Roe v Wade is on deck

[prideandfall]

I'm willing to view life as sacred without any religious connotation. Even as an atheist, it is easily viewed that life is rare and beautiful.

But on the other hand, these pro-lifers don't give a fuck about life. They don't care about the woman who is undoubtedly alive.

two quick things, one of which is mostly just a side comment and kind of a derail so i don't expect an actual answer, though if you can post even a cliff's notes version of a reply to appease my curiosity on the issue that would be cool.

1. how is life, especially human life, rare? or beautiful, but that's an aesthetic choice i guess.
there are almost 8 billion of us. we're fucking everywhere. you can't spit most place without hitting a human.
(ok that's obviously hyperbolic in terms of geography but i mean, there's a shitload of humans)
humans aren't rare, and human life being beautiful is... well let's just say i find the description of human life as 'beautiful' insanely narrow and cherry-picking from the broader swath of human experience.

2. they do give a fuck about 'life' but in terms of quantity, not quality.
existence, at any cost, regardless of the context or circumstances, is their central operating thesis.
forcing existence on as many new human consciousnesses as possible is the end goal, what happens to those beings once they're shat into existence is irrelevant to them.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Sounds like gay rights, right to contraception and other such rights will also come under threat:

After Roe reversal, gay rights and contraception could be next, says Justice Thomas

“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents,” conservative Justice Clarence Thomas's concurring opinion reads.

fortune.com

Perhaps the worst part of the decision. This was only in a concurring part of the ruling, but it was nothing short of a flare for the alt-right / Christian Dominionists.

That he mentions Lawrence is absolutely frightening, because that overturned a law that made consensual gay sex a crime. I'm against pulling back on gay marriage, but I can at least in a corner of my head see about removing what is a privilege. But to recriminalize consensual sex among adults?! That is scary shit. I'm sure TomC will be all for that. Worked for abortion, let's just wipe the slate clean, and when I say wipe the slate, I mean put gays in jail. Let's make it a felony!

Obviously Griswold would be quite something. The right to privacy is inherent in the damn Constitution. The Government can't seize evidence from you without a warrant, even if you are a criminal, but the Government can say if you can have sex, how you can have sex, where you can have sex with your wife?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It seems like Texas GOP having their 'let's hate gays' platform is going to be the basis for re-establishing the illegality of male sodomy. That'll be a pain to enforce, but the GOP really has no issue with spying on people's intimate lives.

Meanwhile in Fuck You Sen. Collins:

“This decision is inconsistent with what Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh said in their testimony and their meetings with me, where they both were insistent on the importance of supporting long-standing precedents that the country has relied upon,” Collins said Friday.

"Inconsistent with"? You mean "a betrayal to", right?

Chief Justice Roberts cements his legacy as a feckless cunt ahead of SCOTUS. He disagreed with overturning Roe v Wade, but siding with the majority.

Can he be hauled in for lying at a congressional inquiry?

Donald Trump incited a fucking riot, and the GOP didn't nothing. You think they are going to reduce their majority in SCOTUS?!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'm willing to view life as sacred without any religious connotation. Even as an atheist, it is easily viewed that life is rare and beautiful.

But on the other hand, these pro-lifers don't give a fuck about life. They don't care about the woman who is undoubtedly alive.

two quick things, one of which is mostly just a side comment and kind of a derail so i don't expect an actual answer, though if you can post even a cliff's notes version of a reply to appease my curiosity on the issue that would be cool.

1. how is life, especially human life, rare? or beautiful, but that's an aesthetic choice i guess.
there are almost 8 billion of us. we're fucking everywhere. you can't spit most place without hitting a human.
(ok that's obviously hyperbolic in terms of geography but i mean, there's a shitload of humans)
humans aren't rare, and human life being beautiful is... well let's just say i find the description of human life as 'beautiful' insanely narrow and cherry-picking from the broader swath of human experience.

You can feel free to believe as you want, that subject is a derail.

2. they do give a fuck about 'life' but in terms of quantity, not quality.
existence, at any cost, regardless of the context or circumstances, is their central operating thesis.
forcing existence on as many new human consciousnesses as possible is the end goal, what happens to those beings once they're shat into existence is irrelevant to them.

They don't care about quantity, they want control. They want women back in the home, barefoot, pregnant.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Sounds like gay rights, right to contraception and other such rights will also come under threat:

After Roe reversal, gay rights and contraception could be next, says Justice Thomas

“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents,” conservative Justice Clarence Thomas's concurring opinion reads.

fortune.com

Perhaps the worst part of the decision. This was only in a concurring part of the ruling, but it was nothing short of a flare for the alt-right / Christian Dominionists.

That he mentions Lawrence is absolutely frightening, because that overturned a law that made consensual gay sex a crime. I'm against pulling back on gay marriage, but I can at least in a corner of my head see about removing what is a privilege. But to recriminalize consensual sex among adults?! That is scary shit. I'm sure TomC will be all for that. Worked for abortion, let's just wipe the slate clean, and when I say wipe the slate, I mean put gays in jail. Let's make it a felony!

Obviously Griswold would be quite something. The right to privacy is inherent in the damn Constitution. The Government can't seize evidence from you without a warrant, even if you are a criminal, but the Government can say if you can have sex, how you can have sex, where you can have sex with your wife?

Yea, I didn't want to say anything to Tom about that issue in the past. I like Tom. But that is exactly what I've been thinking in his earlier posts regarding his being pro-choice. If they take rights from women, they'll most like go after gays. The religious right will go after anyone that they don't agree with. Maybe they'll come after me being married to a white woman?

 

[prideandfall]

I'm willing to view life as sacred without any religious connotation. Even as an atheist, it is easily viewed that life is rare and beautiful.

But on the other hand, these pro-lifers don't give a fuck about life. They don't care about the woman who is undoubtedly alive.

two quick things, one of which is mostly just a side comment and kind of a derail so i don't expect an actual answer, though if you can post even a cliff's notes version of a reply to appease my curiosity on the issue that would be cool.

1. how is life, especially human life, rare? or beautiful, but that's an aesthetic choice i guess.
there are almost 8 billion of us. we're fucking everywhere. you can't spit most place without hitting a human.
(ok that's obviously hyperbolic in terms of geography but i mean, there's a shitload of humans)
humans aren't rare, and human life being beautiful is... well let's just say i find the description of human life as 'beautiful' insanely narrow and cherry-picking from the broader swath of human experience.

You can feel free to believe as you want, that subject is a derail.

2. they do give a fuck about 'life' but in terms of quantity, not quality.
existence, at any cost, regardless of the context or circumstances, is their central operating thesis.
forcing existence on as many new human consciousnesses as possible is the end goal, what happens to those beings once they're shat into existence is irrelevant to them.

They don't care about quantity, they want control. They want women back in the home, barefoot, pregnant.

it doesn't have to be either/or - in fact, it's in their vested interest to have both.

predatory capitalism requires a teeming mass of innocent people being dumped into an existence they are completely unprepared for, untrained for, and given no capacity to thrive in on their own so that they are desperate and will work for less than a livable wage without having the collective power to fight back.

so they want unlimited poor uneducated rubes so they can keep a robust military enrollment and an endless supply of grunts to churn into dust to keep their chipolte burritos under 7 dollars.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Sounds like gay rights, right to contraception and other such rights will also come under threat:

After Roe reversal, gay rights and contraception could be next, says Justice Thomas

“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents,” conservative Justice Clarence Thomas's concurring opinion reads.

fortune.com

Perhaps the worst part of the decision. This was only in a concurring part of the ruling, but it was nothing short of a flare for the alt-right / Christian Dominionists.

That he mentions Lawrence is absolutely frightening, because that overturned a law that made consensual gay sex a crime. I'm against pulling back on gay marriage, but I can at least in a corner of my head see about removing what is a privilege. But to recriminalize consensual sex among adults?! That is scary shit. I'm sure TomC will be all for that. Worked for abortion, let's just wipe the slate clean, and when I say wipe the slate, I mean put gays in jail. Let's make it a felony!

Obviously Griswold would be quite something. The right to privacy is inherent in the damn Constitution. The Government can't seize evidence from you without a warrant, even if you are a criminal, but the Government can say if you can have sex, how you can have sex, where you can have sex with your wife?

Yea, I didn't want to say anything to Tom about that issue in the past. I like Tom. But that is exactly what I've been thinking in his earlier posts regarding his being pro-choice. If they take rights from women, they'll most like go after gays.

I didn't bring it up because I didn't think they'd go there, at least not this quickly. I figured Griswold was always the target. But Justice Thomas's statement is about as chilling as it gets. The Justice who believes rights and privileges are reserved to those chosen by those in power. The Constitution speaks the exact opposite!

The religious right will go after anyone that they don't agree with. Maybe they'll come after me being married to a white woman?

I wouldn't have thought it likely this morning, but maybe I was wrong then. But there are easier fish to fry right now, women and gays.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Sounds like gay rights, right to contraception and other such rights will also come under threat:

After Roe reversal, gay rights and contraception could be next, says Justice Thomas

“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents,” conservative Justice Clarence Thomas's concurring opinion reads.

fortune.com

Perhaps the worst part of the decision. This was only in a concurring part of the ruling, but it was nothing short of a flare for the alt-right / Christian Dominionists.

That he mentions Lawrence is absolutely frightening, because that overturned a law that made consensual gay sex a crime. I'm against pulling back on gay marriage, but I can at least in a corner of my head see about removing what is a privilege. But to recriminalize consensual sex among adults?! That is scary shit. I'm sure TomC will be all for that. Worked for abortion, let's just wipe the slate clean, and when I say wipe the slate, I mean put gays in jail. Let's make it a felony!

Obviously Griswold would be quite something. The right to privacy is inherent in the damn Constitution. The Government can't seize evidence from you without a warrant, even if you are a criminal, but the Government can say if you can have sex, how you can have sex, where you can have sex with your wife?

Yea, I didn't want to say anything to Tom about that issue in the past. I like Tom. But that is exactly what I've been thinking in his earlier posts regarding his being pro-choice. If they take rights from women, they'll most like go after gays.

I didn't bring it up because I didn't think they'd go there, at least not this quickly. I figured Griswold was always the target. But Justice Thomas's statement is about as chilling as it gets. The Justice who believes rights and privileges are reserved to those chosen by those in power. The Constitution speaks the exact opposite!

The religious right will go after anyone that they don't agree with. Maybe they'll come after me being married to a white woman?

I wouldn't have thought it likely this morning, but maybe I was wrong then. But there are easier fish to fry right now, women and gays.

The right is incredibly politically savvy (at least compared to left). You don't win 6 or 7 elections with fewer voters unless you're savvy. I predict that the right will totally claim that Thomas is wrong. They won't use this to go after gays, contraception and other such rights. They wouldn't dare do that........... Until the consolidate their victories in November. Then they'll go after whomever they want, and there isn't a damn thing that we'll be able to do about it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The right is incredibly politically savvy (at least compared to left). You don't win 6 or 7 elections with fewer voters unless you're savvy. I predict that the right will totally claim that Thomas is wrong. They won't use this to go after gays, contraception and other such rights. They wouldn't dare do that........... Until the consolidate their victories in November. Then they'll go after whomever they want, and there isn't a damn thing that we'll be able to do about it.

It doesn't matter what they say. All that matters is the fire the Dems light under the base, or we are extraordinarily fucked. Turnout, turnout, turnout. 2022 is going to be a war come November, hopefully not literally, but we all know the GOP and their position on fairly held elections.

The sad thing is the elections that matter the most are always THIS election. But 2000 was squandered, 2016 was a full-on catastrophe of unprecedented proportions. And the most important of the past 2010, when the state legislatures would become permanently gerrymandered. And purple states like Ohio and Florida would become ruby red for the US House.

But now, it is operation try to drag America back into the 21st Century time. 2022 is the most important response to all the failures of 2000, 2010, and 2016... until the next election.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The SC overturns Roe vs Wade and as a response, Nancy Pelosi reads a poem. We need a new speaker of the house.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The SC overturns Roe vs Wade and as a response, Nancy Pelosi reads a poem. We need a new speaker of the house.

Pelosi is the Arnold Schwarzenegger (action film actor, not politician) of House Speakers. Her ability to get things passed is legendary, she will not be easy to replace. Nothing we do today touches SCOTUS's miscarriage of justice. What do we need to do? We need state based constitutional initiatives started immediately, where states like Ohio allow it.

 

[crazyfingers]

Meanwhile in Fuck You Sen. Collins:

“This decision is inconsistent with what Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh said in their testimony and their meetings with me, where they both were insistent on the importance of supporting long-standing precedents that the country has relied upon,” Collins said Friday.

"Inconsistent with"? You mean "a betrayal to", right?

Chief Justice Roberts cements his legacy as a feckless cunt ahead of SCOTUS. He disagreed with overturning Roe v Wade, but siding with the majority.

Anyone with a functioning brain would have told Collins not to trust them. They are rligious zealotts who would do anything to impose their religious views onto everyone. Fuck her and fuck the 6 assholes on the supreme court. When I was growing up the Supreme Court was the ultimate protecters of what's right. They have become the enemy of all that's good.

 

[blastula]

 

[Derec]

Danke Hillary!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Passing a law doesn't mean SCOTUS won't kill it. This ruling says the 14th Amendment doesn't apply, so the Federal Government has little standing to impart on the states.

 

[ZiprHead]

Danke Hillary!

WTF is that supposed to mean? If the Hillary haters had rubbed two sticks together to get a spark of insight and voted for Hillary over Phony Soprano none of this shit would be happening.

Or do you like what is happening?

 

[Toni]

I think that it extremely interesting and perhaps not well thought out that they have expanded gun rights at the same time they curtailed abortion rights.

 

[Toni]

Danke Hillary!

WTF is that supposed to mean? If the Hillary haters had rubbed two sticks together to get a spark of insight and voted for Hillary over Phony Soprano none of this shit would be happening.

Or do you like what is happening?

It just means that any time Derec can invent a way to dig at a woman who is strong, intelligent, well educated and accomplished, he’ll give it a try.

And fail, of course.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Danke Hillary!

Last time I checked, she didn't appoint any SCOTUS justices. Also, she didn't support the Trump presidency. It'd be thanks, if anything, in part to Nadar voters in Florida and those that didn't turnout to vote in Florida in 2000 and people that didn't turn out to vote in 2016.

I suppose the good news is that we don't have to listen to people bitching about why the woman should be able to choose an abortion without the sperm donator's say.

 

[TomC]

Danke Hillary!

WTF is that supposed to mean? If the Hillary haters had rubbed two sticks together to get a spark of insight and voted for Hillary over Phony Soprano none of this shit would be happening.

Or do you like what is happening?

I can't speak for Derec, but I don't find it hard to understand. I'd be more inclined to phrase it "Thank you Bernie Sanders".

Bernie convinced enough voters that Clinton was too conservative, wooden, and warhawkish to vote for. Trump won.

Here we are.
Tom