Is a reversal of Roe v Wade decision next?

[schuylaar]

That will not work. It will be the same as when they did trump. Woopty do.

Somebody should probably just shoot them. Open carry on the way there if you feel compelled.

Remove.

 

[bam0813]

Men rush to get vasectomies after Supreme Court ends right to abortion

The Washington Post reports that men are "rushing" to get vasectomies in the wake of the Supreme Court ending Americans' right to abortions. Doug Stein, a Florida surgeon referred to…

boingboing.net

They were getting them anyway but Roe made their final decision for them..even young men.

This makes sense to me. If you don’t want children get tied. Pretty sure it’s reversible to a point at least if feelings change or they could adopt

 

[bam0813]

We spay our animals but alot of them do better jobs so why not

 

[hanimmal]

I posted this because I want to rant on it some. I’ve been reading & re-reading the constitution, the founders’ letters and pamphlets, for more than 60 years. I may not have more insight into it than the next person, and I dont have a notebook full of different answers on things, but I did learn stuff. And for as long as I’ve been doing it, there’s been a conversation going around about how to interpret it all - how to parcel out their intentions. One way is what I learned or figured out or something,which I’ve always called “original intent”; another that’s been in the news for 20+ years, pushed hard by the “Federalist” Society, they call “originalism”.

These two sound the same, almost, but they’re very different in the approach they take and the kinds of determinations they end up enabling. At this hour of the morning, though, I’m not going to get much done on it now. But I wanted to bring it forward so I’d stumble over it instead of forgetting.

Before I pass out, tho, I want to say a word about the “Federalists” in the Federalist Society:

Back when the constitution was written, one huge sticking point blocking adoption was the question of rights. Opinions divided sharply between the Federalists (the OG) - who believed that the ordinary freedoms, rights, & liberties were so commonly enjoyed, so alive in the new nation’s communities, so well understood by the people that spelling them all out was seen as laborious, wasteful of time and parchment, and completely unnecessary (some seem to have considered it rude to assume that the people required an itemized list to know their rights); on the Anti-Federalist society, there was concern and distrust of the document, because events with England left many Americans wary of rights being deprived by virtue of being unacknowledged in our founding document. The arguments were pretty fine in their own way, and if someone was interested one could grab a copy of The Anti-Federalist Papers (sometimes held up as an important document in the evolution of libertarianism, but that’s an altogether different thing).

It’s because of this specific round of wrangling that we have the Constitution’s first ten amendments, aka the Bill of Rights…and the arguing hasn’t stopped since,; however, fears were soothed & objections retired, and the Constitution was adopted. For the next 200-210 years, we’ve made do, and kept wrangling about rights.

One of the biggest ‘persuaders’ in the document was amendment #9, which explicitly stated that the rights of citizens could not be denied, even if they weren’t made explicit in the document, and must be honored and protected. This amendment has not been respected by either state or federal government, and I’ve been unable to discover a single case in which an ‘unenumerated‘ right was asserted a US court, where that assertion was accepted & the right recognized. Instead, what has happened is the court has dismis the assertion, on the grounds that the Amendment simply didn’t apply to the right being asserted. I could certainly have missed what I was looking for, but I did look hard - and for a while.

Enter the Federalist Society. The society has been the source of every judge placed on a bench by a Republican since the Bush (Pappy) administration. Not just SCROTUS justices, but judges at every level of the federal judiciary: strictly speaking, between Federalist picks, and procedural interference in the senate to block and eventually hold hostage every judicial appointment made by every democrat president, the Republican Party has packed the judiciary with ”federalist-approved” ideologues at every opportunity for the past thirty years.

This is how we got ourselves saddled with a SCROTUS that is monomaniacally focused on reversing as much of the last 160 years of judicial precedent as they can arrange. They’re doing it now. None of this is theoretical, it’s not speculation, they’ve said out loud that they want to undermine as much “settled law” as they can reach; they’ve said what they intend to do…and they’re doing it.

This, after assuring the senate, during examination of their fitness for the High Bench, that they would NEVER do *exactly* what they are doing right now: overturning keystone precedents, flaunting their lies by turning their back on stare decisis, in effect DARING the USA to find a way to stop them from burning down the legal system - and much of the ways in which US citizens and residents go about their lives.

As mentioned, their main weapon - other than lying under oath to get their jobs under false pretenses - has been “originalism”…and I’ll go into that later.

It is hard for me to not think that their definitions are just a smokescreen for them to basically data mine our laws for every loophole or logical fallacy that they can exploit at an opportune moment.

And right now they know their con that they have been running since at least Nixon is getting exposed fully and they decided that it is time to skin the sheep instead of the sheering that they were able to get away with for decades.

Will have to read the email again, but we got something from the ceo that seemed to indicate that anyone residing in shitty states that finds themselves in need will be fully covered for time off, travel costs, med costs, etc. to go to a non shitty state to get things taken care of.

Just going to think of many states the same way I think of Kansas....and what I think of them is they can choke to death on a big bag of gay dicks. I do what I can to not use businesses based in those states (there aren't many surprise surprise) and try not to spend any money if I happen to pass through.

Makes economical sense to me. Lose a good employee for a week or so and pay some likely tax deductible benefits, or lose them for several months-permanently as their entire lives are upended by a unwanted pregnancy that the Regressives in the Republican party are forcing them to bring to incubate and then birth.

 

[Bagginski]

Singling out young women was deliberate, they will suffer the greatest impact and are the one needing to take the strongest most effective action. Being online is great for organizing action and advertising for cheap like the Lincoln project, but 1/3 of Americans don't vote and many of them are young. Winning in November is the priority and not much else, if they want their basic human rights back.

Of course it was deliberate.
OF COURSE THEY WILL SUFFER
THEY ARE SUFFERING *NOW*

Maybe I’m just activated by seeing the shock of last Friday’s SCROTUS treachery ECHO across my extended community, but they don’t NEED this “tough love”…practically *every* woman I know is reeling from it, dealing with the sudden sense of failure and dread from the lynching of so much hard work & community-building and activism.

Jsnatch said that the vacating of Roe ‘won’t affect 99%’, but that’s not true: this will affect EVERYONE who has women in their lives who matter to them…I’ve been working overtime helping so many who’ve turned to me for comfort, guidance and encouragement; I assure you that “tough love” and an asskicking is NOT WHAT THEY NEED RIGHT NOW.

They will come back strong: they will come back ROARING…but they’re ALREADY dealing with Alito’s asskicking; I think letting them have a week - or even TWO - to recover & regroup from having their world turned upside down is precious little to ask.

I think that - right this second - a little compassion, a little patience, A LITTLE LOVE AND SUPPORT is *completely appropriate* and entirely necessary. Expecting them to hold still for an *extra* asskicking from allies while they’re still recovering is both cruel and unusual.

A little kindness - a little patience - a trace of empathy is the least WE can do for them. I get that you can’t see (or don’t care about) the impact of your ‘advice’; maybe it‘s just the way you were raised; maybe you don’t think that much of kindness toward those who’ve JUST SUFFERED A DISASTER; maybe you’ve never had to recover / help others recover from a disaster: I have, and I can tell you that slapping them around at a time like this is not just cruel, not just “bad form”.

It’s counterproductive. Save your tough-love & condescension for when (if ever) it might do some good: NOW IS NOT THAT TIME.

Sorry to go all papa-bear…but you’re messin’ with my kids, my friends, my students & sisters: I’m asking you to please stop.

 

[DIY-HP-LED]

It’s counterproductive. Save your tough-love & condescension for when (if ever) it might do some good: NOW IS NOT THAT TIME.

Sorry to go all papa-bear…but you’re messin’ with my kids, my friends, my students & sisters: I’m asking you to please stop.

I think you are displaying the classic problem with liberals in general and I'm one, in that you eat your own and are quick to be judgmental and demand some sort of perfection from your allies. I understand why though, when people go tribal they impose group discipline and conformity, it's the same on the right, because they have been at war longer. Well you are at war now and every war needs it's sergeants and sometimes they aren't nice nice people, neither am I when it comes to waging war. Don't mistake a call to effective action for misogamy and you will see many memes with the same theme and all the advice from political professionals will be the same, hit the bricks. It's natural and normal to be shocked and reeling, but one of the purposes of carrying signs in the streets is to meet like minded people and organize from the ground up. Tears of rage only help when they fuel action for change and social media is more useful for that than bitching, but it will be used for that too.

In war it is best to play to your natural advantages, as in the David and Goliath story I posted in war thread. Women have natural strengths and propensities that if they harness them correctly could make the biggest difference of all. Anybody who want's political change, not just women, has to get off their asses and hit the bricks, unless you are doing something online that has a bigger impact. This is about community organization on a personal level and women as a rule are better at that than men, which is why they are the backbone of most social organizations.

 

[Budley Doright]

Thats free here to but now covids kinda in the past its not something local Drs like doing for safety.
In the foreseeable future i can see a women seeing a dr or telehealth only available with your father's or husband's permission. The Dutch have been very good at getting drugs into America but its getting harder and harder and like Assange with free press once they take out a well known player the rest won't bother.
I have a female friend who lives in Louisville Kentucky and if she was married (she is divorced) and wanted her tubes tied she would have to get her husband's permission. That's so medieval and things are going to get worse.

As women no longer have rights will they be allowed to vote soon? Guessing that will get cancelled after the gay marraige and sodemy is finanalised. How long until they cannot own property and work do you think?

Can you provide an actual link that a women in Kentucky needs her husbands permission please?

 

[Budley Doright]

We spay our animals but alot of them do better jobs so why not

You really need to learn what this decision means to women/children. It’s seems you really have not a clue of the real ramifications. If you would gain some knowledge about the ruling and all that could/will follow then perhaps you may actually be as outraged as anyone with a brain.
PS unless your goal is to punish women like some here

 

[DIY-HP-LED]

You really need to learn what this decision means to women/children. It’s seems you really have not a clue of the real ramifications. If you would gain some knowledge about the ruling and all that could/will follow then perhaps you may actually be as outraged as anyone with a brain.
PS unless your goal is to punish women like some here

Hey contraception is next and men will be going on secret little trips to blues states too, for vasectomies. I guess it will depend on how badly, mostly white Americans, want to fuck themselves for a mythical "greater cause". Something is causing mass stupidity down there and jerking people's chains really hard.

 

[bam0813]

Not following. Were we not talking about guys vasectomy. Protect women? Ya no baby. If you know in advance you don’t want kids go ahead and get tied. How does this upset you? You quoted a post i equated shitty parents that don’t want the kid anyway just like we do to animals because we know we don’t want pups?

 

[bam0813]

You guys are a trip lmao. Punish women lol ya like your buddy ^^^^^ promoting the caliphate hahaha

 

[cannabineer]

Hey contraception is next and men will be going on secret little trips to blues states too, for vasectomies. I guess it will depend on how badly, mostly white Americans, want to fuck themselves for a mythical "greater cause". Something is causing mass stupidity down there and jerking people's chains really hard.

Dominionist megapastors

 

[Budley Doright]

Dominionist megapastors

Megamorons. This thread sure did draw them out .

 

[cannabineer]

Megamorons. This thread sure did draw them out .

imo the morons are the effect of a century of the worst sort of evangelical excess. The megapastors are a major source of the evil.

 

[Roger A. Shrubber]

I posted this because I want to rant on it some. I’ve been reading & re-reading the constitution, the founders’ letters and pamphlets, for more than 60 years. I may not have more insight into it than the next person, and I dont have a notebook full of different answers on things, but I did learn stuff. And for as long as I’ve been doing it, there’s been a conversation going around about how to interpret it all - how to parcel out their intentions. One way is what I learned or figured out or something,which I’ve always called “original intent”; another that’s been in the news for 20+ years, pushed hard by the “Federalist” Society, they call “originalism”.

These two sound the same, almost, but they’re very different in the approach they take and the kinds of determinations they end up enabling. At this hour of the morning, though, I’m not going to get much done on it now. But I wanted to bring it forward so I’d stumble over it instead of forgetting.

Before I pass out, tho, I want to say a word about the “Federalists” in the Federalist Society:

Back when the constitution was written, one huge sticking point blocking adoption was the question of rights. Opinions divided sharply between the Federalists (the OG) - who believed that the ordinary freedoms, rights, & liberties were so commonly enjoyed, so alive in the new nation’s communities, so well understood by the people that spelling them all out was seen as laborious, wasteful of time and parchment, and completely unnecessary (some seem to have considered it rude to assume that the people required an itemized list to know their rights); on the Anti-Federalist society, there was concern and distrust of the document, because events with England left many Americans wary of rights being deprived by virtue of being unacknowledged in our founding document. The arguments were pretty fine in their own way, and if someone was interested one could grab a copy of The Anti-Federalist Papers (sometimes held up as an important document in the evolution of libertarianism, but that’s an altogether different thing).

It’s because of this specific round of wrangling that we have the Constitution’s first ten amendments, aka the Bill of Rights…and the arguing hasn’t stopped since,; however, fears were soothed & objections retired, and the Constitution was adopted. For the next 200-210 years, we’ve made do, and kept wrangling about rights.

One of the biggest ‘persuaders’ in the document was amendment #9, which explicitly stated that the rights of citizens could not be denied, even if they weren’t made explicit in the document, and must be honored and protected. This amendment has not been respected by either state or federal government, and I’ve been unable to discover a single case in which an ‘unenumerated‘ right was asserted a US court, where that assertion was accepted & the right recognized. Instead, what has happened is the court has dismis the assertion, on the grounds that the Amendment simply didn’t apply to the right being asserted. I could certainly have missed what I was looking for, but I did look hard - and for a while.

Enter the Federalist Society. The society has been the source of every judge placed on a bench by a Republican since the Bush (Pappy) administration. Not just SCROTUS justices, but judges at every level of the federal judiciary: strictly speaking, between Federalist picks, and procedural interference in the senate to block and eventually hold hostage every judicial appointment made by every democrat president, the Republican Party has packed the judiciary with ”federalist-approved” ideologues at every opportunity for the past thirty years.

This is how we got ourselves saddled with a SCROTUS that is monomaniacally focused on reversing as much of the last 160 years of judicial precedent as they can arrange. They’re doing it now. None of this is theoretical, it’s not speculation, they’ve said out loud that they want to undermine as much “settled law” as they can reach; they’ve said what they intend to do…and they’re doing it.

This, after assuring the senate, during examination of their fitness for the High Bench, that they would NEVER do *exactly* what they are doing right now: overturning keystone precedents, flaunting their lies by turning their back on stare decisis, in effect DARING the USA to find a way to stop them from burning down the legal system - and much of the ways in which US citizens and residents go about their lives.

As mentioned, their main weapon - other than lying under oath to get their jobs under false pretenses - has been “originalism”…and I’ll go into that later.

they are enemies of the United States, who attained their office under false pretense, while under oath...it seems like it should be someones duty to remove them from the bench before they can fuck the entire country over irreversibly.
i see no difference between this and trump having succeeded in staying in office, illegitimately...except this is actually more harmful than 4 more years of trump would have been...he's a fucking moron, these people are far from stupid, they're just fucking evil.

 

[Budley Doright]

You guys are a trip lmao. Punish women lol ya like your buddy ^^^^^ promoting the caliphate hahaha

Actually that was the reality of what Grampa was saying. Punish the slutty women who allow themselves to get pregnant. Do you agree with that? As far as learning more about this ruling your statement about when and why they can and cannot be done was blatantly wrong so yes learn more and it may help you seem brighter, just sayin.

 

[Budley Doright]

imo the morons are the effect of a century of the worst sort of evangelical excess. The megapastors are a major source of the evil.

Yes your probably right, I honestly am dumbfounded at the whole situation you all are dealing with.

 

[injinji]

Sure it will, it will mean codifying abortion rights into law.

It will also mean impeachment inquires for some conservative justices in preparation for packing the court and forcing one of the assholes to retire. It will mean election reform and laws, along with a domestic terrorist watch list and meaningful gun regulation. So the election in November will make a big difference and how many end up in prison is one is one of many issues to be settled.

The blue team will need 53 senators before anything like that is possible since two always vote with the red team. Until we unpack the court it really doesn't matter what gets passed. The court will strike down anything they don't like.

 

[Roger A. Shrubber]

Can you provide an actual link that a women in Kentucky needs her husbands permission please?

it's not law...at the minute, anyway, but a lot of providers won't do it without a males signature...which would leave me to organize protests and boycotts at each and every one of them...
https://4w.pub/in-2020-women-still-need-their-husbands-permission-to-get-sterilized/

 

[injinji]

imo the morons are the effect of a century of the worst sort of evangelical excess. The megapastors are a major source of the evil.

I will carve out a little exception for Marcus Lamb. That man did more to reduce CO2 emissions among the faithful than any other evangelical.