Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights per draft opinion (Update: Dobbs opinion official) (2 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
    Not long ago Kari Lake proclaimed Arizona's abortion law was a great law and wanted it the law of the state.

    Now that she has gotten her way, she is lobbying for it to be repealed.

    As I have been saying since 2022, the overwhelming vast majority of women aren't going to vote for the man who proudly boasts that he got rid of Roe V. Wade. Nor are those women going to vote for a forced birther politician.

    Turns out, republican belief in "pro life" was all just lies to get votes. Who is surprised? I sure am not.

    How many forced birthers will do the same about face?

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/ka ... r-BB1ltx3I.

    Arizona Republican Senate candidate Kari Lake is actively lobbying state lawmakers to overturn a 160-year-old law she once supported that bans abortion in almost all cases, a source with knowledge of her efforts told CNN.
     
    Very interesting read
    ===============
    A statue of Baphomet – a pagan idol used in popular culture as a representation of the devil, with the head, horns and feet of a goat, the torso of a man and the wings of an angel – is the centrepiece of the Satanic Temple’s headquarters in Salem, Massachusetts.

    More than 8ft (2.4 metres) tall, jet black and altogether unnerving, Baphomet serves as a reminder of what brought the Satanic Temple to fame.

    In 2013, the group, which is acknowledged as a religion by the US government, responded to the installation of a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of the Oklahoma state capitol building – seemingly a flagrant abuse of the US constitution’s separation of church and state – by demanding that its own Baphomet statue also be positioned in the grounds.

    According to the first amendment, which protects freedom of religion, public spaces should be open to all religions or none, it argued.

    It turned out that Republican politicians did not want a big statue of a goat-headed pagan deity on capitol grounds.

    Amid lawsuits, the Oklahoma supreme court eventually ordered that the Ten Commandments monument should be removed.

    The tactic, with its wry and anarchic undertones, is typical of the Satanic Temple’s battle against the religious right in the US. In the decade since the spat over the statue, the Temple has tackled prayer in classrooms, religious holiday displays and the distribution of Bibles in schools.

    Now, it is taking on another fundamental issue: the right to abortion.

    The overturning of Roe v Wade last June opened the door for more than half of US states to effectively ban abortion or restrict access to it, horrifying supporters of reproductive rights.

    The Satanic Temple – and many other observers – believe the decision of the supreme court was made on the basis of religion: specifically the extreme form of Christianity that has come to dominate Republican politics in the US.

    The Temple has “seven fundamental tenets”, one of which states: “One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.” This, it believes, offers a way around these draconian new laws.

    It is arguing that its members are exempt from bans or restrictions on abortion, due to their right to a “Satanic Temple religious abortion ritual”, more of which later. With lawsuits already filed in Indiana, Idaho, Texas and Missouri, the Satanic Temple is about to find out whether US courts agree…….

    www.theguardian.com

    Friend of Satan: how Lucien Greaves and his Satanic Temple are fighting the religious right

    They have protested against a homophobic church and opposed prayer in classrooms. Now this minority religion is defending the right to abortion
    www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
     
    Optimus Prime said:
    Very interesting read
    ===============
    A statue of Baphomet – a pagan idol used in popular culture as a representation of the devil, with the head, horns and feet of a goat, the torso of a man and the wings of an angel – is the centrepiece of the Satanic Temple’s headquarters in Salem, Massachusetts.

    More than 8ft (2.4 metres) tall, jet black and altogether unnerving, Baphomet serves as a reminder of what brought the Satanic Temple to fame.

    In 2013, the group, which is acknowledged as a religion by the US government, responded to the installation of a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of the Oklahoma state capitol building – seemingly a flagrant abuse of the US constitution’s separation of church and state – by demanding that its own Baphomet statue also be positioned in the grounds.

    According to the first amendment, which protects freedom of religion, public spaces should be open to all religions or none, it argued.

    It turned out that Republican politicians did not want a big statue of a goat-headed pagan deity on capitol grounds.

    Amid lawsuits, the Oklahoma supreme court eventually ordered that the Ten Commandments monument should be removed.

    The tactic, with its wry and anarchic undertones, is typical of the Satanic Temple’s battle against the religious right in the US. In the decade since the spat over the statue, the Temple has tackled prayer in classrooms, religious holiday displays and the distribution of Bibles in schools.

    Now, it is taking on another fundamental issue: the right to abortion.

    The overturning of Roe v Wade last June opened the door for more than half of US states to effectively ban abortion or restrict access to it, horrifying supporters of reproductive rights.

    The Satanic Temple – and many other observers – believe the decision of the supreme court was made on the basis of religion: specifically the extreme form of Christianity that has come to dominate Republican politics in the US.

    The Temple has “seven fundamental tenets”, one of which states: “One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.” This, it believes, offers a way around these draconian new laws.

    It is arguing that its members are exempt from bans or restrictions on abortion, due to their right to a “Satanic Temple religious abortion ritual”, more of which later. With lawsuits already filed in Indiana, Idaho, Texas and Missouri, the Satanic Temple is about to find out whether US courts agree…….

    www.theguardian.com

    Friend of Satan: how Lucien Greaves and his Satanic Temple are fighting the religious right

    They have protested against a homophobic church and opposed prayer in classrooms. Now this minority religion is defending the right to abortion
    www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
    Click to expand...
    Man I really hope they win these lawsuits and they should. However, there is nothing standing in the way for the majority on the supreme court to just ignore the law and rule against the Satanic Temple. Those justices have already demonstrated that they are willing to ignore and strike down precedent because they can. I have zero faith in them doing the right thing with respect to the law. Zero. If the religious justification of why Roe was overturned is removed, there is no justification. Live begins at conception is a religious concept, not one based in science or fact. It is a belief that is not shared by all religions and if you make a ruling on a law based on a religious belief then you elevate that belief over the beliefs of other religions that runs counter to the belief the ruling is based on and you are codifying a law that openly violates the rights of other religions to practice their faith.
     
    cuddlemonkey said:
    I know Dave from his post history. I've disagreed with him on more than one occasion. I still respect the hell out of him and his opinions.

    As for Chuck, I don't necessarily agree with him on this. As Shock said in his post a few minutes ago, SCOTUS has become incredibly steeped in religion and it's showing. I'm hoping that some of the cases brought forth challenging these cases on religious grounds- i.e., Judaism not only doesn't ban abortions but actually requires them in some situations- start to push things back.

    I'm also hoping that John Roberts retires and Clarence Thomas resigns in shame in the next 6 months and tips the court back toward something resembling objectivity.
    Click to expand...
    Serious question. Does SCOTUS only have objectively when it has a liberal majority?
     
    Even more serious question:
    When was the last time the Court had a liberal majority?

    We have to go all way back to
    1969 and the Warren SC. And they had a massive 5-4 majority. And look how much good came from them. Seriously, if you don’t know then you should look.

    There are two wholly unqualified people on the SC right now and they both lied in their Hearings.

    It is amazing to me when people bring up the Golden Era of America but fail to acknowledge who was in charge that whole time. Even Eisenhower would e called a raging leftist now.

    And who was in charge for the beginning and continued decline of our country (looking at you Reagan and Newt)
     
    SaintForLife said:
    Serious question. Does SCOTUS only have objectively when it has a liberal majority?
    Click to expand...

    I didn't say anything remotely resembling that. Anyone who thinks that is a serious question to ask is not in a position to contribute to the conversations had here on a daily basis.
     
    cuddlemonkey said:
    No, my intent was what I stated with my words. Making shirt up in your head and then replying to that is a strawman argument.



    My belief is that people deserve dignity and respect. Slavery offers the exact opposite.
    Click to expand...
    Are you sure people deserve dignity and respect only if you agree with them?
     
    MT15 said:
    So tell me the context there. Your statement seems pretty clear to me and it’s not the only time you have said it.
    Click to expand...
    What statement? The one about a tug of war between two different faiths?
     
    cuddlemonkey said:
    You want to ban abortions, which is very much your stated religious stance, despite other religions permitting it. Stop lying.
    Click to expand...
    So you are back to the stawman that only religious people are anti-abortion?
     
    Saintamaniac said:
    The fact that you would classify my statements as "racist" clearly demonstrates that you don't understand what racist means. The fact that you won't answer my question tells me that you know my statement is true.
    Again, how would you have created protected classes?
    Do you believe protected classes are necessary?
    You already stated that you understand why protected class creation was necessary. Do you deny that the need for protected classes was made necessary because the majority race of people in this country (people who have the same skin color as yourself) had no problem violating pretty much every tenet of the religion they practiced as well as violating the constitutional rights of people who did not look like them?
    Naturally you will deny that fact as is your customary way, but everyone here KNOWS the truth. You know it's true but you simply can't and won't acknowledge it. However, I would expect nothing more from such a prolific liar as yourself.
    Click to expand...
    It is ok. Don't sweat it. You and your ilk has called me worse than a racist and it doesn't bother me at all anymore, probably because you guys see racism everywhere so it doesn't even have a bad connotation anymore. Did you ever remember the story of the boy that cried wolf?
    I have said I understand the reason the protected classes were established. I don't think they are necessary at all anymore and I also think their creation was a mistake. Protected classes should not exist in a democracy. FULL. STOP. What was a better option? I am not that smart but I can recognize bad when I see it.
     
    bdb13 said:
    I don't feel like it's rooted in bigotry.

    To take it out of the religious context, I think for me it's probably most similar to how I would view the opinions of a flat Earther (or the guy I work with who claims to have been implanted by aliens) and how that particular belief of theirs would likely "color" my view of them and their other opinions.
    Click to expand...
    Well, to be fair, your coworker that was implanted, might be correct.

    Yep, I can see that if you believe that the religious are on the same level as those that believe the earth is flat or that there is a spaceship behind halle-bop. Obviously, I view my beliefs very different just like you believe your beliefs to correct. To each their own.
     
    Farb said:
    It is ok. Don't sweat it. You and your ilk has called me worse than a racist and it doesn't bother me at all anymore, probably because you guys see racism everywhere so it doesn't even have a bad connotation anymore. Did you ever remember the story of the boy that cried wolf?
    I have said I understand the reason the protected classes were established. I don't think they are necessary at all anymore and I also think their creation was a mistake. Protected classes should not exist in a democracy. FULL. STOP. What was a better option? I am not that smart but I can recognize bad when I see it.
    Click to expand...
    What have they called you that's worse than "racist"?

    I think you should watch the Netflix Documentary called 13th.

    I think it would help you understand others perspective about racism.

    If you care to understand other perspective.

    You might find you like some of it. It places some blame for Racial Inequality at the feet of Bill Clinton.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom