29 ms·

Trump won white women in both presidential elections, and Trump got to stamp the court with three justices. 98% of black women voted for Clinton. In 2016, 55%

Trump won white women in both presidential elections, and Trump got to stamp the court with three justices. 98% of black women voted for Clinton. In 2016, 55% of voters were women, which trump won 47-44. By three points, which is a solid win in a presidential general election. So Trump won the largest voting race+gender demographic. https://www.statista.com/statistics/892859/women-support-overturning-roe-vs-wade-us-by-political-affiliation/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/892859/women-support-ove... For republican-leaning women (which will be white women based on the female black vote numbers), it is basically 50-50 in support/opposition for Roe V Wade. For Dem-leaning it is 85-15 roughly. Roe V Wade is the most important women's right won in the courts in the last 50 years, and women voted to overturn it effectively. Finally, this is the culmination of the liberal justices refusing to step down or retire. Ruth Baider Ginsburg is held up as a pinnacle of feminism, and yet her stubbornness to continue serving despite health problems and battles with cancer resulted in Trump getting a crucial third justice. The most stalwart feminist justice handed the overturn of Roe V Wade to a president with a known record for sexual impropriety if not outright assault. Obama sat on Merrick Garland. The baby boomer generation ushered in sexual freedom when it was their time to be young and free, and then shut the door on it in their old age crapping over all the other generations. What a world.

esyir 4y ago
For the record, Ginsburg thought that Roe vs Wade was a mistake, for this exact reason. Momentum was lost to get actually good legislation in, and the vulnerable Roe vs Wade was put in instead.
- Beltiras 4y ago
  This court will never say a federal law allowing abortion is constitutional. Thomas is 74 and Alito is 72. A lot of stars need to align so that anything can be done about this. The lone thing I see changing the calculus is if women in red states stage a mass protest by actually moving to blue states in massive numbers.
  - junofan 4y ago
    Doesn’t your argument apply also to state abortion legalization laws under equal protection? Are those getting struck down? I haven’t been keeping up with this topic.
    - Beltiras 4y ago
      This majority is regressive enough to go full Handmaid's Tale I fear.
    - aksss 4y ago
      This ruling has zero effect in my state where abortion is protected under the state constitution, and there’s near zero chance of a constitutional convention being formed in my lifetime, much less enough consensus being found at such a meeting.
    - mcguire 4y ago
      Republicans have been floating a national ban on abortions; if the Republicans take the legislature in November, it is likely to be the first item on the agenda. Roe v. Wade was the only thing preventing that.
  - lr4444lr 4y ago
    In what way would it not be constitutional? Wouldn't a petitioner have to cite the preexisting implied rights or explicit laws violated in order for the case to even have standing?
  - lkjdsklf 4y ago
    > mass protest by actually moving to blue states in massive numbers That actually makes the problem worse. You can't undo this without changing the court. You can't change the court without the senate and you can't get the senate of team blue continues to isolate it self in a handful of states.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - dh2022 4y ago
- selimthegrim 4y ago
  She wanted a privileges or immunities clause (in 14th Amendment) based argument instead. The issue there is that reopening the Slaughterhouse cases (which shut that line of questioning down) will reopen the obiter dicta therein on birthright citizenship. Pick one, abortion or birthright citizenship?
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
> In 2016, 55% of voters were women, which trump won 47-44. By three points, which is a solid win in a presidential general election. You're quoting stats for white women only, Trump lost the female vote 54/39. Which makes this claim factually incorrect: > Roe V Wade is the most important women's right won in the courts in the last 50 years, and women voted to overturn it effectively. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2018/08/09/an-examination-of-the-2016-electorate-based-on-validated-voters/ https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2018/08/09/an-examinati... I'd imagine if you combined the age demographic information, the female vote that may actually be able to get pregnant and so be affected by this is going to swing even harder away from Trump. The combined male and female vote swings 30% to the red between the 18-29 and 65+ demographics.
mikevm 4y ago
- georgeburdell 4y ago
  My neighbor had an IUD in place when she conceived a 4th child in her early 40s. The pregnancy was ectopic (or misplaced in some way) and the doctor said it would “resolve” on its own. It did not and now she has a disabled 5 year old.
  - gcbirzan 4y ago
    It was definitely not ectopic, there is no way in which an ectopic pregnancy resulted in a birth.
- kaba0 4y ago
  Let me assume you are male.. Also, what happens with rape victims? Or you know, women often know about their pregnancy weeks after the event? Also, you are literally less likely to die from donating your kidney then a women giving birth. Do you really have no empathy whatsoever? Giving birth is brutal, you have a no matter how disgusting it is to write but technically a parasite growing inside you sucking out every resource you have causing often life altering changes. And we are not even at birthing. I am also a guy by the way, but that is exactly why I believe that the only opinion we should have on the issue is to listen to women, and the only voice we should have is to shout over old men deciding on a topic not concerning them.
  - mikevm 4y ago
    > Let me assume you are male.. So what? It takes two to tango. > Also, what happens with rape victims? They should be able to get an abortion. I'm not anti-abortion in all cases. > Also, you are literally less likely to die from donating your kidney then a women giving birth. Do you really have no empathy whatsoever? Giving birth is brutal, you have a no matter how disgusting it is to write but technically a parasite growing inside you sucking out every resource you have causing often life altering changes. And we are not even at birthing. Let me quote a paragraph from [0]: When a woman is pregnant, the situation is different. In the usual case, where pregnancy did not result from sexual assault, the child himself, and his need for shelter and nourishment in the womb, is a direct result of actions taken voluntarily by both parents. The need to live in the mother’s uterus for approximately forty weeks is also not an extraordinary measure, in the way that the term is generally used. It is a basic human need — every single person who has ever been born required it. Just as the newborn has a specific claim against his parents due to the fact that they created him in all his helplessness, so too did he have a claim against them before he was born, for the same reason. It is true that the heavier burden falls on the mother during the prenatal period. Men simply cannot directly provide what their children need during the first forty weeks of their lives. (I would advocate requiring fathers to indirectly provide as much as they can by compensating mothers for their medical bills, lost work time, and other expenses during pregnancy.) The fact that women must shoulder more of the parental obligation during pregnancy than men is regrettable, but does not negate the obligation. If someone claims that “women will always need abortion,” note the implicit assumptions. The first is that our ability to bear children is, and always will be, a handicap. The second is that we can never hope for our society to adequately adjust to the needs of mothers so that women will not feel the need to abort. The third is that violence against certain of our fellow human beings is an acceptable, even necessary way to solve social problems. [...] But I find the acceptance of abortion as a response to a sexist society to be inconsistent with humanist ideals. Humanism values the inherent worth and dignity of every human being. It affirms that moral standards should be based on the effect of our actions on our fellow human beings. It embraces the use of reason and repudiates the use of violence to settle disputes. Abortion is an ancient, backwards practice which is not worthy of those ideals. Legal or not, we must progress beyond it. > I am also a guy by the way, but that is exactly why I believe that the only opinion we should have on the issue is to listen to women, and the only voice we should have is to shout over old men deciding on a topic not concerning them. Oh please, not this argument again. First of all, there are women who are also against abortion, this has nothing to do with "old men". Second of all, we are all human and are capable of empathy (well, except the psychopaths) and just because you are not a woman doesn't mean that you can't reason about things that affect women. [0] https://infidels.org/library/modern/debates-secularist-abortion-roth1/ https://infidels.org/library/modern/debates-secularist-abort...

esyir 4y ago

For the record, Ginsburg thought that Roe vs Wade was a mistake, for this exact reason. Momentum was lost to get actually good legislation in, and the vulnerable Roe vs Wade was put in instead.

Beltiras 4y ago
This court will never say a federal law allowing abortion is constitutional. Thomas is 74 and Alito is 72. A lot of stars need to align so that anything can be done about this. The lone thing I see changing the calculus is if women in red states stage a mass protest by actually moving to blue states in massive numbers.
- junofan 4y ago
  Doesn’t your argument apply also to state abortion legalization laws under equal protection? Are those getting struck down? I haven’t been keeping up with this topic.
  - Beltiras 4y ago
    This majority is regressive enough to go full Handmaid's Tale I fear.
  - aksss 4y ago
    This ruling has zero effect in my state where abortion is protected under the state constitution, and there’s near zero chance of a constitutional convention being formed in my lifetime, much less enough consensus being found at such a meeting.
  - mcguire 4y ago
    Republicans have been floating a national ban on abortions; if the Republicans take the legislature in November, it is likely to be the first item on the agenda. Roe v. Wade was the only thing preventing that.
- lr4444lr 4y ago
  In what way would it not be constitutional? Wouldn't a petitioner have to cite the preexisting implied rights or explicit laws violated in order for the case to even have standing?
- lkjdsklf 4y ago
  > mass protest by actually moving to blue states in massive numbers That actually makes the problem worse. You can't undo this without changing the court. You can't change the court without the senate and you can't get the senate of team blue continues to isolate it self in a handful of states.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- dh2022 4y ago
selimthegrim 4y ago
She wanted a privileges or immunities clause (in 14th Amendment) based argument instead. The issue there is that reopening the Slaughterhouse cases (which shut that line of questioning down) will reopen the obiter dicta therein on birthright citizenship. Pick one, abortion or birthright citizenship?

ZeroGravitas 4y ago

> In 2016, 55% of voters were women, which trump won 47-44. By three points, which is a solid win in a presidential general election. You're quoting stats for white women only, Trump lost the female vote 54/39. Which makes this claim factually incorrect: > Roe V Wade is the most important women's right won in the courts in the last 50 years, and women voted to overturn it effectively. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2018/08/09/an-examination-of-the-2016-electorate-based-on-validated-voters/ https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2018/08/09/an-examinati... I'd imagine if you combined the age demographic information, the female vote that may actually be able to get pregnant and so be affected by this is going to swing even harder away from Trump. The combined male and female vote swings 30% to the red between the 18-29 and 65+ demographics.

mikevm 4y ago

georgeburdell 4y ago
My neighbor had an IUD in place when she conceived a 4th child in her early 40s. The pregnancy was ectopic (or misplaced in some way) and the doctor said it would “resolve” on its own. It did not and now she has a disabled 5 year old.
- gcbirzan 4y ago
  It was definitely not ectopic, there is no way in which an ectopic pregnancy resulted in a birth.
kaba0 4y ago
Let me assume you are male.. Also, what happens with rape victims? Or you know, women often know about their pregnancy weeks after the event? Also, you are literally less likely to die from donating your kidney then a women giving birth. Do you really have no empathy whatsoever? Giving birth is brutal, you have a no matter how disgusting it is to write but technically a parasite growing inside you sucking out every resource you have causing often life altering changes. And we are not even at birthing. I am also a guy by the way, but that is exactly why I believe that the only opinion we should have on the issue is to listen to women, and the only voice we should have is to shout over old men deciding on a topic not concerning them.
- mikevm 4y ago
  > Let me assume you are male.. So what? It takes two to tango. > Also, what happens with rape victims? They should be able to get an abortion. I'm not anti-abortion in all cases. > Also, you are literally less likely to die from donating your kidney then a women giving birth. Do you really have no empathy whatsoever? Giving birth is brutal, you have a no matter how disgusting it is to write but technically a parasite growing inside you sucking out every resource you have causing often life altering changes. And we are not even at birthing. Let me quote a paragraph from [0]: When a woman is pregnant, the situation is different. In the usual case, where pregnancy did not result from sexual assault, the child himself, and his need for shelter and nourishment in the womb, is a direct result of actions taken voluntarily by both parents. The need to live in the mother’s uterus for approximately forty weeks is also not an extraordinary measure, in the way that the term is generally used. It is a basic human need — every single person who has ever been born required it. Just as the newborn has a specific claim against his parents due to the fact that they created him in all his helplessness, so too did he have a claim against them before he was born, for the same reason. It is true that the heavier burden falls on the mother during the prenatal period. Men simply cannot directly provide what their children need during the first forty weeks of their lives. (I would advocate requiring fathers to indirectly provide as much as they can by compensating mothers for their medical bills, lost work time, and other expenses during pregnancy.) The fact that women must shoulder more of the parental obligation during pregnancy than men is regrettable, but does not negate the obligation. If someone claims that “women will always need abortion,” note the implicit assumptions. The first is that our ability to bear children is, and always will be, a handicap. The second is that we can never hope for our society to adequately adjust to the needs of mothers so that women will not feel the need to abort. The third is that violence against certain of our fellow human beings is an acceptable, even necessary way to solve social problems. [...] But I find the acceptance of abortion as a response to a sexist society to be inconsistent with humanist ideals. Humanism values the inherent worth and dignity of every human being. It affirms that moral standards should be based on the effect of our actions on our fellow human beings. It embraces the use of reason and repudiates the use of violence to settle disputes. Abortion is an ancient, backwards practice which is not worthy of those ideals. Legal or not, we must progress beyond it. > I am also a guy by the way, but that is exactly why I believe that the only opinion we should have on the issue is to listen to women, and the only voice we should have is to shout over old men deciding on a topic not concerning them. Oh please, not this argument again. First of all, there are women who are also against abortion, this has nothing to do with "old men". Second of all, we are all human and are capable of empathy (well, except the psychopaths) and just because you are not a woman doesn't mean that you can't reason about things that affect women. [0] https://infidels.org/library/modern/debates-secularist-abortion-roth1/ https://infidels.org/library/modern/debates-secularist-abort...