|
VitalSigns posted:Remember how long liberals were mad when RBG died and got replaced lol Don't worry they channeled that righteous fury to go out and VOTE for a senate that can't do anything because it's currently paralyzed by the "no matter who" half of their rallying cry.
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 22:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 17:54 |
|
|
Sydin posted:Don't worry they channeled that righteous fury to go out and VOTE for a senate that can't do anything because it's currently paralyzed by the "no matter who" half of their rallying cry. those women in america asked for it anyway!
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 23:30
|
|
|
Yeah even as a smarmy joke that's not funny. The decision whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term is a fundamental human dignity and that is now in serious danger of being stripped away - or at least heavily abridged - while the nominally "progressive" political option can't do anything to stop it because they've allowed their ranks to be filled with centrist and conservative poo poo heels in critical positions of power is reprehensible and abhorrent.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 00:36
|
|
|
The Supreme Court straight up stole an election and Democrats/liberals just moved on.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 01:03
|
|
|
The Pope explicitly American Bishops not to try to deny Biden and other Democrats communion over their support of abortion rights. The forced-pregnancy lobby definitely seems to be marshaling for a final showdown.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 01:19
|
|
|
Grammarchist posted:The Pope explicitly American Bishops not to try to deny Biden and other Democrats communion over their support of abortion rights. The forced-pregnancy lobby definitely seems to be marshaling for a final showdown. Unless multiple conservative justices die or retire(lol) with a Dem* in the WH and with Dem control over the Senate, that lobby effectively controls the country for the next several decades. * also assumes it's not some idiot centrist who nominates a conservative to "keep the court balanced" or whatever idiocy they'd use to not pick a progressive or even center-left replacement.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 02:06
|
|
|
Everything is doomed. Nothing to do now except post about how doomed we are.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 02:07
|
|
|
Sydin posted:Back to the actual topic of the thread, my guess is at a minimum Kav and Roberts recognize how monumentally stupid it would be to overturn Casey or Roe v Wade in their entirety at this point in time. If they go full Theocracy and declare abortions illegal baby murder, the outrage will absolutely be at a level that the Dems could very well pickup seats in the midterm and have enough non-shithead senators to start actually governing. Better to take a death by a thousand cuts approach - at least for now - and just rule that it's legal to throw up more bullshit barriers to abortion such that it is functionally unavailable in red states. I hope that Beer and Roberts THINK there would be too much blowback, but IMO most of the GOP and their base are correct in thinking that things are in their favor enough that Now is the Time to strike bold blows and go for big changes.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 02:49
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/emorwee/status/1394711339281518594
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 02:52
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:The Supreme Court straight up stole an election and Democrats/liberals just moved on. They invented and cling to a conspiracy theory about Nader being a plant to ignore the conspiracy that stole the election. Gore flinching that hard suggests he knew, so they also ignore that. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 04:25
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Unless multiple conservative justices die or retire(lol) with a Dem* in the WH and with Dem control over the Senate, that lobby effectively controls the country for the next several decades. Why in the hell do you think “The West Wing” is somehow related to real life? You’re literally making poo poo up and then getting mad about it. Big Hubris posted:They invented and cling to a conspiracy theory about Nader being a plant to ignore the conspiracy that stole the election. Gore flinching that hard suggests he knew, so they also ignore that. I don’t recall seeing you do anything about it. Maybe consider that this was for the oldest posters here one of the first presidential elections they voted in and might not be all that connected to the so-called leftists who would have swung the election for lack of a little more support. Solkanar512 fucked around with this message at 04:34 on May 19, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 04:31
|
|
|
The “Nader lost Gore the election/Nader was a plant” stuff was just a gen x version of “the DNC is an all powerful shadowy organization who is responsible for Bernie losing twice and for Swearengin losing in a landslide -40”. People always come up with excuses and delusions when they lose. Happens on all sides.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 04:39
|
|
|
You have to put Nader in context with Perot who split the vote in 92 and made noise again in 96. It’s not that crazy to imagine in Perot’s absence a second term for bush followed by another R in 96.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 05:19
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:
I don't know about other blue states, but abortion would be immediately outlawed in Massachusetts because the legislature never repealed the 1845 law banning it.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 05:42
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:I don't know about other blue states, but abortion would be immediately outlawed in Massachusetts because the legislature never repealed the 1845 law banning it. Massachusetts repealed that in 2018, and the state supreme court recognized an independent right to abortion under the state constitution in Moe v. Secretary of Administration and Finance (1980).
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 08:36
|
|
|
Looking forward to more idiots making tortured arguments about how things aren't actually that bad while Breyer continues to insist that the court is apolitical and that retiring now would damage faith in it. Solkanar512 posted:Why in the hell do you think “The West Wing” is somehow related to real life? You’re literally making poo poo up and then getting mad about it. What the hell does the West Wing have to do with this? The SCOTUS and judiciary in general is stacked with a bunch of right wingers selected specifically for their political views which includes them all being anti-choice. The GOP (correctly) sees the courts as their best defense against change since loading it with a lot of middle aged extremists means they ultimately control things because judicial reform is dead in the water thanks to Republicans and shithead  Dems.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 14:19
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:What the hell does the West Wing have to do with this? The SCOTUS and judiciary in general is stacked with a bunch of right wingers selected specifically for their political views which includes them all being anti-choice. The GOP (correctly) sees the courts as their best defense against change since loading it with a lot of middle aged extremists means they ultimately control things because judicial reform is dead in the water thanks to Republicans and shithead The bullshit claim made about some big mean liberal nominating a conservative justice “out of fairness” is lifted wholesale from The West Wing, numbnuts. But hey, whatever it takes to keep that fake rage going I guess.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 15:14
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:I don't know about other blue states, but abortion would be immediately outlawed in Massachusetts because the legislature never repealed the 1845 law banning it. Seems unlikely that if any blue states still have defunct anti-abortion laws on the books that they would even bother to enforce them and/or wouldn't repeal them immediately. E: Massachusetts' GOP governor even signed the repeal, you don't get elected as a Republican in a state with Democratic supermajorities if you're a biblethumping nutter ranting about abortions and gay sex VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 15:42 on May 19, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 15:40
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Seems unlikely that if any blue states still have defunct anti-abortion laws on the books that they would even bother to enforce them and/or wouldn't repeal them immediately. I don’t see how this proves your case that “blue state libs wouldn’t care”.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 15:41
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:I don’t see how this proves your case that “blue state libs wouldn’t care”. Probably you are confused because fabricated that quote and attributed it to me, you don't have to post to argue with yourself, you can do it in your own head.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 15:44
|
|
|
I think you'd need more Scalia/Thomas/Alito types on the court to get a full repeal of Roe. They'll likely continue the death of a thousand cuts that the right to choose has experience ever since Roe was decided.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 16:09
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:The bullshit claim made about some big mean liberal nominating a conservative justice “out of fairness” is lifted wholesale from The West Wing, numbnuts. But hey, whatever it takes to keep that fake rage going I guess. Not everyone watches and/or gives a poo poo about The West Wing like you do I guess so grats on being an rear end in a top hat looking to pick a fight? I guess Democrats have never nominated garbage conservatives to the court due to idiotic "decorum" and garbage traditions right? So there's no reason to worry that similar idiocy will happen again. Groovelord Neato posted:I think you'd need more Scalia/Thomas/Alito types on the court to get a full repeal of Roe. They'll likely continue the death of a thousand cuts that the right to choose has experience ever since Roe was decided. Barrett and Kavanaugh easily fit in that group. Abortion rights will only exist to the extent that Gorsuch and Roberts decide they should and if either of them decide "yes I think abortion should be illegal" then that's the end of abortion in the US for the foreseeable future, unless the SCOTUS majority changes.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 17:03
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Not everyone watches and/or gives a poo poo about The West Wing like you do I guess so grats on being an rear end in a top hat looking to pick a fight? I guess Democrats have never nominated garbage conservatives to the court due to idiotic "decorum" and garbage traditions right? So there's no reason to worry that similar idiocy will happen again. You literally took something from a lovely TV show, pretended it was real and got mad over it. Learn the difference between television and reality.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:You literally took something from a lovely TV show, pretended it was real and got mad over it. Learn the difference between television and reality. You didn't get it so let me make it clearer: I've never watched The West Wing and that a TV show did a thing doesn't invalidate the sact that Dems have done similar stupid poo poo and with how many of them act it's entirely possible they'll continue to do similar stupid poo poo. (and I gave an example of the Dems doing this exact thing which you're conveniently ignoring) Evil Fluffy fucked around with this message at 17:28 on May 19, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 17:19
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Barrett and Kavanaugh easily fit in that group. Abortion rights will only exist to the extent that Gorsuch and Roberts decide they should and if either of them decide "yes I think abortion should be illegal" then that's the end of abortion in the US for the foreseeable future, unless the SCOTUS majority changes. Undoing Roe is not the end of abortion in the US. It allows the possibility of ending it. Red states will ban it, blue states won't or will explicitly permit it. A federal ban requires an anti-abortion trifecta so that's 2025 at the earliest.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 18:03
|
|
|
This may be outside the bounds of this thread, but is there any hope that there are people out there who are currently republicans or nonvoters who may become single-issue voters if abortion is outlawed in their state? I'm guessing the answer is no, because poor women have already been destroyed by decades of defacto bans on abortion and nothing has changed, while rich women will always have the means to find an abortion no matter the laws of their state.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 18:25
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Undoing Roe is not the end of abortion in the US. It allows the possibility of ending it. Red states will ban it, blue states won't or will explicitly permit it. A federal ban requires an anti-abortion trifecta so that's 2025 at the earliest. Undoing the CRA allowed the possibility of ratfucking the voter rolls which happened *checks notes* the very next day. poo poo abbot signed a six week ban **today**
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 18:31
|
|
|
Proust Malone posted:Undoing the CRA allowed the possibility of ratfucking the voter rolls which happened *checks notes* the very next day. poo poo abbot signed a six week ban **today** They mean that only red states will ban abortion immediately. In states where there isn't the political will to do it at the state level, congress will need to pass a law, which will require republican control of congress and the presidency.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 18:34
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:You literally took something from a lovely TV show, pretended it was real and got mad over it. Learn the difference between television and reality. chill
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 18:48
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Undoing Roe is not the end of abortion in the US. It allows the possibility of ending it. Red states will ban it, blue states won't or will explicitly permit it. A federal ban requires an anti-abortion trifecta so that's 2025 at the earliest. This depends on how a Roe repeal is argued in the decision, really. The anti-abortion movement's end goal isn't just repealing Roe/Casey, it's mandating fetal personhood, and if a hypothetical SCOTUS case issued a repeal not just based on Roe and Casey being decided wrong, but on Roe and Casey being decided wrong because of fetal personhood, that would result in a nationwide ban, not just throwing it back to the states like a barebones repeal would do.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 19:01
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:This depends on how a Roe repeal is argued in the decision, really. The anti-abortion movement's end goal isn't just repealing Roe/Casey, it's mandating fetal personhood, and if a hypothetical SCOTUS case issued a repeal not just based on Roe and Casey being decided wrong, but on Roe and Casey being decided wrong because of fetal personhood, that would result in a nationwide ban, not just throwing it back to the states like a barebones repeal would do. You're broadly right, but your use of "repeal" is making my eye muscles twitch.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 19:23
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:This depends on how a Roe repeal is argued in the decision, really. The anti-abortion movement's end goal isn't just repealing Roe/Casey, it's mandating fetal personhood, and if a hypothetical SCOTUS case issued a repeal not just based on Roe and Casey being decided wrong, but on Roe and Casey being decided wrong because of fetal personhood, that would result in a nationwide ban, not just throwing it back to the states like a barebones repeal would do. SCOTUS dictating the existence of fetal personhood out of whole cloth in an effort to invalidate blue state abortion protections would be a really quick way to force the Dems to action, so it would be an incredibly stupid move. That's more of less what Taney did with Dread Scott and that did not turn out great for the Pro Slavery Camp.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 19:32
|
|
|
Fetal personhood would create a dozen constitutional crises when states and their courts say “fetal personhood doesn’t override the rights of a pregnant person over their own body guaranteed by our state”.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 19:44
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Undoing Roe is not the end of abortion in the US. It allows the possibility of ending it. Red states will ban it, blue states won't or will explicitly permit it. A federal ban requires an anti-abortion trifecta so that's 2025 at the earliest. The SCOTUS can absolutely issue a ruling that ends legal abortion nationwide if 5+ justices want to do so. It's far more realistic that they'd give a ruling that makes it a state level decision (for now) but the conservatives on the court have absolutely zero qualms with doing whatever they want regardless of how nakedly corrupt or absurd it is. They just recently handed down a ruling about non-unanimous jury convictions that doesn't even try to explain how it's ok to keep people in prison who were convicted non-unanimously despite having decided that convictions by non-unanimous juries are unconstitutional. Sanguinia posted:SCOTUS dictating the existence of fetal personhood out of whole cloth in an effort to invalidate blue state abortion protections would be a really quick way to force the Dems to action, so it would be an incredibly stupid move. That's more of less what Taney did with Dread Scott and that did not turn out great for the Pro Slavery Camp. Thinking ahead to the consequences of their actions isn't a Republican strong point.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 19:47
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Fetal personhood would create a dozen constitutional crises when states and their courts say “fetal personhood doesn’t override the rights of a pregnant person over their own body guaranteed by our state”. I don't see how it would be a crisis, states can have different laws on what constitutes murder versus manslaughter versus justifiable homicide.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 19:51
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:I don't see how it would be a crisis, states can have different laws on what constitutes murder versus manslaughter versus justifiable homicide. SCOTUS has already decided they know more about state constitutions than the state supreme court, and they’d do it again.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 19:56
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:The SCOTUS can absolutely issue a ruling that ends legal abortion nationwide if 5+ justices want to do so. It's far more realistic that they'd give a ruling that makes it a state level decision (for now) but the conservatives on the court have absolutely zero qualms with doing whatever they want regardless of how nakedly corrupt or absurd it is. They just recently handed down a ruling about non-unanimous jury convictions that doesn't even try to explain how it's ok to keep people in prison who were convicted non-unanimously despite having decided that convictions by non-unanimous juries are unconstitutional. It's also worth pointing out that with Roberts now on the "liberal" wing, having lost his centroid position with RBG being replaced by ACB, if all five of the other right-wingers want to throw out any given precedent, it doesn't matter if he wants to stop them to preserve the decorum of the court, or the long-term conservative agenda, or whatever else. He can't. It would just happen 5-4 without him. (Though he'd be more likely to sign on, making it 6-3, so he can write the ruling or assign it to whoever he wants to actually pen the thing.)
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:I don't see how it would be a crisis, states can have different laws on what constitutes murder versus manslaughter versus justifiable homicide. Wonder how long it'll go before airlines charge extra for expectant mothers and how long before we get a lawsuit demanding the issuance of an SSN to a fetus as well as granting the tax allowance for a child 4 months before birth.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2021 00:48
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Wonder how long it'll go before airlines charge extra for expectant mothers and how long before we get a lawsuit demanding the issuance of an SSN to a fetus as well as granting the tax allowance for a child 4 months before birth. Simply abort your dependent when the IRS accepts the return!
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2021 00:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 17:54 |
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Looking forward to more idiots making tortured arguments about how things aren't actually that bad while Breyer continues to insist that the court is apolitical and that retiring now would damage faith in it. Antifa Turkeesian posted:I don’t think there are single-issue republicans any more. The way politics functions as identity for republicans means they’ll stay because they have nothing else and nowhere to go. Gun control has been a dead issue for 20 years, but gun nuts have continued to vote republican. Raldikuk posted:I'm sure this is
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2021 03:22
|
|
but PMCs have seen a huge rise in the US military and they continued to get pushed.