tradition” to "was illegal".
Then come the rest of the typical conservative mental gymnastics, with gems like:
That the common law did not condone even pre-quickening abortions is confirmed by what one might call a proto-felony-murder rule. Hale and Blackstone explained a way in which a pre-quickening abortion could rise to the level of a homicide. Hale wrote that if a physician gave a woman “with child” a “potion” to cause an abortion, and the woman died, it was “murder” because the potion was given “unlawfully to destroy her child within her.”
The irony of this opinion saying "Roe was egregiously wrong from the start"
says the people who trot out the confederate flags at rallies.
What Actually Happens When a Country Bans Abortion
Romania under Ceausescu created a dystopian horror of overcrowded, filthy orphanages, and thousands died from back-alley abortions.
As lawmakers in Alabama this week passed a bill that would outlaw abortion in the U.S. state entirely, protesters outside the statehouse wore blood-red robes, a nod to Margaret Atwood’s dystopian novel The Handmaid’s Tale, in which childbearing is entirely controlled by the state. Hours later, the book was trending on Twitter.
But opponents of the restrictive abortion laws currently being considered in the United States don’t need to look to fiction for admonitory examples of where these types of laws can lead. For decades, communist Romania was a real-life test case of what can happen when a country outlaws abortion entirely, and the results were devastating.
In 1966, the leader of Romania, Nicolae Ceausescu, outlawed access to abortion and contraception in a bid to boost the country’s population. In the short term, it worked, and the year after it was enacted the average number of children born to Romanian women jumped from 1.9 to 3.7. But birthrates quickly fell again as women found ways around the ban. Wealthy, urban women were sometimes able to bribe doctors to perform abortions, or they had contraceptive IUDs smuggled in from Germany.
Yet Romania’s prohibition of the procedure was disproportionately felt by low-income women and disadvantaged groups, which abortion-rights advocates in the United States fear would happen if the Alabama law came into force. As a last resort, many Romanian women turned to home and back-alley abortions, and by 1989, an estimated 10,000 women had died as a result of unsafe procedures. The real number of deaths might have been much higher, as women who sought abortions and those who helped them faced years of imprisonment if caught. Maternal mortality skyrocketed, doubling between 1965 and 1989.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/05/16...mania-alabama/
Abortion bans do not stop abortions.
The overnight pills will see to that. Just more government overreach.
Forced pregnancy.
Just in time for the midterms. Gonna see some record turnout on both sides if this goes through. That tends to be bad for the GOP.
Target will be looted.
Here he is, the man that accomplished this miracle. The trifecta of SC Judges. Is it proper to ask if the candidate will reverse Roe? No. What did President Trump do? Sat 'em one after another across that Resolute Desk...
"I ain't in' around. Will you overturn Roe? Yes, or no and we can save a lot of time, then order out."
1.2.3. just like that ending with the girl.
"Who's the wild man now!!!"
On top of Old Smokey!!!
What they are today is a possible overturn of RvW. I'd have to defer to the legal scholars here but states' rights seem to be the driving factor here. This is assuming anything changes at all.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)