Abortion

2021-09-05 10:52:46

#201

SuperJail Warden: Gone Forever; +640|3937

The Texas abortion law is funny. Citizens spying on each other for a bounty is like the USSR. What is particularly interesting is the amount of civil strife this could unleash. If you are a liberal woman do you cut off your pro-life friends and family since they can be informants?

2021-09-05 16:56:55

#202

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|6989|PNW

Supreme Court about split down the middle, 5-4:

Supreme Court Won't Block Highly Restrictive Texas Abortion Law After Delay
https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-cour … ml?src=rss

Remember when people were making noise about Obama nominating two members of the Supreme Court, but then Trump did three without objection from the same group? "A president shouldn't do that!" Except there were presidents who nominated 4, 5. FDR nominated 8. Like, you don't have to be a US history triviologist, just look it up. Reagan nominated 3, by the way. Would have appreciated if more would have just addressed their fears about ideological pull away from their own ideas rather than try and make it about numbers.

Anyway, if it isn't the consequences for some of the fence sitters (who voted for Trump "for the memes" or because "he told it like it is") coming home to roost.

From:

Cassidy: New Texas abortion law could still be 'destroyed' by Supreme Court
https://news.yahoo.com/cassidy-texas-ab … 00155.html

excerpt wrote:
Biden administration have been vocal in their opposition to the measure. Biden said that Texas' restrictive new abortion law violates the Constitution and pledged to "protect and defend" abortion rights.

I'm sure statements from the Biden administration will have a huge swaying impact on the other half of the country. People who go into a dark, seething rage if they so much as hear the name, or other trigger names like AOC, Pelosi, etc. (I have anecdotes).

A better way to prevent abortion imo: thorough and frank sex-ed, bountiful access to contraceptives and family planning. I am so tired of hearing conservatives declare their great concern for babies, and then do a 180 expressing their disdain for welfare programs and stuff like free school lunches. Even when I was on the red side of things, it wasn't something that made much sense to me when I thought about it.

2021-09-05 17:14:12

#203

pirana6: Go Cougs!; +691|6508|Washington St.

The "Obama shouldn't nominate that many" was clearly just a talking point to rile up the base, who aren't smart enough to look 10 years in the past, and aren't smart enough to learn from the past, whether it be 30 seconds ago, or 10 years ago.

Also, I don't have a calendar on me but I'm pretty sure FDR was president for like 30 years so it makes sense that nominated 8.

2021-09-05 17:36:37

#204

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|6989|PNW

Three terms, actually, though maybe it felt like 30 years. Here's a list on top nominators:

https://www.thoughtco.com/who-nominated … es-3880107

Nixon nominated 4.

2021-09-06 00:47:50

#205

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,813|6323|eXtreme to the maX

I don't know what the word is for the arrogance that is expecting everyone else to follow rules that don't exist and simultaneously expecting to be exempt from rules which do exist.

Basically it boils down to "Republicans should be allowed to select the Supreme Court, Republicans should be free to use every trick in the book to prevent Democrats selecting the Supreme Court"

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2021-09-06 01:03:04)

Fuck Israel

2021-09-06 01:13:30

#206

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|6989|PNW

When accused of something they can't wriggle out from under, "the other party does it too!"

It's a similar mindset to pointing out bigotry in Israel or India in response to uncomfortable comments about bigotry at home.

2021-09-06 02:56:08

#207

uziq: Member; +493|3670

Dilbert_X wrote:
I don't know what the word is for the arrogance that is expecting everyone else to follow rules that don't exist and simultaneously expecting to be exempt from rules which do exist.

Basically it boils down to "Republicans should be allowed to select the Supreme Court, Republicans should be free to use every trick in the book to prevent Democrats selecting the Supreme Court"

RBG was urged on several occasions over the better part of a decade to retire when the moment was opportune and a democrat was in the white house. she refused.

democrats have done the exact same thing with supreme court nominations. it's just politics. it's a wonder it hasn't been stacked and expanded several more times than it has. the history of supreme court nominations is pretty labyrinthine and goes way beyond 'republicans are bad lol'.

Last edited by uziq (2021-09-06 02:56:41)

2021-09-06 02:57:47

#208

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,813|6323|eXtreme to the maX

RBG fucked it up.

Fuck Israel

2021-09-06 03:57:16

#209

uziq: Member; +493|3670

the constitutional (or unconstitutional, in the case of the U.K.) overlap between the executive, legislative and judiciary is everchanging. the balance and separation of powers is fragile. different branches of government arrogate or rescind power at different moments.

of course, technically a supreme court judge should never be overtly political, or make any ultra vires claims on the executive’s turf. but, as in the unspoken norms of the british system, it’s obvious that the very senior-most judges are intrinsically political. so, yes, in that regard RBG fucked it up.

the latter-day republican party are far more shameless about playing the game as it has been devised, whether it’s supreme court nominations or voter suppression/district rezoning, etc. but they haven’t been the only blameless ones. not even in recent history.

there’s a wider legal argument about just how big the supreme court should be, ideally. these sorts of things weren’t thought through to the fullest extent when the whole form of government was strung together. often times the judges’ own roles, as well as their judgments, turn on a single clause of text or phrase written over 200 years ago. not easy stuff.

2021-09-06 04:05:02

#210

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,813|6323|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:
the unspoken norms of the british system

LMAO The British judiciary exists to protect the establishment

Fuck Israel

2021-09-06 05:37:07

#211

uziq: Member; +493|3670

yeah, no. the supreme court literally rejected boris johnson's attempt to prorogue parliament last year.

and remember this? from 2016? in one of the main tabloid mouthpieces of the establishment?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cb/Daily_Mail_-_Enemies_of_the_People.png

'the establishment' is present in every country, of course. the US legal system favours rich elites too.

but to say that the judiciary at the highest level plays a servant to the executive or 'establishment' is historically inaccurate. it has ran counter to the aims and ambitions of the government on any number of occasions, asserting the independence of the judiciary.

Last edited by uziq (2021-09-06 05:39:46)

2021-09-06 06:27:58

#212

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,813|6323|eXtreme to the maX

The govt /= the establishment

Fuck Israel

2021-09-06 07:22:24

#213

uziq: Member; +493|3670

i am discussing the separation of powers, particularly in the context of an overweening executive or state legislative.

you, as per usual, seem to think that the travails your family suffered in the 1980s is far more important to the discussion. how many women are there in texas, i wonder?

i already said that, no shit, judges and barristers look more favourably on the rich and privileged insiders. why don’t you turn your ire to the fact that non-whites and street criminals get much harsher sentencing than white-collar criminals? same principle … except oh, it doesn’t affect you personally. i think we GET it by now.

2021-10-04 14:52:34

#214

SuperJail Warden: Gone Forever; +640|3937

Abortion should probably be decided state by state. I think that is where the SCOTUS is going to put us eventually.

A great compromise in which abortion law is devolved back to the states in exchange for free prenatal care, free childhood healthcare, free school lunch (lol what a low bar), and well funded education seems fair. Abortion will still be safe in blue states. There will be plenty of organizations to transport women across state lines to get abortions.

I don't expect either side to agree to such a thing though. The right wingers still view abortion in apocalyptic terms. Left wingers will complain, probably justly, about vulnerable women being unable to get abortions. Neither side can also count on the other side not reneging and either cutting all of those social programs or renationalizing abortion.

I am pro-choice by the way. I strongly believe in my right to pressure a girl into an abortion.

2021-10-04 15:56:17

#215

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|6989|PNW

That creates parts of the country where women have less rights than women in other parts of the country. This Texas thing is an interesting petri dish.

2021-10-04 16:05:30

#216

SuperJail Warden: Gone Forever; +640|3937

So what is your solution? I don't mean that in a combative way. I am genuinely interested to see if you can come up with anything because I don't see people budging from the "abortion is murder" position.

2021-10-04 17:02:05

#217

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|6989|PNW

I don't really have one that covers all variables. If the federal government wasn't sometimes pushy and combative about this stuff, we'd probably still have segregated public schools.

Southern dickheads like talking about how the civil war was about states' rights. The meme response is usually "states' rights to what?" It's hard to imagine a civil war starting over abortion or vaccines though.

2021-12-01 09:18:01

#218

SuperJail Warden: Gone Forever; +640|3937

Abortion case in front of SCOTUS. I am reading the NYT's live feed about it.

I don't expect the SCOTUS to do something extreme and totally ban abortion. I suspect we will get a decision that basically makes abortion a state's rights issue.

I don't have strong feelings on abortion so "states rights" seems reasonable. NYT had an article about how blue states expanded access to abortion during the Trump years. I expect road trips to the abortion clinics to be a thing. Probably will get organizations who help facilitate that.

2021-12-01 14:31:26

#219

KEN-JENNINGS: I am all that is MOD!; +2,978|6849|949

Road trips to buy guns are already a thing. Rich people have the means and resources to travel to areas where safe access to abortions is available. This is nothing more than another rule set forced on the poor.

2021-12-01 17:52:35

#220

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,813|6323|eXtreme to the maX

Ah except travelling out of state or conspiring to help someone travel out of state for an abortion will be a crime prosecutable by Joe Citizen no?

It'll be like China, google searches will be blocked and reported.

Fuck Israel

2021-12-16 17:52:25

#221

SuperJail Warden: Gone Forever; +640|3937

FDA authorized abortion pills by mail without doctor visit. And thus the gauntlet is thrown. Of course the next admin can rescind this. Funny way to get around the problem of geography though the suspect the people most affected by the future state bans will have trouble figuring out how to get their abortion next day delivered.

2021-12-16 20:15:33

#222

uziq: Member; +493|3670

a neat solution. good move. we don’t need any more large families full of catholic republicans.

2021-12-17 18:21:26

#223

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,813|6323|eXtreme to the maX

Next people will be authorised to shoot postmen on sight in case they're delivering abortion pills.

Checkmate.

Fuck Israel

2021-12-17 19:10:55

#224

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6934

i like how this is still a political issue in america

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2022-01-27 08:44:57

#225

RTHKI: mmmf mmmf mmmf; +1,741|6955|Oxferd Ohire

'The first proposal would define that life begins at fertilization and any doctor who performs an abortion after that point could face similar charges to murder. The bill also says birth control and other contraception methods would not be outlawed and abortions could be performed if a mother's life is in danger or an egg was fertilized outside the womb.'

Came across this article, this is South Carolina.
Interesting that life begins at fertilization but only if it's inside a womb

BF2S Forums Abortion

excerpt wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

uziq wrote:

Board footer