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

Users who are viewing this thread

    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    Now that she has gotten her way, she is lobbying for it to be repealed.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.
     
    One of my issues with her is that she’s not very quick-witted. I suspect that she thinks IVF is a helpful way for couples struggling to have children to be able to have families. She apparently needed assistance. But a smart leader understands that this framework kills IVF - it will cease to exist in those jurisdictions.

    She doesn’t realize that and the interviewer should be asking that in a following question. She should be forced to reconcile those two positions.

    Oh, from a logical, sane, rational perspective I couldn't agree more but I think we sometimes forget, that is not the target audience for her "message".....

    and it seems that "journalists/interviewers" are going out of their way in many instances (with right wing politicians) not to dirty the waters with logic perhaps in fear that they won't get access if they do? Not sure on that one....
     
    There's some deep irony here in that the plaintiffs were three IVF couples. This was not brought by the state or any other sort of interested party or activist group. The plaintiffs are two couples that allege that the hospital negligently failed to safeguard their embryos in the cyrogenic facility and a hospital patient somehow got in there and caused "several" of them to be destroyed. Two of the three couples lost two embryos and the third couple lost one. The record also shows that these families already had successful IVF births with actual living children.

    So I can only presume that in their greed to get money for the loss of "several embryos", they have now shut down IVF entirely in the state of Alabama. There will be no way that a properly-run facility will be able to operate with the risk that now comes not only with possible criminal exposure (which is very real) but also substantial wrongful death tort liability exposure.

    If they are still trying to have an IVF baby, they're going to have to go to another state. In addition, according to the brief for the hospital, two of the three couples chose the "have the embryos destroyed" upon their determination that they no longer wished to pay for their storage, or if the mother turned 55.

    What a bunch of greedy butt crevasses.
    This is such a ridiculous ruling. If doctors can no longer perform IVFs, then will cryogenic facilities be required to keep the remaining embryos forever without a way to pay for them? If they go into bankruptcy, then will the state be required to keep the embryos? Will the IVF facility be allowed to send the embryos elsewhere to be used, such as by the couples that may still want to use them? Are the parents responsible to pay for their upkeep, and will their heirs then inherit that responsibility?
     
    Democrats need to remind voters that Thomas will probably retire if a Republican wins the presidency, but if a Democrat wins, he may not last anyway, so these crazy abortion rulings may get overturned if a Democrat were to win. This Alabama ruling is surely going to be appealed to the Supreme Court, and hopefully they'll be sane, but I won't bank on it until another Democratic nominee is seated to the court.
     
    This is such a ridiculous ruling. If doctors can no longer perform IVFs, then will cryogenic facilities be required to keep the remaining embryos forever without a way to pay for them? If they go into bankruptcy, then will the state be required to keep the embryos? Will the IVF facility be allowed to send the embryos elsewhere to be used, such as by the couples that may still want to use them? Are the parents responsible to pay for their upkeep, and will their heirs then inherit that responsibility?
    With that in mind, is it crazy to think that the end game would be ordering women to act as 'vessels' (as they like to put it) to carry these embryos to term? If it's either that or murdering "children," which one do you think they'd choose?
     
    Last edited:
    Now they are saying that IUD’s cause abortions. They will go after every form of birth control in order to oppress women.

     
    Strong indication that you are correct, lol



    My head just exploded. They nailed the caption in the picture, though.

    "Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) has no idea what is going on. ALEX WONG VIA GETTY IMAGES"
     
    I hate living in this state, but I don't want to move up north. Is there anywhere sane left that isn't freezing cold?
     
    Putting this here because this is all related. Women are not viewed as human, they have no identity other than wife/mother, they are not allowed joy. (Bio says he is 18 and has a cross, of course). Very similar to the Taliban.

     

    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!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom