7 ms·

Abortion access is not a social view. It's a health necessity, as is contraception. I'd understand if "the left" was trying to take away some other person's r

by diob 4y ago

Abortion access is not a social view. It's a health necessity, as is contraception. I'd understand if "the left" was trying to take away some other person's right, but this is the opposite. They're trying to preserve rights. A tyranny of the majority in conservative states is now restricting rights, it's going to cause death / suffering.

soco 4y ago
You mean that contraception which is in line for the next court decision?
- diob 4y ago
  Exactly. They won't stop there either.
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  It isn't an inference or extrapolation either. From today's decision, citations my own: > For that reason, in future fases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold[1], Lawrence[2], and Obergefell[3]. The decision advocates for re-ruling on each of these cases. If these should be decided against their current status, expect states to outlaw contraception, gay relations, and same-sex marriage. 1. Ruled that contraception bans are unconstitutional https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/griswold_v_connecticut_%281965%29 https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/griswold_v_connecticut_%2819... 2. Ruled that sodomy bans are unconstitutional https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/lawrence_v._texas https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/lawrence_v._texas 3. Ruled that same-sex marriage bans are unconstitutional https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/14-556 https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/14-556
  - wilsonnb3 4y ago
    Isn’t this from Thomas’s concurrence? In other words, Thomas has always been crazy about this sort of thing but no one else on the court agrees. Hence why nobody else signed on to this concurrence.
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      That doesn't really matter though, what matters is how they will vote and if they voted like they did today then all bets are off.
    - tigershark 4y ago
      Yeah, right. Like those liars didn’t say in their confirmation hearing that Roe vs Wade was an established precedent and wouldn’t be touched. Either you are so gullible that you still believe them against all the evidence or you are in bad faith. Tertium non datur.
    - bashinator 4y ago
      The other five Republican-aligned justices have amply demonstrated that they’re lying liars when it comes to their publicly-stated vs. actual intentions.
    - selimthegrim 4y ago
      Thomas’ dicta have a bad habit of becoming the right wing party line on the Court in 2.0 years or so
      - selimthegrim 4y ago
        For 2.0 read 20
- fragmede 4y ago
  That's not as far fetched as you would hope. Of course by the time we see that come to pass it'll be too late.
- djfdat 4y ago
  Abstinence is a form of contraception. This is gonna get weird.
  - tigershark 4y ago
    You didn’t watch the handmaid’s tale? The commanders were pretty much forced to rape their handmaid to procreate. This is what they want, a continuous influx of cheap poor laborers that are pretty much slaves.
gwd 4y ago
> I'd understand if "the left" was trying to take away some other person's right, but this is the opposite. They're trying to preserve rights. The thing that makes these discussions so frustrating is that people often seem to be completely deer-in-the-headlights ignorant of the other side's arguments. The argument of pro-life people is that there are two human beings involved in the abortion: the mother, and the child. Making abortion legal gives the mother the right over her body by removing the right of the child to not have her life taken away. In the eyes of pro-life people, "taking away some other person's right" is exactly what "the left" are doing. Now you might not agree that there is a child in this case; you might think that children begin existing and having rights once they pass through the birth canal and not before. Or you might think that even if there is a child that has rights, the mother's right to bodily autonomy trumps the child's right to life. But you can't say "I don't understand where they're coming from; 'the left' isn't trying to take away some other person's right" without being profoundly ignorant of the basic views of the people you're arguing against.
- bardworx 4y ago
  That's a really good point but unfortunately its just a surface level argument. Same states that demonize abortions also cut health services for children and mothers. All states that had a trigger law to ban abortions also do not have paid family leave. So they only kinda sorta care about the child in the womb but not about the mother or the child when they are born. If folks are going to ban abortions they should at least expand child and mother care, in my opinion. On the other hand, pre-Roe, the maximum tax rate was 70%, with 25 different tax brackets. I'm guessing that folks that support today's decision are probably okay with the tax increases and big government that will follow. Put another way, the case several days ago that allows child school credit to be used for Catholic school ALSO allows the same credit to be used for the Church of Satan School of the Gifted. The unintended consequences of all the rulings during the past week are going to be an interesting things to observe.
  - forty 4y ago
    Exactly, so much bullshit when the only goals are really to make sure poor people stay poor and that women don't work...

by diob 4y ago

soco 4y ago

You mean that contraception which is in line for the next court decision?

diob 4y ago
Exactly. They won't stop there either.
kelseyfrog 4y ago
It isn't an inference or extrapolation either. From today's decision, citations my own: > For that reason, in future fases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold[1], Lawrence[2], and Obergefell[3]. The decision advocates for re-ruling on each of these cases. If these should be decided against their current status, expect states to outlaw contraception, gay relations, and same-sex marriage. 1. Ruled that contraception bans are unconstitutional https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/griswold_v_connecticut_%281965%29 https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/griswold_v_connecticut_%2819... 2. Ruled that sodomy bans are unconstitutional https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/lawrence_v._texas https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/lawrence_v._texas 3. Ruled that same-sex marriage bans are unconstitutional https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/14-556 https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/14-556
- wilsonnb3 4y ago
  Isn’t this from Thomas’s concurrence? In other words, Thomas has always been crazy about this sort of thing but no one else on the court agrees. Hence why nobody else signed on to this concurrence.
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    That doesn't really matter though, what matters is how they will vote and if they voted like they did today then all bets are off.
  - tigershark 4y ago
    Yeah, right. Like those liars didn’t say in their confirmation hearing that Roe vs Wade was an established precedent and wouldn’t be touched. Either you are so gullible that you still believe them against all the evidence or you are in bad faith. Tertium non datur.
  - bashinator 4y ago
    The other five Republican-aligned justices have amply demonstrated that they’re lying liars when it comes to their publicly-stated vs. actual intentions.
  - selimthegrim 4y ago
    Thomas’ dicta have a bad habit of becoming the right wing party line on the Court in 2.0 years or so
    - selimthegrim 4y ago
      For 2.0 read 20
fragmede 4y ago
That's not as far fetched as you would hope. Of course by the time we see that come to pass it'll be too late.
djfdat 4y ago
Abstinence is a form of contraception. This is gonna get weird.
- tigershark 4y ago
  You didn’t watch the handmaid’s tale? The commanders were pretty much forced to rape their handmaid to procreate. This is what they want, a continuous influx of cheap poor laborers that are pretty much slaves.

gwd 4y ago

> I'd understand if "the left" was trying to take away some other person's right, but this is the opposite. They're trying to preserve rights. The thing that makes these discussions so frustrating is that people often seem to be completely deer-in-the-headlights ignorant of the other side's arguments. The argument of pro-life people is that there are two human beings involved in the abortion: the mother, and the child. Making abortion legal gives the mother the right over her body by removing the right of the child to not have her life taken away. In the eyes of pro-life people, "taking away some other person's right" is exactly what "the left" are doing. Now you might not agree that there is a child in this case; you might think that children begin existing and having rights once they pass through the birth canal and not before. Or you might think that even if there is a child that has rights, the mother's right to bodily autonomy trumps the child's right to life. But you can't say "I don't understand where they're coming from; 'the left' isn't trying to take away some other person's right" without being profoundly ignorant of the basic views of the people you're arguing against.

bardworx 4y ago
That's a really good point but unfortunately its just a surface level argument. Same states that demonize abortions also cut health services for children and mothers. All states that had a trigger law to ban abortions also do not have paid family leave. So they only kinda sorta care about the child in the womb but not about the mother or the child when they are born. If folks are going to ban abortions they should at least expand child and mother care, in my opinion. On the other hand, pre-Roe, the maximum tax rate was 70%, with 25 different tax brackets. I'm guessing that folks that support today's decision are probably okay with the tax increases and big government that will follow. Put another way, the case several days ago that allows child school credit to be used for Catholic school ALSO allows the same credit to be used for the Church of Satan School of the Gifted. The unintended consequences of all the rulings during the past week are going to be an interesting things to observe.
- forty 4y ago
  Exactly, so much bullshit when the only goals are really to make sure poor people stay poor and that women don't work...