US Politics: Roe v Wade into the quiet part of the stream

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Here’s hoping.

I've read suggestions that the conservative justices are aware of that, so may well technically keep Roe v Wade in place, while allowing the States to gut it in practice.

[mormont]

I noted this before, but for the record, banning abortion doesn't prevent abortions.

https://www.guttmacher.org/infographic/2020/abortion-occurs-worldwide-where-it-broadly-legal-and-where-it-restricted

https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/sexual-and-reproductive-rights/abortion-facts/

If your intention is to save lives, legal abortion is what does that. Banning abortion only puts more lives at risk. People will seek abortions anyway, because unintended pregnancy is so serious that they will risk their lives to avoid it. 

If your intention is to reduce the number of abortions, increase sex education and make contraception easier to access. That is the only proven way to achieve that goal. 

[HoodedCrow]

You know, with dna testing, lots of men are going to be found to be daddies.

[DMC]

9 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I've read suggestions that the conservative justices are aware of that, so may well technically keep Roe v Wade in place, while allowing the States to gut it in practice.

This was almost certainly what Roberts wanted to do, but the leak confirms he lost that battle and the other five went for the full move.

[Martell Spy]

Quote

If your intention is to reduce the number of abortions, increase sex education and make contraception easier to access. That is the only proven way to achieve that goal. 

Sounds logical, but the same people are also usually against contraception. And of course any government support after birth. They insist on the worst outcomes possible at every stage. I assume the massive human suffering is the entire point. It's just stunning that we've put the wackos in charge.

[Mindwalker]

Don't worry, Dems will passionately fundr... I mean, fight for you. Schumer & Pelosi released a weak sauce statement babbling about Reps owing an explanation, and ...

 

[Week]

6 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Sounds logical, but the same people are also usually against contraception. And of course any government support after birth. They insist on the worst outcomes possible at every stage. I assume the massive human suffering is the entire point. It's just stunning that we've put the wackos in charge.

It's a Faustian bargain for power. The Right recognizes it can throw red meat to the base (resulting in suffering) in order for their elites and donors to remain in power keeping the status quo and continuing to remove regulations/accountability for businesses/private profit. The difference between now and the GOP of 20 years ago is that there are more true believers that accelerate the suffering on behalf of a white Christian state -- which, hopefully, endangers their electoral chances to retain/regain power.

[Jaxom 1974]

14 minutes ago, DMC said:

This was almost certainly what Roberts wanted to do, but the leak confirms he lost that battle and the other five went for the full move.

As mentioned on Twitter earlier...Republican who Fund Raise only wanted to chase the car, but now those that actually wanted to catch it, have done so. Now what?

Tell anyone and everyone you know to vote.  Look to the young people who will be eligible to vote for the first time by Movember.  Just get out the vote.

[Mindwalker]

Fun fact...

 

[Week]

Funny, that.

[Liffguard]

24 minutes ago, mormont said:

If your intention is to save lives, legal abortion is what does that. Banning abortion only puts more lives at risk. 

I think that for the people seeking to outlaw abortion, this is a feature not a bug.

[Jaxom 1974]

And don't let the discourse be distracted by the notion that the bigger story is that the story was leaked from the unleakable Supreme Court...

[Ormond]

It will be interesting to see how this affects Democratic primaries the next few months. I wonder if it will give women candidates a boost among Demcrats? 

[fionwe1987]

8 hours ago, Larry of the Lake said:

This is going to kill a bunch of black women.

Especially in the South, which marries lack of abortion access with lack of prenatal care. 

1 hour ago, cock_merchant said:

I'm counting black babies. Their lives matter too.

They do, eh? So you're for the child tax credit? Affirmative action? How about public education? Or police reform?

I'm betting you support none of these things which make the lives of black babies more livable. 

Conservatives claiming this is about saving black lives are just concerned with keeping the prison slave labor market well supplied. 

[DMC]

37 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

As mentioned on Twitter earlier...Republican who Fund Raise only wanted to chase the car, but now those that actually wanted to catch it, have done so. Now what?

As has been suggested, they move on to other privacy rights and precedents.

[Zorral]

18 minutes ago, DMC said:

As has been suggested, they move on to other privacy rights and precedents.

Reinstate the 1857 Dred Scott v. Sandford decision. For the idiot who thinks slavery cannot be reinstituted, it already is, and is enshrined in the original Constitution -- which states people can be incarcerated and not be paid for criminal violations.  So not only can a woman or anyone who assists a woman  who is suffering from a miscarriage -- Texas and other states have CRIMINALIZED miscarriage, don't fool yourself -- they can enslave them all.

Remove universal suffrage, which is deeply in progress for decades now, women's right to their own property and businesses, credit and bank accounts.

By the way, @Kal -- the person reading this right now has always believed and argued since Reagan, that the R;s (now the white male, xtian nationalist authoritarian party) objective was to overturn RvW, thus have expected it all along.  I also named the previous US political thread, with that and many other 'opinions' in mind.

Why yes, I've always been a sky is falling, the end is near, tinfoil wearing, in expectation disaster is not only imminent, but in progress, and / or already in place.  

[LongRider]

2 hours ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

Slavery won't be next, of course,

Workers' rights and workplace safety tho?  Gonna be rough.  Also, the new anti-lynching laws?  Possibly a very short life.       

[Martell Spy]

4 minutes ago, LongRider said:

Workers' rights and workplace safety tho?  Gonna be rough.  Also, the new anti-lynching laws?  Possibly a very short life.       

I mean, it's just the minimum wage being scrapped. It's not like their bringing back actual slavery. Just large corporations paying workers $2.00 an hour for their labor. 

[Fez]

24 minutes ago, DMC said:

As has been suggested, they move on to other privacy rights and precedents.

Presumably they also wait to see if there's any significant backlash.

Minority rule doesn't work when the minority is too small and a total ban on abortion without exceptions is deeply unpopular. But it's a very open question whether that translates to huge shifts in voting patterns. I suspect it won't, but wouldn't rule it out entirely.

[Zorral]

A lawyer amigo observes:

Quote

 

Whoever leaked this is a hero, and the more the Court become demystified in general the better.

Interesting to assign the opinion to Alito rather than ACB; they just don’t give a fuck any more and don’t need to.

The opinion is incredibly thin and unpersuasive — Alito actually used the junior high school debate society “durr, the Constitution does not mention the word ‘abortion,’ durr” argument twice in the first few grafs of the opinion. 

It even starts like a bad generic freshman essay: "The debate about abortion is as old as the history of history itself"