Interesting development Limiescouse. I can’t see Republicans going against big business, but on the other hand, I look at the likes of Ron DeSantis taking on Disney in a culture war, and am reminded that the current iteration of the Republican Party has lost the plot.
Prediction from me while I’m on:
Ron DeSantis will be the next President of the United States.
My company is one of them, they’ve announced today they’ll cover travel and medical expenses. I wondered the same thing about whether they will be prosecuted in states, or that our employees in those states will.
Absolutely ridiculous that we have to even talk about this honestly.
I coincidentally had arranged a full team meeting that happened to fall just a few minutes after the decision was made. Although everyone who works on my team is in “safe” states there was a lot of emotion, understandably. Had no idea what to tell them other than I’m available to talk to if they want.
Comes to something when you’re leaving the morality of the nation in the hands of corporations worth billions of dollars.
a nd Blinken seeks to lecture the world in human rights. Let America get its own house in order first.
Republicans can give up their obsession on Abortions and they’ll instantly make huge inroads. But this is a setback alright. Huge setback for the USA. Being dictated to by 9 judges on what a woman ought to ought not to do with her body. And what sticks further is the fact that Trump appointed Barrett as a finishing touch to his presidency.
And have to put some fault at Ginsberg for not retiring when Obama requested her too. This shitshow might not have even come to pass
Not just Barrett; he appointed Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh too.
Maybe pro-choice activists should form a militia? You know, just to confuse them all.
I am personally torn by such a decision because firstly, I am also of the opinion that abortion of a baby is killing a life no matter how I look at it, specifically if the pregnancy happened because of an informed decision you made and because of regrets, you choose to abort.
But inspite of that opinion, I cannot understand why there is no exception for pregnancies caused by a crime like rape etc. Because the pregnancy happened not because of a choice made voluntary by the woman and surely that exception has to be made even if the law outlaws all other circumstances of abortion. I also think that abortion, even if I disagree with it, cannot be made illegal as a law. We can counsel or inform the women of the decision to abort and what it means to take away a life etc but ultimately I still hold the opinion that women need to be given the right to have a choice on that, regardless of my opinion on what that action means to me.
There is a ton of “blame” to be shared here as this doesnt happen this way without a long list of dominoes falling the way they did, but I think with few exceptions (focusing on McConnel and Trump) it’s the wrong way to think about the situation to single any of them out. This happened because of a 30 year long push to make it happen that key members of the conservative moment prioritized over all other issues. They spend that time myopically focusing on vulnerabilities while people in power who supported abortion rights had their focus on doing other things to improve the country (in their eyes) during a period when the right was viewed as settled law.
This exception never made much sense to me. Especially as it is often thrown into the mix with “life of the mother.” If the opposition to abortion is based on it being murder, as it is with most people who support bans, then the reason for the pregnancy existing doesnt change that. Supporting those exceptions make the opposition to murder seem conditional. Life of the mother on the other hand is a completely different situation that turns it from less like more murder and more like self defense so is far more compatible with the the religious opposition to abortion.
I agree. The right has been underestimated too many times.
To think even a country like Ireland (with its staunch catholicism) could make progress on this issue and US just takes themselves back 30 years.
I am split 50 50 on this. But then i remember that it is for a woman to decide on whether to carry forward the pregnancy or not.
Latin America as well. Mexico, Argentina and Colombia have all made significant progress in recent years on the issue despite their Catholicism.
So, none of the men’s fault and women are blamed for being ‘uninformed’? You can’t be impregnated by yourself, yeah? In the case of your ‘exception’, when going to court, how do you decide this is ‘rape’? After a traumatising event, a court case to decide if the mother was in the wrong or not too? I really hate to drag sexes or gender into discussion, but really. Try getting pregnant.
Also, how much a life without conscience worth? Do you want to extend this to all the coma patients, they’re alive with heart beats and all, must we keep them on ventilators forever? Who will decide for them? Who foots the bills? The ‘life’ you said, what about when they grow up?
I see no reason to be torn here, we don’t decide for other people, non-stop. The fact that abortion is still being discussed as wrong/right in the moral sense shows how much the ‘argument’ has taken root, not being based in medical reasons or anything at all. And that’s why any country wanting to roll back this particular healthcare support for women, we say they regress to the dark times.
He has the right to be torn. Abortion is a difficult, and divisive, issue.
If a person sees abortion as being about women’s health, and her right to choose what she wants with her own body, this ruling is obviously awful. Hence the protests.
If a person sees the unborn as having a right to life, this ruling is obviously welcome. Hence the celebration.
I will not dress it up even if I might be the minority but to me, the baby or foetus or mass whatever is the term being called, to me is life. I have seen 2 friends who miscarried at 4 months and 6 weeks and the emotions are the same. Even the latter friend who was only told of the miscarriage later because at 6 weeks, it was not immediately obvious and only a blood test at a doctors visit, she was told of that. And even then, she had the same self blame and grief of not being able to protect the life she had in her body. So that is why my opinion that abortion is taking a life away, no matter how I want to see it.
But yet, because I have seen how pregnancies and abortions can be so personal and complicated that I also believe that despite of whatever I believe or a religion advocates etc, decisions on whether to carry on a pregnancy or an abortion should solely be the final decision of the woman herself. Again, I have 2 couple friends who made drastically different decisions when they were told their babies would most likely be Down Syndrome. The first couple who eventually made the decision to keep the baby did it because they believe that their daughter had every right to experience this world in her own way and its their responsibility as parents to facilitate that and do the best they can. Today she is a beautiful 15 year old and I love the way she dances to music whenever she hears them in public, oblivious to the public eyes and just enjoying the world she sees it. Another couple decided in the end to abort. And I see how difficult and the pain when they eventually decided to abort. And I respect that because precisely they respected life in a different perspective because they did not believe that the quality of life is there for the kid. Do I agree, no. Do I respect the decision and support them as friends? Yes. The decision to abort for them was not as less difficult and painful as having to bring up a special needs kid. So that is why I believe as outsiders, no one has the right to tell someone else whether they can abort or not. My personal conviction and opinion does not matter in this case. I believe if you choose to have sex and then gets pregnant and just choose to abort simply because you regret it, is irresponsible and reckless and disrespecting life. But that is me, because I have seen how complex such decisions can be, who am I to be able to tell someone what to do.
I actually think that would also be the view of the vast majority on here - and almost everywhere else including in the US - hence the outrage at the abortion ban.
It’s fine to be morally against abortion, it’s not fine to impose that moral standard on someone else.
One of the things the past few days have demonstrated to me is how much social media has broken our dialogue. I see endless streams of dunking on people for takes they havent actually made.
John Cornyn is a detestable PoS, but he responded to Obama’s complaint about precedent being overturned by pointing to the Plessy precedent (segregation) that was overturned by Brown vs Board of education (banning school segregation). His point clearly was that people are ok with precedent being overturned when it is viewed as righteous. You can poke holes in the argument, but it absolutely was not a call to return to segregation. Yet, that is how libs on twitter responded to it.
Ana Navaro is a old school cog in the GOP machine who was one of the first movers in being Anti-Trump and hasn’t wavered. She made the point on CNN that you would be able to take the moral arguments of the party regarding abortion more seriously if they were willing to lift a finger for families once the kid was born. She spoke of the experiences of her family in raising kids with special needs and how difficult it has been and how lacking in support from the state they have found themselves. She describing them as facing breaking point numerous times, the point being that another kid on top of this would have been untenable. She was describing the thought process of abortion being used as the best way to take care of the family you already have. These abortions would be less likely if there was more support for families once the babies were born. Yet for 2 days now people have been dunking on her for advocating eugenics for thinking special needs should be aborted.
Neil Katyal was the Solicitor General in the Obama Administration and made the case for not opposing Gorsuch’s nomination. His argument was a tactical one about how to protect/advance the liberal agenda rather than an endorsement of Gorsuch. His point was the election has been lost and they’re going to get their SC pick. And given the shape of the court they will likely get another one after that. Fighting tooth and nail over what was clearly going to be a losing battle over someone who was far more reasonable than the next person they are likely to pick is bad strategy and will undermine the legitimacy of their arguments next time around. Yet, in the face of this decision he is being dunked on, as if he fucking nominated the guy or stopped us following through on other non-existent plans to stop his appointment.
We’ve really got ourselves to the point that every conversation that is worth having is pushed into the direction of being dumbest possible version of that conversation.