Politico: Roe to be overturned per draft opinion

[frikkenfrakken]

So, to clarify, are you saying that if it does make it into the final version, other freedom-oriented cases (e.g., Gay Marriage from IUClovers example) could change direction?

Alito says they should not change based on the reasoning in Dobbs. Alito repeatedly mentioned that since dead babies are involved, (my words, not his) abortion is different than those other cases.

But those guys can cite to whatever they want. If someone wants to cite it for that proposition later, there is nothing stopping them. Hell, Alito cites his own dissenting opinions, and those of Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, ACB, Scalia, and Rehnquist many times during the opinion. Dissents aren't authority, but that didn't stop him here,

 

[Univee2]

Cool. One Party will just let the other Party steal their legitimate pick for the court in order to swing the court in that Parties favor as you insinuate. Maybe get your party to stop stealing Presidential pics and there won't be any 119-118 rulings. It's puzzling to me how the deep thinkers in here think it's OK for their party to steal pics or act dishonestly without a response from the other party.

Bork Bork Bork

 

[snarlcakes]

View embedded media

LMAO..... birthing body? Good Lord....what total clowns people have turned into.

On second thought. I need to go yell at my mom (excuse me, birthing person) for not aborting me many years ago. It would have saved me from having to read that dumb tweet.

 

[DANC]

I've got food being delivered. A conference call i'm going to be jumping on. Champions league will be on in the background, the internet up, and if i were single and had more energy i could get some sexting cookin too. wtf is wrong with him. multitask

I thought you were going to say if you were single and had more energy you'd be banging your admin while watching the Champions League

 

[larsIU]

Bork Bork Bork

Well, at least he got a hearing and was voted down.

https://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/348_1987.pdf

 

[jet812]

I think he said that back in the 1970's-but not in 2012. I think this is a misquote. He flipped his position but that was not his position in 2012.

He flipped when figured out pandering to certain groups could lead to a 48 year career as a grifter…

 

[DANC]

Bork Bork Bork

"One Party will just let the other Party steal their legitimate pick for the court in order to swing the court in that Parties favor as you insinuate."

I think he meant Thomas. Oh wait, no, Kavanaugh.

 

[DANC]

Well, at least he got a hearing and was voted down.

https://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/348_1987.pdf

You're not serious, are you?

 

[DANC]

It’s ironic that lying is perfectly legal in a civil society.

No shit. Adam Schiff would be doing a life sentence.

Rep. Adam Schiff says "plenty of evidence" of Russia collusion hiding "in plain sight"

"The biggest thing that the president could do is confront Moscow to establish some kind of deterrent," said Schiff

www.cbsnews.com

 

[DANC]

If someone thinks abortion is murder, I cannot imagine them being happy murder is legal in other states. The state's rights argument is just a temporary argument.

Why do you hate states' rights?

Are you worried pro-lifers might persuade the Congress to *gasp* pass a law outlawing abortion?

That's what democracy looks like, Marv.

 

[DANC]

sure, if you want to repeat the Japanese or European catastrophe. We need to improve birth rates, particularly for the socioeconomic groups with means.

A relative of mine is doing a 2 year stint in Sweden. Swedes get a year and a half of paid leave for having a child.

The crazy thing is, the relative - and his wife - are American. And even they are eligible. So, they've got another year to go over there and are thinking of getting pregnant so they can take that much time off.

 

[TommyCracker]

Boy could you be in for a shock. You might want to check Latino attitudes lately.

A few points, the Mississippi law that eventually made it up to the Supreme Court and is (possibly) leading to the overturning of Roe and Casey was not seeking to ban abortion. The law was seeking to restrict abortions. Roe was shitty law forced on us with shitty logic without the people's representatives having the ability to debate the same. It never would have passed the legislative branch at the time it was decided. Casey doubled down and made it so that there was no ability to have any restrictions which is the position of the left. Which makes them out of step with the majority of the rest of the world.

Roe should be overturned and we should have the debate. This is merely a reset back to where this all should have started anyway. If the Democrats think that there should be no restriction abortion, make the case through legislation. I think abortion should be banned in almost all but the most rare of circumstances. I don't believe that my position could get through...now. So my expectation is going to be that the starting ante on the right will be limiting it to a timeframe that is less than 20 weeks in most states.

Going back to Latinos:

View embedded media

View embedded media

You might want to take a look at Latinos in those poll results. The woman up above is the front runner to take a Democrat held seat that has always gone that way.

This issue may motivate the AWFL part of the Democrat party along with some of the black voters who already do not vote for the GOP. However, I think many of you are making an assumption, as Greenwald points out, that the party speaks for minorities. W.r.t. Latino voters, that does not necessarily appear to be the case. As a racial group, they are turning into some of the most committed GOP voters in the country.

So let's overturn Roe and Casey and then let's start having the debate on this we should have had nearly 50 years ago. I am a pragmatic "loony" on this. I am not going to get what I want, but what I should be able to get is the first walk back on this policy in 5 decades that will shift the conversation. We'll see where things go from there.

Edit: for some reason the tweets are not pulling through, I was able to access them by clicking the links though.

Abortion is not an issue that I get triggered about (now my mother, holy shee-ot. She's currently spinning around 3000 rotations per second that I'm sure you can hear the drilling sound in her grave). I'm more curious in the political ramifications, especially since this tends to fall under the religious tent (which again, I've always believed bible belt religion is more a tax free business opportunity and con).

My simplistic stance on abortion comes from my more libertarian side, with a couple cups of church distrust mixed with the pragmatic approach that the church/right has absolutely no plan, per usual, of the ramifications of their decisions.

You still don't.

Anyway, this has already been decided. So this, let's have a debate means to overturn an individual's right that was granted by SCOTUS.

Correcting SCOTUS tends to fall under a high majority public opinion that wants to correct individual's right that wasn't granted or taken away.

I get the unborn not having rights argument...but it's not an popular opinion good, bad, happy or said.

That all being said, ultimately this is what happens when you don't vote, so this falls on democrats in 2016. Had we supported HRC with even average turnout, than Trump never happens and you don't get those SCOTUS appointments, I think (who knows the stall games that would have been played).

But we didn't and this is the consequence. End of story.

The obvious fear isn't as simple and cordial of what you stated, the 'lets have a debate'. There is fear in the address that other rights will be re-addressed. Remember same sex marriage was approved by just one vote. I gotta think that's a big one at risk here, etc. This ruling, again written before the case came up (which I think is pretty f#$ked up), gives a good insight into the current SCOTUS majority and it's mindset.

As far as Latino's, at the macro level the democratic share as pretty consistently been double the republican share. As overall voters (since Dems are a larger pie) they've been more than double consistently for the past 30 some years and maybe more.

Within the Latino group, Cubans are the outlier. They are very solidly conservative. The majority of the Cuban population is in Florida.

That being said, the Latino numbers that GG is posting is eye opening so...???? The 2020 election had mild gains in the republican portfolio (from a 5 to 7 in index) while still being around half of the dem portfolio (which went from 10 to 13 in index in the same).

As far as this girl, she's in a special session in an area that has been redistricted as a combo dem area (if I read it right). If she wins she has to go up against some Gonzalez feller who is the now overwhelming favorite this Nov regardless who wins the special session. A couple of months is better than a stick in the eye (if she wins) but it seems like an apathy play.

 

[Lucy01]

View embedded media

LMAO..... birthing body? Good Lord....what total clowns people have turned into.

Biden is feeble proof of what Clowns have turned into and the people that support him.

 

[DANC]

Just answer the question. Is your relationship with DANC platonic or playondick? Not that I care but curiosity is a pain in the ass.

Just when I start to take you seriously as a poster, you come up with this kind of garbage.

I just can't help but laugh at you as a 4 year old knowing all about sex..... was it your neighbor you were playing around with, or your sister?

I don't care, but curiosity is a pain in the ass.

 

[NOMORENIT]

Bork Bork Bork

Yes, Bork Bork Bork was denied a nomination as he should have been denied. And then Reagan nominated Kennedy. Looks like the pick wasn't stolen after all....

 

[larsIU]

You're not serious, are you?

he got more than Garland did.

 

[DANC]

How is that possible if statistically the population is measured as a bell curve? Perhaps you are saying that because the population is/has been growing, there are more people in each category?



If you incentivize and accelerate the birth rate for the middle and upper class, those individuals not only have the means to be financially independent, but are more likely to pass those means on to their kids (doesn't even have to be directly - e.g., inheritance/wealth transfer, but rather via education, societal fit, etc.).

The welfare state exists and grows because reproduction is so much higher among those without means.

It's pretty simple to anyone who can think logically.

 

[DANC]

If I was a Republican in congress I’d push for a bill that allowed abortion up to 23 weeks which is what Roe did and then ban it for the rest of the pregnancy with only exceptions for the physical health of the mother or the death of the unborn child. This is essentially the position of most Americans, including most Democrats. Then I’d sit back and watch every Democrat vote against it as they always have for every late-term ban that has been introduced. Their de facto position has been abortion on demand until after the baby is born. I think that would be uncomfortable for Democrats.

For a guy who claims to be a true Republican, you don't follow the Republican plank that's been it its platform since well before Trump.

 

[DANC]

Eugenics doesn't have to be about race. It can be about engineering a "desirable" population as per your suggestion about the more affluent having more children with the lower income folks having far less children?

Yes, eugenics is about race. You're pushing a bogus argument because eugenics is a trigger word.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

Sounds like she's about to go out on the warpath.

View embedded media

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

For a guy who claims to be a true Republican, you don't follow the Republican plank that's been it its platform since well before Trump.

I've never been 100 percent against abortion and neither have most Republicans. I'm more pro-life than pro-choice, but I'm not hard-core pro-life. This has long been OK for most Republicans to be in this space - after all, it's the position of most Americans.

 

[DANC]

Is the fetus a person? Let's go back to the Terry Schiavo case, did the US commit murder by disconnecting her?

Totally bogus comparison.

Schiavo had no brain function and no potential to acquire any.

A fetus will grow into a human.

 

[DANC]

View embedded media

LMAO..... birthing body? Good Lord....what total clowns people have turned into.

Sure, because a man can have a baby. Right?

 

[Stuffshot]

I'm not sure. It's a topic that people are passionate about. I think it's shelf life will be longer than you think

It will last for-freaking-ever.

I predict this ruling (if it turns out to be substantially like the leaked draft) will foster and encourage numerous right wing statutory proposals that will demand substantial expenditure of available time in both Congress and all the state legislatures. In other words, proposed legislation concerning screwing will preempt/interfere with proposed legislation concerning infrastructure, environment, balanced budget, national defense etc. and other issues important to both sides.

Keep in mind that the anti-abortion crowd claims abortion is a religious issue (despite the fact that the Bible does not even describe an abortion as near as I can tell). They won't give up on any theory, especially a theory that can get them reelected.

1. The first area of religious rightwing blitzing may well be to challenge the number of pregnancy weeks for a permissible abortion. As I remember, the Texas 15-week cutoff is based on someone's notion that 15 weeks is about when a fetal heartbeat can be detected. I predict it won't be long before some state-level Republican, boosted by the Clarence Thomas majority, files legislation to reduce the 15-week period in their state to just 9 days, the earliest possible time to determine if an egg has been fertilized.

How Early Can Pregnancy Be Detected?

How early can pregnancy be detected? Learn all about pregnancy tests, false positives and false negatives, and how early you can take a pregnancy test!

www.babymed.com

2. Another big area of rightwing religious blitzing will be opposition to contraception. As they will say, there is no need to provide contraception because everyone can just abstain from sex.

We've already seen state proposals to restrict the teaching of slavery, slave ownership, gayness etc. So, another big area of religious rightwing legislation will likely be to prevent the teaching of contraception in schools, the issuance of instructive contraception literature on public or school grounds and other restrictions.

3. And, there will also be proposals for unusual stuff like posting the Ten Commandments on public land, recognizing Christianity as the official religion, etc. because rightwingers think they have a green light now.

We need a recall procedure (not as extreme as California's) to remove ancient members of both Congress and the Supreme Court,

 

[DANC]

That commercial almost single-handedly stopped littering in the US.

I can remember before that, there was trash everywhere on the roads. There still are places where there is a lot of litter, but not like back then.

 

[twenty02]

It will last for-freaking-ever.

I predict this ruling (if it turns out to be substantially like the leaked draft) will foster and encourage numerous right wing statutory proposals that will demand substantial expenditure of available time in both Congress and all the state legislatures. In other words, proposed legislation concerning screwing will preempt/interfere with proposed legislation concerning infrastructure, environment, balanced budget, national defense etc. and other issues important to both sides.

Keep in mind that the anti-abortion crowd claims abortion is a religious issue (despite the fact that the Bible does not even describe an abortion as near as I can tell). They won't give up on any theory, especially a theory that can get them reelected.

1. The first area of religious rightwing blitzing may well be to challenge the number of pregnancy weeks for a permissible abortion. As I remember, the Texas 15-week cutoff is based on someone's notion that 15 weeks is about when a fetal heartbeat can be detected. I predict it won't be long before some state-level Republican, boosted by the Clarence Thomas majority, files legislation to reduce the 15-week period in their state to just 9 days, the earliest possible time to determine if an egg has been fertilized.

How Early Can Pregnancy Be Detected?

How early can pregnancy be detected? Learn all about pregnancy tests, false positives and false negatives, and how early you can take a pregnancy test!

www.babymed.com

2. Another big area of rightwing religious blitzing will be opposition to contraception. As they will say, there is no need to provide contraception because everyone can just abstain from sex.

We've already seen state proposals to restrict the teaching of slavery, slave ownership, gayness etc. So, another big area of religious rightwing legislation will likely be to prevent the teaching of contraception in schools, the issuance of instructive contraception literature on public or school grounds and other restrictions.

3. And, there will also be proposals for unusual stuff like posting the Ten Commandments on public land, recognizing Christianity as the official religion, etc. because rightwingers think they have a green light now.

We need a recall procedure (not as extreme as California's) to remove ancient members of both Congress and the Supreme Court,

Not buying into any of that. There are a lot of people that are anti-abortion.... but don't give a shit about anything you've listed here.

 

[DANC]

I've never been 100 percent against abortion and neither have most Republicans. I'm more pro-life than pro-choice, but I'm not hard-core pro-life. This has long been OK for most Republicans to be in this space - after all, it's the position of most Americans.

It's not what they run on and that's not their platform stance.

It's your opinion and those who you know. It's not an official Republican position.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

I've never been 100 percent against abortion and neither have most Republicans. I'm more pro-life than pro-choice, but I'm not hard-core pro-life. This has long been OK for most Republicans to be in this space - after all, it's the position of most Americans.

It frustrates me that people want to have debates in a vacuum, as if there are two choices.

Both sides need to accept some common sense. I don't know if 21 weeks is the exact right number, but it feels like a place where both sides can get comfortable, given a fetus isn't viable until 24 weeks (medically speaking) and any material issues for the baby tend to be diagnosed during the 20 week appointment.

Typical exceptions for medically necessary (risks to mother) should be upheld until whenever as it should be her decision if she is willing to sacrifice her life for the birth of her offspring (assuming an unfortunate circumstance like this actually occurs). If there is an ability to induce labor, I assume the vast majority of prospective mothers would take that over a later-term abortion.

When people throw out all of this late-term abortion nonsense, where is it coming from? It's not reality in modern America. That being said, if Dems just agree to a reasonable cap/limit and Republicans stop pushing down that age of the fetus cap/limit well below medically-defined viability, we can push forward on more important issues. And lord knows we have plenty of those to work through.

 

[Stuffshot]

Why do you hate states' rights?

Are you worried pro-lifers might persuade the Congress to *gasp* pass a law outlawing abortion?

That's what democracy looks like, Marv.

That's what Constitutional approval of slavery used to look like, too.

Do we really have to have a Civil War every time someone points out "this is wrong" ?

 

[DANC]

That's what Constitutional approval of slavery used to look like, too.

Do we really have to have a Civil War every time someone points out "this is wrong" ?

Yeah, because enslaving people is exactly like killing an unborn child.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

It will last for-freaking-ever.

I predict this ruling (if it turns out to be substantially like the leaked draft) will foster and encourage numerous right wing statutory proposals that will demand substantial expenditure of available time in both Congress and all the state legislatures. In other words, proposed legislation concerning screwing will preempt/interfere with proposed legislation concerning infrastructure, environment, balanced budget, national defense etc. and other issues important to both sides.

Keep in mind that the anti-abortion crowd claims abortion is a religious issue (despite the fact that the Bible does not even describe an abortion as near as I can tell). They won't give up on any theory, especially a theory that can get them reelected.

1. The first area of religious rightwing blitzing may well be to challenge the number of pregnancy weeks for a permissible abortion. As I remember, the Texas 15-week cutoff is based on someone's notion that 15 weeks is about when a fetal heartbeat can be detected. I predict it won't be long before some state-level Republican, boosted by the Clarence Thomas majority, files legislation to reduce the 15-week period in their state to just 9 days, the earliest possible time to determine if an egg has been fertilized.

How Early Can Pregnancy Be Detected?

How early can pregnancy be detected? Learn all about pregnancy tests, false positives and false negatives, and how early you can take a pregnancy test!

www.babymed.com

2. Another big area of rightwing religious blitzing will be opposition to contraception. As they will say, there is no need to provide contraception because everyone can just abstain from sex.

We've already seen state proposals to restrict the teaching of slavery, slave ownership, gayness etc. So, another big area of religious rightwing legislation will likely be to prevent the teaching of contraception in schools, the issuance of instructive contraception literature on public or school grounds and other restrictions.

3. And, there will also be proposals for unusual stuff like posting the Ten Commandments on public land, recognizing Christianity as the official religion, etc. because rightwingers think they have a green light now.

We need a recall procedure (not as extreme as California's) to remove ancient members of both Congress and the Supreme Court,

Heartbeats can be detected around 6-8 weeks IIRC. Definitely well before 15.

Secondly, anyone that opposes abortion and contraception is a hypocrite that can't be taken seriously in 2022.

 

[Stuffshot]

Biden is feeble proof of what Clowns have turned into and the people that support him.

"feeble"
"Clowns"
"Lucy"

it's all here.

 

[Stuffshot]

Yeah, because enslaving people is exactly like killing an unborn child.

What are you talking about? You're the one claiming Constitutional provisions ate important (until I point out something you don't like).

Little boy, grow up,

 

[bawlmer]

It frustrates me that people want to have debates in a vacuum, as if there are two choices.

Both sides need to accept some common sense. I don't know if 21 weeks is the exact right number, but it feels like a place where both sides can get comfortable, given a fetus isn't viable until 24 weeks (medically speaking) and any material issues for the baby tend to be diagnosed during the 20 week appointment.

Typical exceptions for medically necessary (risks to mother) should be upheld until whenever as it should be her decision if she is willing to sacrifice her life for the birth of her offspring (assuming an unfortunate circumstance like this actually occurs). If there is an ability to induce labor, I assume the vast majority of prospective mothers would take that over a later-term abortion.

When people throw out all of this late-term abortion nonsense, where is it coming from? It's not reality in modern America. That being said, if Dems just agree to a reasonable cap/limit and Republicans stop pushing down that age of the fetus cap/limit well below medically-defined viability, we can push forward on more important issues. And lord knows we have plenty of those to work through.

Abortion pills are our future, for better or worse.

 

[Lucy01]

"feeble"
"Clowns"
"Lucy"

it's all here.

That's ok short stuff, your party has Rome burning 🔥.

 

[Stuffshot]

Heartbeats can be detected around 6-8 weeks IIRC. Definitely well before 15.

Secondly, anyone that opposes abortion and contraception is a hypocrite that can't be taken seriously in 2022.

But, some of those will surely run for office. I hope you reject them on sheer principle.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

Abortion pills are our future, for better or worse.

How can they be used on a later abortion, say 20 weeks?

 

[DANC]

What are you talking about? You're the one claiming Constitutional provisions ate important (until I point out something you don't like).

Little boy, grow up,

Post when you make sense.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

It frustrates me that people want to have debates in a vacuum, as if there are two choices.

Both sides need to accept some common sense. I don't know if 21 weeks is the exact right number, but it feels like a place where both sides can get comfortable, given a fetus isn't viable until 24 weeks (medically speaking) and any material issues for the baby tend to be diagnosed during the 20 week appointment.

Typical exceptions for medically necessary (risks to mother) should be upheld until whenever as it should be her decision if she is willing to sacrifice her life for the birth of her offspring (assuming an unfortunate circumstance like this actually occurs). If there is an ability to induce labor, I assume the vast majority of prospective mothers would take that over a later-term abortion.

When people throw out all of this late-term abortion nonsense, where is it coming from? It's not reality in modern America. That being said, if Dems just agree to a reasonable cap/limit and Republicans stop pushing down that age of the fetus cap/limit well below medically-defined viability, we can push forward on more important issues. And lord knows we have plenty of those to work through.

What do you mean by "nonsense?" More than 600,000 late-term abortions per year happen in this country and the reasons are not usually due to the health of the mother or the fetus. If you read articles on the research you'll find:

most late-term abortions are elective, done on healthy women with healthy fetuses, and for the same reasons given by women experiencing first trimester abortions. The Guttmacher Institute has provided a number of reports over 2 decades which have identified the reasons why women choose abortion, and they have consistently reported that childbearing would interfere with their education, work, and ability to care for existing dependents; would be a financial burden; and would disrupt partner relationships.3 A more recent Guttmacher study focused on abortion after 20 weeks of gestation and similarly concluded that women seeking late-term abortions were not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment.

The nonsense that's being spread about late-term abortions is that the numbers are insignificant (tell that to the more than 600,000 potential healthy lives that were terminated after viability) and almost always due to the health of the mother or fetus. None of that is true, therefore it is nonsense. Democrats vote for ending the lives of viable unborn baby every time they've had a chance.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6457018/

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

But, some of those will surely run for office. I hope you reject them on sheer principle.

Sadly, it's one of the reasons I find myself hating nominees of either side. I'm socially moderate (tighter gun controls, particularly banning anything large mag or military-grade), pro choice (to a certain point), but fiscally conservative.