Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights per draft opinion (Update: Dobbs opinion official) (1 Viewer)

[LovesMusic7360]

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Now that she has gotten her way, she is lobbying for it to be repealed.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

 

[DaveXA]

I saw this:



Moments before I saw this:



I that I think I saw the Republican Senator from Alaska standing behind Senator Gillibrand who is the one talking in that video.

My read of body language of the Senator from Alaska is that she is behind Senator Gillibrand in more ways than just standing there behind Senator Gillibrand. I think maybe she will vote with Democrats on this one.

I think she will. And maybe one other Republican Senator. The rest? Not so much.

 

[SamAndreas]

I don't know who she is, but she speaks for me. She speaks for my wife and daughter.

 

[SamAndreas]

I think she will. And maybe one other Republican Senator. The rest? Not so much.

Usually I would agree, I'm not so sure about this one, this one might be a bit different.

I don't think I've ever seen this many women being this furious, all at the same time.

I don't think they're going to "just get over it" this time either.

 

[el caliente]

One day we are going to have a reckoning when we realize that we elected these crazies to represent us in DC. From Cruz, to Hawkley, to Lee, to Trump, to Biden, to etc., etc.

What a peculiar take.

The concept of a person's status or position changing parameters or raising expectations, as it might relate to conduct or in addressing an issue, is nothing new. What somebody says here to an audience of very few carries no meaningful weight outside of this website. There might be other reasons to find the commentary objectionable, but not for the same reasons as a sitting U.S. senator idly speculating about suspects and motives to the point of singling out a justice and her staff, regarding a controversial action related to a polarizing topic.

For what it's worth, I haven't shared an opinion about who I think leaked the document or motives to do so. I have some thoughts about it, but nothing I feel strongly enough to share.

However, expressing our opinions about people, actions, or statements we disagree with is central to the purpose of this board. You do it, and so it doesn't make sense that you should now raise such a poorly framed objection over this matter.

What a peculiar tale indeed. You say that expressing our opinions about people, actions, or statements we disagree with is central to the purpose of this board. I would say that goes as well off the board as well, and in the public square.

So why Cruz shouldn’t be able to share his opinion, while Joe Public can seems a little “rules for thee, but not for me” if we’re being honest with ourselves.

Did the man give his opinion on the matter as a sitting US Senator, or was it as Ted Cruz, the guy that fled his state in the middle of a freeze? Can we not separate the two?

As Dave pointed out, why folks are taking his opinion (and he made sure to clarify that it was his opinion) so seriously is odd. The man has a history of running his mouth, this doesn’t break from the character he portrays on a daily basis.

 

[SystemShock]

Sure...but Cruz has been doing it for a while now and yet nothing happens. It just gets to a point where we can't take him seriously.

1. Don't call it an "opinion", because it isn't.
2. Things do happen. We are where we are because the things people like Cruz say and do.

 

[DaveXA]

Usually I would agree, I'm not so sure about this one, this one might be a bit different.

I don't think I've ever seen this many women being this furious, all at the same time.

I don't think they're going to "just get over it" this time either.

I hope you're right. I guess we'll see when it happens.

 

[DaveXA]

1. Don't call it an "opinion", because it isn't.
2. Things do happen. We are where we are because the things people like Cruz say and do.

That it's his opinion seems pretty obvious to me. I guess we'll just have to disagree on this point.

Things do indeed happen, and for a whole host of reasons. Violence associated with the abortion debate is hardly unprecedented (there's a long history of it), and I suspect would happen regardless what Cruz says.

 

[SystemShock]

That it's his opinion seems pretty obvious to me.

Then I have some beach property in Colorado to sell you.

Things do indeed happen, and for a whole host of reasons. Violence associated with the abortion debate is hardly unprecedented (there's a long history of it), and I suspect would happen regardless what Cruz says.

There are many long histories, and the reason there are long histories, is because some people are bent on continuing those histories through demagoguery, rhetoric, and actions, ethics be damned.

 

[coldseat]

One day we are going to have a reckoning when we realize that we elected these crazies to represent us in DC. From Cruz, to Hawkley, to Lee, to Trump, to Biden, to etc., etc.

Biden isn't crazy and he shouldn't be mashed into that group as an attempt to "both sides". Biden is the only one of that group that actually attempts to govern in and adult manner, regardless of what you think of his policies, and fulfill the role he was elected too. All of those other politicians are just flame throwers that try to break government.

If we're going to start making better choices as an electorate, first we need to differentiate between the flame throwers looking to break government and the those politicians actually attempting to govern. That is irrespective of political ideology. And right now, the right wing has huge number of the former, while the majority of Democrats fall in the latter category.

 

[MT15]

One day we are going to have a reckoning when we realize that we elected these crazies to represent us in DC. From Cruz, to Hawkley, to Lee, to Trump, to Biden, to etc., etc.



What a peculiar tale indeed. You say that expressing our opinions about people, actions, or statements we disagree with is central to the purpose of this board. I would say that goes as well off the board as well, and in the public square.

So why Cruz shouldn’t be able to share his opinion, while Joe Public can seems a little “rules for thee, but not for me” if we’re being honest with ourselves.

Did the man give his opinion on the matter as a sitting US Senator, or was it as Ted Cruz, the guy that fled his state in the middle of a freeze? Can we not separate the two?

As Dave pointed out, why folks are taking his opinion (and he made sure to clarify that it was his opinion) so seriously is odd. The man has a history of running his mouth, this doesn’t break from the character he portrays on a daily basis.

So I think I see part of the problem. Nobody says Cruz cannot express his opinion, obviously.

What we are doing is criticizing his judgement and morals in expressing this particular opinion in public given his status. And guess what? Our criticism is also free speech. As is your criticism of our criticism, lol.

I think a lot of people are conflating the idea that when you have free speech nobody is allowed to criticize what you say. Free speech doesn’t work like that.

 

[DaveXA]

Biden isn't crazy and he shouldn't be mashed into that group as an attempt to "both sides". Biden is the only one of that group that actually attempts to govern in and adult manner, regardless of what you think of his policies, and fulfill the role he was elected too. All of those other politicians are just flame throwers that try to break government.

If we're going to start making better choices as an electorate, first we need to differentiate between the flame throwers looking to break government and the those politicians actually attempting to govern. That is irrespective of political ideology. And right now, the right wing has huge number of the former, while the majority of Democrats fall in the latter category.

I tend to agree. What I find disappointing is how little backbone otherwise reasonable moderate to conservative Republicans have to the Qanonsense out there. They're too worried about either not looking like Democrats or protecting the party. When it's party over country, we've lost our way.

And yeah, Biden isn't one of the flamethrowers, not even close. He does put his foot in his mouth at times, but certainly not a rabble rouser.

 

[DaveXA]

So I think I see part of the problem. Nobody says Cruz cannot express his opinion, obviously.

What we are doing is criticizing his judgement and morals in expressing this particular opinion in public given his status. And guess what? Our criticism is also free speech. As is your criticism of our criticism, lol.

I think a lot of people are conflating the idea that when you have free speech nobody is allowed to criticize what you say. Free speech doesn’t work like that.

Yep, he deserves criticism for a lot of the nonsense he spews. No doubt. He's free to say what he says, but certainly not without consequence. The problem is there are no consequences for him, as is any other politician in his position. That's more a constituent problem than a politician problem though.

 

[el caliente]

So I think I see part of the problem. Nobody says Cruz cannot express his opinion, obviously.

What we are doing is criticizing his judgement and morals in expressing this particular opinion in public given his status. And guess what? Our criticism is also free speech. As is your criticism of our criticism, lol.

I think a lot of people are conflating the idea that when you have free speech nobody is allowed to criticize what you say. Free speech doesn’t work like that.

I am not saying folks can’t have an opinion, as a matter of fact I think everyone should have an opinion. I just find it hypothetical that “he shouldn’t be saying that” is being said by people doing the exact same thing.

At any rate, it is what it is. The man spouts off crazy ish, and it’s on each of us to take offense or not.

 

[zztop]

I think there is a difference between a small group of people on a forum vs a known public person postulating to his legion of devoted followers who the leaker might be. I'm reminded of when republicans openly named who they thought was the (supposed to be anonymous) whistleblower - that filed an ethics complaint when trump tried to get Ukraine to find some servers or whatever. I wonder what happened to that whistleblower, or how many death threats he got because of that open speculation by those politicians which lead to their followers taking it upon themselves to harass the person

 

[bdb13]

I am not saying folks can’t have an opinion, as a matter of fact I think everyone should have an opinion. I just find it hypothetical that “he shouldn’t be saying that” is being said by people doing the exact same thing.

Just to illustrate the point in a bipartisan manner here, there's a HUGE difference in impact between me saying on here that Putin "cannot remain in power" and Biden publicly saying the same thing.

I don't see why it doesn't make sense for me to think it's probably OK for me to say that on here as a nobody but not OK for Biden as President to have said it in front of the whole world.

 

[el caliente]

Just to illustrate the point in a bipartisan manner here, there's a HUGE difference in impact between me saying on here that Putin "cannot remain in power" and Biden publicly saying the same thing.

I don't see why it doesn't make sense for me to think it's probably OK for me to say that on here as a nobody but not OK for Biden as President to have said it in front of the whole world.

Is he speaking as President Biden, or as Joe Biden?

 

[bdb13]

Is he speaking as President Biden, or as Joe Biden?

At least in the moment of him saying it I don't think there's any real distinction to be made there.. and when they then are forced to do damage control by parsing it out it becomes obvious that he shouldn't have said it in the first place.

 

[MT15]

Am just now reading that in the draft opinion it is pointed out that “the domestic supply of infants” to adopt will be a real plus from this ruling. I don’t know what to say, other than they view women who will be impacted by this as just convenient sources for the adoption industry.

Meanwhile 400,000 children are in foster care and tens of thousands age out every year having never been adopted. And studies show that most of the time when a mother can’t care for her baby it is taken in by relatives. So let’s violate the rights of women all over the US so that we can provide “infants” as a commodity.