Republicans may soon be the dogs that caught the car.
After years of crusading to overturn Roe v. Wade — a battle motivated sometimes by earnest conviction, sometimes by political expediency and sometimes by both — it looks like they’ve nearly won. The Supreme Court is expected to overturn or undermine Roe this summer, a right-wing victory decades in the making.
Yes.
Move along now…
Of course, you didn’t believe it was all about State Rights, did ya?
Many states that successfully eliminate abortion options in due time will move on to attacking contraception. After Roe comes Griswold.
Seems to me that much of the pro-choice argument needs to be re-focused:
Banning abortion in some states is ONLY going to affect the poor.
This fact is plain and simple and needs to be front and center in the Democratic/pro choice talking points. This effort is an assault on the poor.
The middle class and the well off in states where abortion is banned will be able to travel to pro-choice states. The poor, not so much.
The originalists on SCOTUS must be made to understand that the founders did not intend to have inequalities of this type. Let those opposed to abortion not have them, and let those who are in favor of access have it. Plead your case, peacefully; provide alternatives, peacefully; provide birth control, generously; but let women decide for themselves.
One can hearken to the Bible… I’ve forgotten where, but there was a case where someone caused a woman to abort, by some sort of physical means. The person so causing this abortion was not accused of murder, but of something else. Go figure. (Here’s a good discussion of this matter: https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/37/37-2/JETS_37-2_169-184_Fuller.pdf . In the end, strict interpretation of the Bible, it seems, results in the conclusion that a foetus is not a person, and causing an abortion is not murder, but, rather, a crime punishable by a fine.)
OT. I didn’t though he was going to do it, but he did. The guy believes he is invincible and is trying to show his “domination”.
“If fetuses are persons under the 14th Amendment, not only is abortion not constitutionally protected, but it is forbidden by the Constitution.”
Incorrect. The 14th Amendment restricts state action, not private conduct. It does not criminalize homicide or abortion.
First, the originalists don’t WANT to understand this. Second, the founders left slavery intact. Poll taxes, which meant poor people can’t vote were allowable as well so inequalities of this type was fine with the founders.
Stop 100 adults at random. Ask them about Griswold. See how many know that until 1965 at least one state was allowed to outlaw contraception. I’m old enough to recall when condoms were sold literally from under the counter. They could not be displayed. The creepoid religious right have been doing their due diligence now for decades. With the help of the GOP have managed to stack SCOTUS with fellow religious creepoids.
If a fetus is a person with rights, it seems the person taking care of that fetus should be subject to the same laws they are subject to in the care of a child that has been born. A parent cannot feed a child alcohol, but a pregnant woman can drink alcohol, which passes through the placenta into the fetus’ bloodstream. Same goes for smoking. I think if anti-choice people are to be philosophically consistent they should be arguing it should be illegal for pregnant women to smoke and drink.
Um, they do.
Amidst the recent CON court-packing, I’ve watched in some disbelief as numerous progressive commenters have rather sanguinely minimized the coming overturning of Roe by asserting that abortion by mail-order pill will just take over, and at least blue states will be safe. It’s flabbergasting to me that even actively-engaged progressives don’t get that the end game will be a nationwide ban on all abortions. And that attacks on birth control pills will likely be part of that. The SC blithe acceptance of Hobby Lobby’s right to act on their “sincerely held belief” that the pill is an “abortofacient” had my hair on fire. Yet that part of the story got very little attention as far as I saw. The Court basically decided religious fanatics are entitled to their own facts. Freaking terrifying.
Yes, but, still: first, the founders meant for the Constitution to be improved upon, and second, they did not intend for the states to all have different laws on matters of import such as these. (But IANAL, nor a constitutional scholar, but I play one on TPM.)
Many states have majority GOP legislatures, and most of those are zealously anti-choice, proclaiming a fetus is a person. Have any of them moved legislation to their Governor’s desks for signature laws such as I’ve mentioned?
How did DeSantis’ domination win over COVID, or will he claim it was God’s will that people died?
No, because they just prosecute women under existing child endangerment/abuse laws.
Seriously, it’s a thing. Look it up.
At the same time, they will continue to cut funding for pre-natal care, housing, schools, food security and low-income medical care, so we’re going to be a nation of dying families.
It’s all about being self-sufficient, though many on the Right have many of the same issues.
Sure of course they want to outlaw it and turn us into Romania and that’s what will happen - thousands of unwanted children will be left ot be raised by orphanages until they age out and go live on the streets. Just like Romania.
They think the crime rate is high now? It’s all tied together. Thank god I’ll be dead when they reap what they are sowing.
Actually, it’s all about an issue (abortion) which distracts people while they “continue to cut funding for pre-natal care, housing, schools, food security and low-income medical care.” and taxes, and lots more.
