Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

[Dashinka 24,487]

3 hours ago, Kai G. Llewellyn said:

I'm pretty sure the far left were not keen on Biden. I'm pretty left wing and the guy is a conservative in sheep's clothing and in the pockets of big business. The left held their noses and voted for Biden because they wanted rid of Trump. If Biden faces any other GOP nominee, he will lose. That I have no doubt.

 

Protip to the GOP if you want to win in 2024, have literally any other nominee than Trump, you'll win. A lot of people won't bother to vote for Biden if they're not staring down another 4 years of Trump.

 

Though Biden has been quite so useless in getting any of his campaign promises through, I won't be surprised if people sat out the next election even if Trump did end up getting the GOP nomination again.

A little off topic, but I don't see Trump running again in 2024.  Even though his policies were some of the most centrist of any of our most recent presidents, his personality is off-putting to many, and one thing we have learned over the past 20 or so years is that the Presidency is as much a popularity/unpopularity contest as opposed to which person is truly best to lead the country.  I do find it interesting that the Biden WH is suggesting that Trump should be allowed back on Twitter now (see below).  I guess they need something to try and offset Biden's atrocious record.  Again, personally, I hope Trump keeps his promise to not get back on Twitter, no reason to give the Dems anything.

 

3 hours ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

This is my guess. I doubt they overturn it.

 

I am anti abortion but pro choice if that makes sense,  as are the majority of Americans. I do believe in strict limits after a fetus becomes viable. I do oppose restrictions when the health of the mother or quality of life of the fetus is in question. 

 

Why oh why. This is an issue designed to enflame the far right and the far left bases. Of all the problems facing this country this is way down the list.

 

I doubt it is important enough to most Americans to move.

 

The far right and left fringes that must be appeased to win a primary in a 2 party system are why we keep getting leaders like Biden and Trump.

What will be interesting is the analysis that will occur if the final decision is to keep Roe.  We will hear so much analysis supposing that this leak caused a flip which to me is the biggest detriment to what occurred with the early leak.  There is a reason the Supreme Court, and for that matter any jury, conducts their deliberations in private and do not make immediate snap decisions.  With this leak, and if they continue with other controversial cases, SCOTUS will be infused with a distrust that will hamper their work.

 

That being said, I could not care less about Roe, but it is interesting to see how the Left has come back to recognize that women are women.

[Crazy Cat 41,831]

7 hours ago, Kai G. Llewellyn said:

States are neither sovereign nor nations, that is a matter of fact.

The fact is that explicit powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution BELONG to the states. 

10th Amendment

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

 

We are not a single kingdom.  We are a union of separate states. 

 

Edited May 4, 2022 by Crazy Cat

[Dashinka 24,487]

1 hour ago, Dashinka said:

A little off topic, but I don't see Trump running again in 2024.  Even though his policies were some of the most centrist of any of our most recent presidents, his personality is off-putting to many, and one thing we have learned over the past 20 or so years is that the Presidency is as much a popularity/unpopularity contest as opposed to which person is truly best to lead the country.  I do find it interesting that the Biden WH is suggesting that Trump should be allowed back on Twitter now (see below).  I guess they need something to try and offset Biden's atrocious record.  Again, personally, I hope Trump keeps his promise to not get back on Twitter, no reason to give the Dems anything.

 

What will be interesting is the analysis that will occur if the final decision is to keep Roe.  We will hear so much analysis supposing that this leak caused a flip which to me is the biggest detriment to what occurred with the early leak.  There is a reason the Supreme Court, and for that matter any jury, conducts their deliberations in private and do not make immediate snap decisions.  With this leak, and if they continue with other controversial cases, SCOTUS will be infused with a distrust that will hamper their work.

 

That being said, I could not care less about Roe, but it is interesting to see how the Left has come back to recognize that women are women.

Sorry, forgot to include the story of the WH staffers with hopes and dreams of Trump rejoining Twitter.

 

https://uproxx.com/viral/joe-biden-staffers-trump-twitter/

[Kai G. Llewellyn 837]

5 hours ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

Well you said it. He does pander to the far left.  Biden is by far the most far left Potus during my lifetime. If you think he is conservative you must have plowed into the left ditch hard. I am preety much a moderate who drives right down the middle of the road.

 

Nice to have a liberal her to balance the far right . Just wanted to say hello before you get censorshiped.

 

Hardly, I'm pro 2A, against government monopolies and was skeptical regarding the lockdowns, and I have a visceral dislike of the CCP. What makes me left wing is that I think the US should have public healthcare, at-will terms of employment shouldn't be a thing and paid parental, sick and vacation leave should be required to be provided to all employees...y'know, things that the rest of the world have. It's just that the overton window in the US has been pushed extremely far to the right by the GOP and aided by corrupt corporate democrats.

 

3 hours ago, Dashinka said:

 Even though his policies were some of the most centrist of any of our most recent presidents,

If Trump is a 'centrist', I dread to think what an actual right-wing president would be like.

2 hours ago, Crazy Cat said:

The fact is that explicit powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution BELONG to the states. 

10th Amendment

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

 

We are not a single kingdom.  We are a union of separate states. 

 

Again, there is a real mixup between Confederation and Federation here. The articles of Confederation (1781-1789) was the Union that existed prior to the current Federation that the US exist under. Under that arrangement:

 

 

"Confederations are voluntary associations of independent states that, to secure some common purpose, agree to certain limitations of their freedom of action and establish some joint machinery of consultation or deliberation. The limitations on the freedom of action of the member states may be as trivial as an acknowledgment of their duty to consult with each other before taking some independent action or as significant as the obligation to be bound by majority decisions of the member states. Confederations usually fail to provide for an effective executive authority and lack viable central governments; their member states typically retain their separate military establishments and separate diplomatic representation; and members are generally accorded equal status with an acknowledged right of secession from the confederation. The term federation is used to refer to groupings of states, often on a regional basis, that establish central executive machinery to implement policies or to supervise joint activities. In some cases such groupings are motivated primarily by political or economic concerns; in others, military objectives are paramount."

 

 

Historically, confederations have often proved to be a first or second step toward the establishment of a national state, usually as a federal union. Thus, the federal union of modern Switzerland was preceded by a confederation of the Swiss cantons; Germany's modern federal arrangements may be traced to the German Confederation of the 19th century (the Deutsche Bund); and the federal constitution of the United States is the successor to the government of the Articles of Confederation."  - https://www.britannica.com/topic/political-system/National-political-systems

 

 

Now let's look at why the Confederation fell apart and had to be replaced by the Federal US Constitution:

"Under the Articles of Confederation, states often argued amongst themselves. They also refused to financially support the national government. The national government was powerless to enforce any acts it did pass. Some states began making agreements with foreign governments. Most had their own military. Each state printed its own money. There was no stable economy."  https://www.unh.edu/ara/sites/unh.edu.ara/files/Revolution Series, March 13, Reading 2.pdf

 

 

The Articles of Confederation are at this point null and void. The current arrangement is no longer a voluntary association but states are today bound in the federal union, with no mechanism to leave, subject to the jurisdiction of the federal level, unable to have their own foreign policy and prohibited from having certain powers such as printing money, controls over immigration, customs, defense and so on.

 

 

Just because a reserved powers model exists, whereby, unless otherwise defined the powers rest with the states does not equal sovereignty. Reserved powers exist for Wales, Scotland and Canada's Provinces. I would actually go much further and argue that Canada's Provinces have more sovereignty than US states as Canada is a bit of a mix with elements that suggest both Federation and Confederation whereby the Federal Government exists at the consent of the provinces. The Canadian Federal government in many instances has to consult with the premiers of those provinces, even over matters that are beyond the provinces such as border control, national emergencies and immigration. Provinces even have influence in immigration policy in Canada, to the extent that Quebec itself has full determination over its own immigration policy AND provinces do have a legal means that they can exit the Confederation and become a sovereign nation state, a.k.a an independent country.

 

 

You are right about the part on 'Kingdom', I think we all agree that the US is indeed a Federal Presidential Republic.

Edited May 4, 2022 by Kai G. Llewellyn

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

23 minutes ago, Kai G. Llewellyn said:

Hardly, I'm pro 2A, against government monopolies and was skeptical regarding the lockdowns, and I have a visceral dislike of the CCP. What makes me left wing is that I think the US should have public healthcare, at-will terms of employment shouldn't be a thing and paid parental, sick and vacation leave should be required to be provided to all employees...y'know, things that the rest of the world have. It's just that the overton window in the US has been pushed extremely far to the right by the GOP and aided by corrupt corporate democrats.

 

 

We are not that far apart. I am probably a social liberal.  I am however very against the virtually open border stupidity the dems push 

[Redro 4,611]

Just like to hop in an say:

Abortion is not a FAR LEFT WING/ FAR RIGHT WING issue

It is all about women's health care and women's rights. 

My friends who are mothers, my friends who aren't mothers all care about access to the right to access a safe abortion.

And I'll remind you... you probably know a woman who has had an abortion. Legal or because 'the baby had a medical issue'...

Access to safe and legal abortion should be protected in all countries. 

 

We can go down the slippery slope of what this means for the US but

having a child really does impact a woman's earning capacity and if they are forced to have a child their future and earning capabilities are greatly compromised. 

 

Edited May 4, 2022 by ROK2USA

[Boiler 45,464]

Yet again Abortion is an issue for all Genders.

 

Apparently.

 

One thing I did wonder about and could not think through, how come Emergence Medicare covers pregnancy? That seems contra logical.

 

Like many issues there are no good simple answers, at one end you have the Morning After Pill, and at the other end you have localities where you abort at 9 months plus. The first strikes me as a non issue, the second makes me feel queasy.

[Redro 4,611]

8 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Yet again Abortion is an issue for all Genders.

 

Apparently.

 

One thing I did wonder about and could not think through, how come Emergence Medicare covers pregnancy? That seems contra logical.

 

Like many issues there are no good simple answers, at one end you have the Morning After Pill, and at the other end you have localities where you abort at 9 months plus. The first strikes me as a non issue, the second makes me feel queasy.

The morning after pill sounds fun but it can really mess with a woman's cycle and health for several months after she takes it... and ... 

Abortion at 9 months is because the baby (I will always say baby regardless of gestation period) had an abnormality and will not survive after birth... 

Read those abortion stories. Read stillbirth stories they are heartbreaking. 

If you are in anyway aware of what women have to endure when they fall pregnant, when they access an abortion you don't think it's an easy breazy experience. 

I really dislike the "abortion is for all genders" argument.

It isn't. It's a woman's issue. WOMEN have to deal with the ever looming spectre of pregnancy. WOMEN have to panic every time they miss a period. 

The amount of friends of spoken to about missed periods, miscarriages, and abortions... men don't even realize. 

 

Edited May 4, 2022 by ROK2USA

[Boiler 45,464]

I cannot be bothered to look up  a source but pretty sure abnormalities are not a requirement in some localities, I was pointing out the extremes and why it is a difficult subject.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10762699/Midwives-taught-university-help-biological-men-penises-birth.html

 

Midwives are being taught otherwise, there was a couple of better sources but behind paywalls.

 

My comment was about Emergency Medicare, all sorts of medical conditions can produce very nasty issues, but this provides routine care so why this and why not other conditions.

 

[Redro 4,611]

11 minutes ago, Boiler said:

I cannot be bothered to look up  a source but pretty sure abnormalities are not a requirement in some localities, I was pointing out the extremes and why it is a difficult subject.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10762699/Midwives-taught-university-help-biological-men-penises-birth.html

 

Midwives are being taught otherwise, there was a couple of better sources but behind paywalls.

 

My comment was about Emergency Medicare, all sorts of medical conditions can produce very nasty issues, but this provides routine care so why this and why not other conditions.

 

It doesn't matter if a locale doesn't stipulate abortion at 9 months is only for medical issues.

 I can assure you... from my personal experience... women who go to 9 months want that baby. 

Also an abortion at 9 months is basically labour./ a still birth.

Doctors will sometimes pressure a woman to abort because of abnormalities but when you are pregnant and you know it every month is awesome and a gift! And when you're informed about an abnormality you cling to the belief it isn't real and you'll have a healthy baby... 

@laylalexagree or disagree about your experiences with friends?

Edited May 4, 2022 by ROK2USA

[Dashinka 24,487]

43 minutes ago, ROK2USA said:

Just like to hop in an say:

Abortion is not a FAR LEFT WING/ FAR RIGHT WING issue

It is all about women's health care and women's rights. 

My friends who are mothers, my friends who aren't mothers all care about access to the right to access a safe abortion.

And I'll remind you... you probably know a woman who has had an abortion. Legal or because 'the baby had a medical issue'...

Access to safe and legal abortion should be protected in all countries. 

 

We can go down the slippery slope of what this means for the US but

having a child really does impact a woman's earning capacity and if they are forced to have a child their future and earning capabilities are greatly compromised. 

 

Are you suggesting on demand abortions throughout the pregnancy or some time limit (I don't want to say viability as that is much too difficult to define) like most of Europe has?  It is interesting, most of Europe only allows on demand abortions in the first trimester, not really sure how much it is enforced, but they also allow Dr. to refuse to perform abortions.  Anyway, I am just curious as we keep hearing 54% of Americans favor keeping Roe (I keep hearing 70%, but the 54% is a much more recent poll), but when people are asked about abortions in the 2nd or 3rd trimester, there is a great many not in favor except for the mother's health (I know, this poll is quite old, don't have time to dig for a newer one).

 

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/03/politics/americans-poll-roe-v-wade-scotus-draft/index.html

 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/235469/trimesters-key-abortion-views.aspx

[Redro 4,611]

8 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Are you suggesting on demand abortions throughout the pregnancy or some time limit (I don't want to say viability as that is much too difficult to define) like most of Europe has?  It is interesting, most of Europe only allows on demand abortions in the first trimester, not really sure how much it is enforced, but they also allow Dr. to refuse to perform abortions.  Anyway, I am just curious as we keep hearing 54% of Americans favor keeping Roe (I keep hearing 70%, but the 54% is a much more recent poll), but when people are asked about abortions in the 2nd or 3rd trimester, there is a great many not in favor except for the mother's health (I know, this poll is quite old, don't have time to dig for a newer one).

 

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/03/politics/americans-poll-roe-v-wade-scotus-draft/index.html

 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/235469/trimesters-key-abortion-views.aspx

Truthfully... I suggest "on demand abortion"... 

But, this is only because I've spoken to numerous women who do not want an abortion and really struggle with the decision.

And am a) From a country where although abortion is legal but doctors pressure women to keep the baby because a grandparen (family member) will/can/should care for the child and 

B) I live in a country where doctors pressure women to have an abortion because they aren't male/ have the markers of down syndrome/ have another birth abnormality. 

 

After seeing friends struggle with raising children alone. Having seen high school girls expelled from school for being pregnant while the father of said children gets to stay in school... I'm all for more choice and freedom for women who become pregnant and want to explore their options. 

 

People think as soon as abortion is legal it is a free for all but the truth is women still discuss the decision with family members. The entire discussion is about access to safe and legal abortions. 

Edited May 4, 2022 by ROK2USA

[Boiler 45,464]

24 minutes ago, ROK2USA said:

It doesn't matter if a locale doesn't stipulate abortion at 9 months is only for medical issues.

 I can assure you... from my personal experience... women who go to 9 months want that baby. 

Also an abortion at 9 months is basically labour./ a still birth.

Doctors will sometimes pressure a woman to abort because of abnormalities but when you are pregnant and you know it every month is awesome and a gift! And when you're informed about an abnormality you cling to the belief it isn't real and you'll have a healthy baby... 

@laylalexagree or disagree about your experiences with friends?

Sounds like you are not actually Pro Choice? You would exclude some situations. Colorado has a trigger law and as far as I can tell it is Pro Choice and Colorado is ramping up its efforts for an influx

[Redro 4,611]

3 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Sounds like you are not actually Pro Choice? You would exclude some situations. Colorado has a trigger law and as far as I can tell it is Pro Choice and Colorado is ramping up its efforts for an influx

I am pro choice... I cannot dictate what other women do... I don't exclude any situations but my personal experience tells me late term abortions aren't something a woman decides on a whim. It is generally informed by a medical issue. If someone has an abortion at 8 months cos they just didnt want a baby not my circus and not my monkey! But, they're not having an abortion at 8 months they're going into labour and the baby will most likely be a still birth. 

Edited May 4, 2022 by ROK2USA

[Dashinka 24,487]

Reading through some of the data and facts is interesting.  To be honest, I never really gave this topic much thought until recently.  So looking at the data, it seems most states already have different rules on abortions (seems this won't change if Roe is overturned).  There are very few clinics in the US that will actually perform 3rd trimester abortions some older references say 4, but that was from 2013.  A little more than 90% of abortions happen prior to 15 weeks.  This makes me wonder why the Mississippi law was challenged in the first place as it is even surpasses the laws in Europe (not that we should emulate Europe, but I understand they are very progressive there). 

 

It is interesting how orchestrated the Democrat response was to this "leak", just more political deflection I suspect.

 

https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/04/raw-data-abortions-by-week-of-pregnancy/

 

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/abortion-laws-by-state

 

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/takeaway/segments/263140-last-four-doctors-who-perform-third-trimester-abortions