On the heels of Roe - same-sex marriage and contraception (1 Viewer)

[Bleu Raeder]

As Supreme Court overturns abortion rights, could same-sex marriage be next to go?

No other justices signed onto Justice Clarence Thomas' opinion, but it nonetheless served...

www.houstonchronicle.com

"Justice" Thomas wants to burn it all down...except for interracial marriage.

WASHINGTON — As the Supreme Court on Friday declared the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested the court should also reconsider past rulings establishing rights to contraception, same-sex relationships and gay marriage, as well.

“We have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents,” Thomas wrote in a concurring opinion, pointing to landmark decisions that protected the right to obtain contraception, the right to engage in private, consensual sexual acts, and the right to same-sex marriage.

 

[bdb13]

Gay marriage is as good as gone imo.

 

[Optimus Prime]

When the ruling was leaked and people worried about this exact thing being the next steps others said it was ridiculous and it wouldn’t happen

And yet, here we are

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

If you can overturn Roe you can overturn nearly anything based on Substantive Due Process and Equal Protection. The Court will only get worse as I don't see a Democrat winning in 2024 so any potential vacancies at that time will be filled with people even more right-of-center than Thomas.

 

[zztop]

yep, this is just the start of things. Be ready for them to strip away even more in the coming years

 

[Heathen]

The Democrats being spineless and 'catering to the middle' is part of what brought us to this point.

We may be forced to lay in the bed we made.

 

[bdb13]

The Democrats being spineless and 'catering to the middle' is part of what brought us to this point.

We may be forced to lay in the bed we made.

There has not been political will or political power in place for Democrats to operate from a place other than center-left. I don't see what you see in the landscape that makes you believe the Democrats could have gone much further left on things and that that in turn would have beget more political power for them which in turn could have prevented things like this.

If you're hearkening back to 2008 and Obama and the large majorities Democrats enjoyed in the house and senate back then.. then OK. But since then it hasn't been feasible or realistic to believe that pushing further to the left would have been more advantageous.

The right succumbing to extremism on all fronts is the right's forking problem we're all having to deal with. They themselves are responsible for what they've become and a push greatly further to the left ain't going to be the solution in fighting it.

 

[Heathen]

There has not been political will or political power in place for Democrats to operate from a place other than center-left.

Interesting, because the climate says different: You don't see that more Americans than not support extensive measures on gun control, medicare for all / subsidized healthcare, climate change action, higher minimum wage, etc? Even by Democrats themselves, these are 'far left' <:insert scary music here:> ideas.

I don't see what you see in the landscape that makes you believe the Democrats could have gone much further left on things and that that in turn would have beget more political power for them which in turn could have prevented things like this.

Read above - the climate is certainly there for Democrats to operate on a more leftward agenda.
Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Barrett - all Trump nominees and arguably all hard right wingers. You honestly don't see how Democrats putting forth a vanilla-policy warhawk against a populist was a bad idea that had a consequential ripple effect years later?

If you're hearkening back to 2008 and Obama and the large majorities Democrats enjoyed in the house and senate back then.. then OK. But since then it hasn't been feasible or realistic to believe that pushing further to the left would have been more advantageous.

The right succumbing to extremism on all fronts is the right's forking problem we're all having to deal with. They themselves are responsible for what they've become and a push greatly further to the left ain't going to be the solution in fighting it.

You can keep repeating that - and Democrats will keep losing like this. Let's talk about what we do know. We do know that the majority of Americans support abortion. Why then, do we have a ruling that will shut that right down for half or more of America?

Something's not working. The Democrats by and large haven't had any big surges 'left' by most any standard other than a social issue here or there.
That's what we can call the meandering middle ground. Appease a sect of your more left-leaning followers without angering your conservative Democrat base.

Add that to a big pot of simmering borderline-theocrats whose views by and large haven't changed for 50 years?

This is what you get. And yeah, they'll probably come for gay marriage and forcing their religion into schools next.

 

[Crzycjunx76]

Quick,someone challenge the validity of the drug schedule and turn their argument on its ear.

Edit: Never mind, they abused the commerce clause to justify that... not SDP.

 

[MT15]

The Democrats being spineless and 'catering to the middle' is part of what brought us to this point.

We may be forced to lay in the bed we made.

Ugh. Yes, it’s the democrats fault. Not the Republicans, the Democrats. 🤔

 

[Heathen]

Ugh. Yes, it’s the democrats fault. Not the Republicans, the Democrats. 🤔

Because that's precisely what I said, isn't it?

 

[MT15]

Because that's precisely what I said, isn't it?

In that one post, pretty much. I don’t mean to single you out, though. It’s a common trope among a lot of people. A lot of media, etc. I just find it grates on my nerves a bit because the main reason we are in the position we are in is because of regressive Republican policies going back to Reagan.

 

[Heathen]

In that one post, pretty much. I don’t mean to single you out, though. It’s a common trope among a lot of people. A lot of media, etc. I just find it grates on my nerves a bit because the main reason we are in the position we are in is because of regressive Republican policies going back to Reagan.

No, not really. That's why I said 'part'.

It's true that the GOP's far right policies have been ignited in the wake of Trump and in part stemming from Reagan policies. But to
act like the state of the party plays no role here is to have one's head in the ground, metaphorically.

The Democrats had YEARS through the Obama tenure when they had the majority and heading into the 2016 election to establish a
strong enough base of support to beat a random real estate mogul like Trump. They had YEARS to distinguish themselves from Repubs.
But they didn't, plain and simple. In the states they lost, the states that mattered...Democrats should have EASILY won. Rust Belt States.
States that Democrats should have made strong inroads to on the subjects of providing good jobs, workers rights, family leave, childcare, schooling,
etc. Instead? The voters narrowly rejected Clinton and the Democrats. There are many theories why, but one that is accepted pretty widely
is that the Democratic platform didn't stand for enough. It didn't do enough to convince voters. In other words - it didn't have a strong enough
message for why someone should vote blue. And Clinton assumed she had it in the bag.

You can call it trope. You can dismiss what I'm saying. I"m used to hearing it. But you need to understand that folks like myself aren't against Democrats. We are Democrats. We just realize that doing the same thing and expecting a different result is a great way to have 'A Handmaid's Tale' become reality in a few years, much less in 2024 when a Biden with no real track record of solid accomplishments faces an even more deranged Trump and the ever-present conspiratorial goons that got us into this mess in the first place.

I simply want the Democrats to actually stand for more. And to distance themselves from the 'reasonable middle' which happens to be squarely in the right in America's Overton window.

 

[Crzycjunx76]

Ugh. Yes, it’s the democrats fault. Not the Republicans, the Democrats. 🤔

But they were not catering to the middle. For the most part they were the middle, the wanted to be uniters so they reached out. Many of the Republicans were the middle too, but they were already marching lockstep and more interested in bringing down the opposition... so they insisted on fighting much of which their party members would have supported on their own.

 

[CrowFlies]

maybe next thomas will stop inter-racial marriage too....he seems so busy.

 

[DaveXA]

As Supreme Court overturns abortion rights, could same-sex marriage be next to go?

No other justices signed onto Justice Clarence Thomas' opinion, but it nonetheless served...

www.houstonchronicle.com

"Justice" Thomas wants to burn it all down...except for interracial marriage.

I guess my only hope is that one of the other conservative Justices along with Roberts realizes that Thomas' desire to burn it all down is going to be disastrous for individual civil rights and liberties and that they'll come around for overturning other stuff.

The abortion issue is SOL until Congress changes enough that codifying becomes a possibility.

 

[brandon]

maybe next thomas will stop inter-racial marriage too....he seems so busy.

Maybe Thomas is playing the long game to get out of being married to Ginny.

 

[MT15]

No, not really. That's why I said 'part'.

It's true that the GOP's far right policies have been ignited in the wake of Trump and in part stemming from Reagan policies. But to
act like the state of the party plays no role here is to have one's head in the ground, metaphorically.

The Democrats had YEARS through the Obama tenure when they had the majority and heading into the 2016 election to establish a
strong enough base of support to beat a random real estate mogul like Trump. They had YEARS to distinguish themselves from Repubs.
But they didn't, plain and simple. In the states they lost, the states that mattered...Democrats should have EASILY won. Rust Belt States.
States that Democrats should have made strong inroads to on the subjects of providing good jobs, workers rights, family leave, childcare, schooling,
etc. Instead? The voters narrowly rejected Clinton and the Democrats. There are many theories why, but one that is accepted pretty widely
is that the Democratic platform didn't stand for enough. It didn't do enough to convince voters. In other words - it didn't have a strong enough
message for why someone should vote blue. And Clinton assumed she had it in the bag.

You can call it trope. You can dismiss what I'm saying. I"m used to hearing it. But you need to understand that folks like myself aren't against Democrats. We are Democrats. We just realize that doing the same thing and expecting a different result is a great way to have 'A Handmaid's Tale' become reality in a few years, much less in 2024 when a Biden with no real track record of solid accomplishments faces an even more deranged Trump and the ever-present conspiratorial goons that got us into this mess in the first place.

I simply want the Democrats to actually stand for more. And to distance themselves from the 'reasonable middle' which happens to be squarely in the right in America's Overton window.

I agree with a lot of what you say, but I think you (not just you personally, but a lot of progressives) vastly overestimate the ability of progressives to win elections in huge parts of the country. When we had the newer political test thing a while ago, it said the percentage of the population that identifies as you do was around 10% if I recall correctly. That surprised me, because even I didn’t think it was that low. My more traditional liberal stance was only around 20%, again going from memory. I just don’t think that the party moving further left would solve their problems right now.