SupremeCommander wrote:I want nothing more than to bash the Knicks FO right now -- but it is not the biggest problem in our orbit right now. I don't give a **** where you think life starts -- that bottom line is we just devalued our women and rolled back rights on them

I have called my Governor and will call my other representatives. Please do the same and please support our women because there are many that are hurting right now.

How exactly does this decision "devalue women"? It's a dumb decision, I give you that. But I don't understand how we can make the leap you suggested.

And is that decision in ALL cases e.g. rape/incest, threat to a mother's life, etc?

Having said that, women in America have had the right to vote for the last 100 years. Maybe this will push them to take matters into their own hands to protect their rights and determine their destiny at the voting booths, rather than rely on a flimsy SCOTUS ruling.

People gotta stop expecting someone to bring them goodies on a silver platter.

HofstraBBall wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:I want nothing more than to bash the Knicks FO right now -- but it is not the biggest problem in our orbit right now. I don't give a **** where you think life starts -- that bottom line is we just devalued our women and rolled back rights on them

I have called my Governor and will call my other representatives. Please do the same and please support our women because there are many that are hurting right now.

Very good point. Women's rights have been taken back to the 1950's. Strange how so many. including females, on the right do not understand this.
Add the USSC ruling on guns earlier this week and I am worried on where we are headed.

There was a Princeton University study done a few years back on voting. They found that money was more influential in determining policy than actual votes. And considering that the average American couldn't afford a $500 emergency without going into debt pre-pandemic, it is safe to say that the average-Joe has no real sway in choosing the direction of the country. If it did, we'd have universal healthcare and gun reform by now...

RSparrow2 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:I want nothing more than to bash the Knicks FO right now -- but it is not the biggest problem in our orbit right now. I don't give a **** where you think life starts -- that bottom line is we just devalued our women and rolled back rights on them

I have called my Governor and will call my other representatives. Please do the same and please support our women because there are many that are hurting right now.

How exactly does this decision "devalue women"? It's a dumb decision, I give you that. But I don't understand how we can make the leap you suggested.

And is that decision in ALL cases e.g. rape/incest, threat to a mother's life, etc?

So, anyone(women) that has had a baby, science PROVES that a baby in the womb is a life, look at sonograms. So, having an abortion GUARANTEES that you are killing a life EVERYTIME. Sixty Million over the last 50 years, that is 20% on our current population. Women have the right to not have a baby still and that comes BEFORE pregnancy.

Most of all, the Constitution does not give you the right to take a baby in the womb. It can not be a Federal "LAW". It goes to the states now.

Knicks $**k btw ..

It sounds like you have more of a conservative viewpoint. I'm moreso on the opposite end of the spectrum but can appreciate your concerns on the topic; I think I share the moral POV. Even so, I think it's a dangerous thing to impose my moral viewpoints on another and I believe Roe v Wade needs to be protected. From a more pragmatic standpoint, single-motherhood is a bellwether for whether a child will be at-risk. We have enough problems in society before exacerbating that issue.

NardDogNation wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:I want nothing more than to bash the Knicks FO right now -- but it is not the biggest problem in our orbit right now. I don't give a **** where you think life starts -- that bottom line is we just devalued our women and rolled back rights on them

I have called my Governor and will call my other representatives. Please do the same and please support our women because there are many that are hurting right now.

How exactly does this decision "devalue women"? It's a dumb decision, I give you that. But I don't understand how we can make the leap you suggested.

And is that decision in ALL cases e.g. rape/incest, threat to a mother's life, etc?

My understanding is yes. Decisions get kicked to the states. Some states have already passed laws prohibiting these forms of abortion and will consider it homocide in all cases - even if the mother travels to another state with allowable laws to have an abortion.

Moonangie wrote:Sad day...and I'm not referring to last night's head scratching draft.

WTF is wrong with 'Merica. FFS!

SCOTUS is a lifetime appointment

Conservative PACs and Power Brokers have been mapping out a SCOTUS majority and grooming prospective judges who have anti Roe v. Wade sentiment for a loooong time.

McConnell used his power with a majority Rebublican Senate to obstruct/block Obama from adding a Justice (Garland) to replace the open seat when Scalia died

McConnell's scheming (likely working with conservative power brokers) allowed Trump to appoint 3 conservative / anti-abortion Justices - giving the SCOTUS both a political and SCOTUS majority.

IMO Democrat politicians were not paying enough attention to this. When Biden was elected and with a majority House and Senate - they should have expanded the court by 2 and also looked to enact term limits for SCOTUS appointees. It has been expanded in the past.

Note that this will likely be only the beginning of what a Conservative Supreme Court means for our future. We could easily see:

- Continued / even enhanced gun rights
- Striking down affirmative action in higher education
- Non- Support for equal gender pay
- Weakening federal regulations (for example - environmental regulations
- Supporting Dilution of voting rights
- Overturning of LGBTQ rights - such as the right to same sex marriage

Roe v Wade was always tricky jurisprudence. I don't know if people have read it, but it barely gave lip service to equal protection clause (which is explicit) and whether it applies to fetuses but continued a bunch of other cases which found a right to privacy from the fourth amendment which prohibits the government from conducting unfair searches and seizures. I think a lot of people welcomed the outcome from a policy standpoint but the reasoning was always shaky, and for a good long time it was upheld under stare decisis which essentially says we've gotten used to this so let's continue doing it. Consider that logic if we're talking about other contexts like Separate but Equal. Not very satisfactory either.

there are many other legal contexts that involve the definition of life which we leave to the states, such as infanticide (e.g., someone injures a pregnant woman and the fetus dies -- is is murder or just battery)

So at some level i don't have a problem with leaving the issue to the states. That said, and it's not talked about widely, there are HUGE issues with the first amendment when it comes to the regulation of abortion. First amendment among other things is supposed to guarantee separation between Church and State. FWIW this was Laurence Tribe's primary point on abortion. I feel a lot of the regulation is really motivated and guided by religious views on life

How many of the dead children never got to enjoy any rights at all? Oh yeah, that's right. All of them.
But of course, it's better to get rid of something that might cause a drain on society. Like single mothers. And the elderly. And the terminally infirm. And gun owners. And any other right wing nuts.

Another thread where the power of ad hominem makes more sense to some than simple biological facts.

Want reproductive rights? Try not ****ing for fun. That goes for both sides of the act. Oh, but that doesn't fit today's societal moral code.

Better to spend time and tax money teaching kindergartners how to **** properly and cross-dress.