Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, eliminating constitutional right to abortion

Women haven't been this upset since they were denied the right to vote.

 

The more relevant term would be "Southern conservatives"

 

“If it’s that late in your pregnancy, then almost by definition, you’ve been expecting to carry it to term,” he said. “We’re talking about women who have perhaps chosen a name, women who have purchased a crib, families that then get the most devastating medical news of their lifetime, something about the health or the life of the mother or viability of the pregnancy, that forces them to make an impossible, unthinkable choice.” - Buttigieg

Resurfaced Buttigieg Video on Late-Term Abortion (advocate.com)

 

There are just a few posters that constantly play with these labels. At first, I wasn't sure if they are fooled or trying to fool others. But since it has been pointed out numerous times, they are just trying to fool others. Dishonesty isn't a good virtue.

 

The exhibit also includes many relics, including a letter from GOP president Calvin Coolidge to the club commemorating its opening in 1924 and a 1902 letter from Susan B. Anthony. Coolidge was an ardent supporter of suffrage at a time when it was unpopular. Usually a walker of the party line, he went against his party’s orthodoxy, noting that women uniquely look to the future and “think of conditions not only for themselves but for their posterity.”

Eventually, the Republican party became the first major party to advocate equal rights for women, and it wasn’t until the Republicans gained control of Congress in 1919 — after Democrats had defeated the 19th amendment four times — that the amendment passed. Twenty-six of the 36 states that ratified it had Republican legislatures.

link​

Next.

 

Not sure how common, but in my circle of very conservative friends, a few didn't even think of women's health and agreed that women's health should be an exception. I didn't think there is anyone out there that don't consider that, but I was wrong. Who knows how many people just keep hearing about killing baby and nothing else.

 

No, they were Democrats. Your attempt to rewrite the history of the Democrat party notwithstanding.

 

So southern conservatives?

Are you saying the people who fought to extend slavery were some Northeast cost liberals or something?

Hey buddy today in the year 2022, who is more likely to display a Confederate battle flag as a form of pride? A Republican voter or Democrat voter?

 

Thoughts?

Texas educators propose referring to slavery as “involuntary relocation” | The Texas Tribune

 

Those must be Democrats right?

 

LiNcOlN WaS a RePuBlIcAN

 

You say "Next" like you responded with something intelligent or proved some point. You're stuck in some feeble political two party, us against them Rep. vs Democrat mindset and quoting party line votes from over 100 years ago, while others are discussing Women's Rights in the year 2022.​

 

What are the underlying causes? What are your solutions? And what are the politicians that you vote for doing to get your proposed solutions enacted? So far, I've seen a ban with no legislation enacted to improve neonatal care, maternal care, an expansion of healthcare for people uninsured, or anything that would improve the quality of life people most in need. That to me, would be a better demonstration of enacting Pro-Life legislation than banning a woman's autonomy over her own body.

 

well, that certainly sounds cherry-picked

 

You do know people can go into foster care at different ages, right? Thousands (millions?) of people want to adopt infants. When you adopt an infant, they grow up seeing you as their parent. They don't have a memory of living with a previous family (their "real" family). They didn't go through their formative years living with parents who may have imparted different standards and values. Your genetics are not there, but the nurture side is all up to you. When you adopt someone that went into foster care at 12, they have already largely developed many of their foundational beliefs, habits, and processes. They also likely have experienced severe childhood trauma. This cohort is much harder to deal with. It is less likely to see you as their "real" parents, and is more likely to have serious behavioral issues that you have little to no chance of correcting. Yes though, at some point every 12-year-old was an infant, and a fetus, and a zygote.

Allowing people to voluntarily choose from any number highly effective birth control methods, including sterilization is a dog whistle for forced sterilization? It seems like you just prefer to argue against straw men instead of addressing the points people actually make.

Whatever the reason, it still wasn't me that brought it up.

I didn't mention women at all. I was explaining to someone else the difference between doing something at the risk of a negative outcome and doing something for the purpose of a negative outcome. You tried to make a hypothetical about women being promised they could gamble because their boyfriend would cover their losses. I pointed out that is not how staking someone normally works and you should probably be skeptical if someone makes such an offer to you. From this, you have extrapolated a claim that women are irresponsible. That does not logically follow.

Putting more infants up for adoption will result in those infants being adopted, because there are people looking to adopt infants. If they are sold out of Teslas, it is not a good argument to say new Teslas won't sell because there are already lots of Nissan Leafs sitting on the lot not selling. They are two different things, and only one of them is in demand. We should try to have fewer unfit mothers losing custody of their teenagers who have trouble getting adopted, but it is a totally separate problem from adoption of infants where demand exceeds supply.

Former planned parenthood workers have explicitly testified that they counseled their patients to lie about the reason for their abortion, in some instances just to get the government to pay for the abortion.

 

I don't agree with women lying to physicians about their health. Late term abortions are a small percentage and women lying about it is likely a small percentage of that small percentage.

 

At what point in the pregnancy does abortion become wrong for you? (Excluding pregnancies with health complications)

 

lol

Abolishing the Filibuster To Protect Abortion Rights Would Clear the Way for Republicans To Ban Abortion
Democrats aren't really this short-sighted, are they?

https://reason.com/2022/06/30/aboli...lear-the-way-for-republicans-to-ban-abortion/

excerpt:

As the president admits, this is not the first time he's voiced support for carving away at the filibuster. After years (many, many years) of championing the Senate's 60-vote threshold as an important aspect of its proper functioning, Biden called in January for the Senate to scrap the filibuster in a narrow way to allow Democrats to overhaul federal election procedures.

But the problem with changing the rules for the elections bill or an abortion bill is the same as the one for abolishing the filibuster for judicial nominees: There's no way to actually do this in a narrow sense. One side doesn't get to break the norms by claiming it's "only just this once" or only for a special reason. Once the filibuster for judicial nominations was scrapped, there was no doubt that it would soon be abolished for Supreme Court nominations too. The same will happen if Democrats kill the legislative filibuster—no matter how good of a reason they might think they had.

Once it's gone, it's gone. And the Senate is (whether fairly or not) tilted in favor of Republicans. It would be beyond foolish for Democrats to willingly walk into this same trap twice in the span of a decade.
​

more at the link