Jump to content
UnevenEdge

Draft ruling shows Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade: report


ZoomBubba

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Doom Metal Alchemist said:

 

One time I got pulled over (can't exactly remember for what but VERY most likely speeding), so as I was waiting for the cop to come to my window I quickly dug out my registration from my glove box and my license from my wallet and immediately tried handing it to him. He looked at it but didn't take it and asked me what I was doing. I said it's my license and registration. He said I could put it away. I said you don't need to see it? He said, no that's just something Hollywood (meaning TV/movies etc) does. I think he told me police very rarely need to see people's registration and often don't need to see their license.

Must be a Cali thing cuz it’s the first thing the oinks ask for when they pull you over out here. License insurance and registration 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Doom Metal Alchemist said:

Huh. Weird.

How long ago was this?  NY doesn’t have, or it’s not widely had, something in the license plate that’s a chip or some shit that has all that info that cops can just scan or some shit. Maybe you had that?  Idk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 1pooh4u said:

How long ago was this?  NY doesn’t have, or it’s not widely had, something in the license plate that’s a chip or some shit that has all that info that cops can just scan or some shit. Maybe you had that?  Idk. 

What I assume they did is just look at my plate and enter in the number in some....machine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Both Roe and Casey overturned.

 

Putting this one out there just in case it actually happens.  Could be an interesting night.

 

I hope it happens. Fuck them all. The violence that might happen needs to happen.  No one has the right to tell anyone else what to do with their bodies. Pregnancy isn’t a communicable illness. Life does not begin at fertilization. Life begins when labor begins and the baby is free from the womb. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is fuckin outrageous to ignore precedent in order to mold this country to what the right wants is a fuckin disgrace.  Bowing to precedent was mostly a good thing so future courts couldn’t undo what a prior SCOTUS has decided. Fuck them all and may they never have a moment of peace ever again. Not at work. Not at home. NOT ANYWHERE 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 1pooh4u said:

So the only difference between the leaked opinion and the actual opinion is that the opinion in the leak that said this applies to abortion rights and those rights only is a lie. Now we go back to the 1950’s. 

No, Thomas went out on a limb to say that because this legal holding only applies to abortion, he's ready and willing to apply the analysis to everything else.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 1pooh4u said:

So the only difference between the leaked opinion and the actual opinion is that the opinion in the leak that said this applies to abortion rights and those rights only is a lie. Now we go back to the 1950’s. 

No, the 1850s. We are losing control of our bodies - how long before we lose other rights? Maybe the court will next address whether letting us have the vote was a mistake?

  • Like 2
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s just fucking wild, and I’ll never understand what it’s like for any of this outside of what people tell they are feeling because I’m lucky enough to be a really white, male… and I pass all the smell tests and visual ones too.

My wife left work early, and a couple of her nurses colleagues did too…. It’s truly heartbreaking.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Raptorpat said:

No, Thomas went out on a limb to say that because this legal holding only applies to abortion, he's ready and willing to apply the analysis to everything else.

So he just gave a wink to any state that wants to restrict those issues in some way? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 1pooh4u said:

So he just gave a wink to any state that wants to restrict those issues in some way? 

He's saying "if you bring these issues to the supreme court, you'll have at least one of the five votes you need."

The counterpoint is the reason Alito was specific that this only applies to abortion is because he needed to limit it to abortion to get the five votes. Because the legal analysis here is just filling in for the politics of a 50-year campaign to do this.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, mthor said:

No, the 1850s. We are losing control of our bodies - how long before we lose other rights? Maybe the court will next address whether letting us have the vote was a mistake?

This is disastrous but a loud minority doesn’t care cuz they’re getting everything they ever wanted 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Raptorpat said:

He's saying "if you bring these issues to the supreme court, you'll have at least one of the five votes you need."

The counterpoint is the reason Alito was specific that this only applies to abortion is because he needed to limit it to abortion to get the five votes. Because the legal analysis here is just filling in for the politics of a 50-year campaign to do this.

I don’t believe there will be any issues getting the votes if it’s put before them.  I have no confidence in this court.  I think Thomas Kavanaugh Gorsuch and ACB should be removed from the bench.  I can’t lie during a job interview and keep my job but people that actually mold the country can?  Joke court. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still trying to reconcile how you can argue trying to interpret laws from the perspective of the authors of the constitution when those authors were white supremacist. Women and people of color weren't meant to have any rights in the first place. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
  • D'oh 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SwimModSponges said:

You know we talk a lot about how "we're going back to the days of the founding fathers" but we ignore the fact that the textbook Benjamin Franklin wrote as the basis for the American education system specifically included instructions for at-home abortions.

But what do i know.

Hey!!!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, SwimModSponges said:

You know we talk a lot about how "we're going back to the days of the founding fathers" but we ignore the fact that the textbook Benjamin Franklin wrote as the basis for the American education system specifically included instructions for at-home abortions.

But what do i know.

I feel like I'm missing your point ... are you saying at home abortions have been around when the founding fathers were around ?

yes ... because back room/home abortions have been around for as long as there have been pregnancies 

Edited by Vamped
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Vamped said:

I feel like I'm missing your point ... are you saying at home abortions have been around when the founding fathers were around ?

yes ... because back room/home abortions have been around for as long as their have been pregnancies 

Not "back room abortions", instuctions for safe, at home, pharmaceutical abortions, essentially "how to make plan B before plan B existed'.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/16/1099244635/for-ben-franklin-abortion-was-basic-arithmetic

I mean yeah, founding fathers were hella racist, but we're not trying to "go back to their time."

They lived in the "age of enlightenment".

We want to go back into the darkness.

Edited by SwimModSponges
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I believe the point was that (one of) the founding fathers believed in access to abortion, given that at-home was the best you could get at the time. Thus, this ruling, like most, cites the "founding fathers" with no consideration to their beliefs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SwimModSponges said:

Not "back room abortions", instuctions for safe, at home, pharmaceutical abortions, essentially "how to make plan B before plan B existed'.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/16/1099244635/for-ben-franklin-abortion-was-basic-arithmetic

I mean yeah, founding fathers were hella racist, but we're not trying to "go back to their time."

They lived in the "age of enlightenment".

We want to go back into the darkness.

Dude how stupid have you become in your “break” from this place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SwimModSponges said:

Not "back room abortions", instuctions for safe, at home, pharmaceutical abortions, essentially "how to make plan B before plan B existed'.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/16/1099244635/for-ben-franklin-abortion-was-basic-arithmetic

I mean yeah, founding fathers were hella racist, but we're not trying to "go back to their time."

They lived in the "age of enlightenment".

We want to go back into the darkness.

Unfortunately, most herbal concoctions that cause abortion can also result in kidney or liver damage or death, but hey, we're women - it's not like we make sperm or anything.

  • Like 5
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mthor said:

Unfortunately, most herbal concoctions that cause abortion can also result in kidney or liver damage or death, but hey, we're women - it's not like we make sperm or anything.

I guess your response was less incendiary… but since he chose this thread to come back officially…

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mthor said:

Unfortunately, most herbal concoctions that cause abortion can also result in kidney or liver damage or death, but hey, we're women - it's not like we make sperm or anything.

Ffs, he ain't saying we should bring that back or anything. It was the best available at the time, and was a widely accepted practice. Medical advancements made it safer, and somehow it's become less acceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 1pooh4u said:

He left already.  I guess he tested the waters and decided it’s still too cold, or too hot?  Wtf knows 

I really just didn't understand the first post, then he said the founding fathers were enlightened and I got a flashback of the cheese "greater" thing and decided I didn't care

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, rpgamer said:

Ffs, he ain't saying we should bring that back or anything. It was the best available at the time, and was a widely accepted practice. Medical advancements made it safer, and somehow it's become less acceptable.

The point is that every sperm is sacred, but the incubators not so much. Then and now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe it's just time for a new constitution. It may seem like such a radical idea to the American mind, but constitutions have been rewritten frequently in most other countries. To say something is unconstitutional based on a document written such a long time ago seems pretty retarded. A lot has changed since then.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

6 minutes ago, Sawdamizer said:

I guess your response was less incendiary… but since he chose this thread to come back officially…

I still post, just incredibly slowly.

Also not going to argue my inent.

Pro-choice af and referring to time periods by what they're known as, but sure.

Let's all change the focus of the topic to attacking me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...