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

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    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    Now that she has gotten her way, she is lobbying for it to be repealed.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.
     
    There are multiple pressure points arising that have no relief valve. When that happens; explosions occur. We are approaching critical mass and I fear 2024 will be the catalyst.

    I really don’t know how this gets better. Zealots are free to say and do what they wish. We just gasp and point and then go on with our day.
    If a national abortion ban occurs it will be because an R (Trump) wins in 24. This scenario, combined with everything that has happened and will happen in the next year and a half, I really could see the west coast thinking about leaving and forming a new nation.

    Being that secession settled law and states aren’t allowed to, leave we would be at a Constitutional Crisis of massive proportions. I am not even going to guess at the events from there.

    Other than it sets off global problems as the US has been the bouncer in the club since WW2. We take our eye off that ball and who knows what could happen (see Taiwan)
     
    DaveXA said:
    Does any state outright ban abortions when the life of the mother is at risk?

    That said, with reduced abortion access, it probably will be harder in those states banning abortions in most situations. If a lot of clinics are closed, I wonder if hospitals would be able to perform the procedure in emergency situations to save the life of the mother?
    Click to expand...
    I think some do, or have such bans proposed, not yet taking effect. But, it’s an illusion, like I said. The wording is so stringent, and penalties so severe, that doctors will be hamstrung. They will not give women the medical care they need, if it means they risk going to prison. So women will die needlessly. I read yesterday that in at least some states the proposed penalties for doctors for providing abortions is more severe than the penalty for rape.
     
    I am starting a pool to guess who first proposes to burn witches. I'm leaning towards Cruz.
     
    Eeyore said:
    They want to go farther back

    Click to expand...

    This isn't as bad as it reads. Cornyn was trying to make the point that the US Supreme Court has overruled precedent in a 'good' way. Of course, there's obviously a split in this country as to whether removing the right to an abortion from constitutional protections is good... but at least in his mind it is. He's not trying to say the Court should overturn Brown.
     
    SaulGoodmanEsq said:
    This isn't as bad as it reads. Cornyn was trying to make the point that the US Supreme Court has overruled precedent in a 'good' way. Of course, there's obviously a split in this country as to whether removing the right to an abortion from constitutional protections is good... but at least in his mind it is. He's not trying to say the Court should overturn Brown.
    Click to expand...

    So, what is he trying to say?

    The way I understand it, "now do Brown v Board of Education" means "do the same thing to B v. BoE that you did to abortion", and if SCOTUS does B v BoE like they did abortion, it would mean that States will be free to enact laws to establish racial segregation.
     
    SaulGoodmanEsq said:
    He was trying to do a pithy comeback to the Obama tweet: that it isn't unheard of for the Court to overturn precedent. He just worded it poorly because he's clueless.
    Click to expand...

    I don't know, man. Today I read the takedown of RvW was a triumph for white life.
     
    SystemShock said:
    I don't know, man. Today I read the takedown of RvW was a triumph for white life.
    Click to expand...
    Freudian slip for sure. Although, in practice, it doesn't really achieve that end since most financially well off white people will still be able to procure an abortion. So it sort of goes against the Great Replacement Theory.
     
    SaulGoodmanEsq said:
    Freudian slip for sure. Although, in practice, it doesn't really achieve that end since most financially well off white people will still be able to procure an abortion. So it sort of goes against the Great Replacement Theory.
    Click to expand...

    Yeah, the net result is ironically a slight uptick in minority babies. It's going to be funny in a year when Alex Jones realizes this, and starts trying to push that the SC is in on it.
     
    J-DONK said:
    Yeah, the net result is ironically a slight uptick in minority babies. It's going to be funny in a year when Alex Jones realizes this, and starts trying to push that the SC is in on it.
    Click to expand...
    Oh, it's gonna start sooner than that, lol. You know if they see an opening they'll exploit it for all its worth.
     

    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