Roe v Wade is on deck

[Gospel]

Previous elections =/= coming elections (which is what I was talking about).

TomC is not wrong. There is not much of a gender difference in opinions on whether abortion should be legal. Appealing to the "war of the sexes" narrative, a feminist instinct, is not likely to be fruitful.

The whole "Women's March" was also a bad idea for this reason and others (including Islamists and racists as part of the leadership team being a big one).

I grant you respect for not doubling down on TomC's addon, but to make your own addon to what I said is just special. Let's wait and see what happens in the coming elections MMkay? See you then sweetie.

 

[Copernicus]

I suspect that the timing for this decision may have had something to do with the election coming a half year later, giving the GOP candidates time to work on softening the negative impact on their image. In November, the abortion issue may not be the hottest one in the election, and there will be ample time stoke anger against the arrogant "woke" Democrats, who will be dealing with simultaneous inflation and a recession. That's what happened to Jimmy Carter when OPEC caused a huge spike in oil prices and cars formed lines at gas stations. Interest rate hikes may cool down the job market. I already have one Facebook friend who is so outraged at the cost of filling his diesel-guzzling truck that he vows not to vote for Democrats in November.

 

[Gospel]

I'm gonna get in trouble for asking. But have you ever dealt with pissed-off women? Pshaw.

 

[Toni]

I suspect that the timing for this decision may have had something to do with the election coming a half year later, giving the GOP candidates time to work on softening the negative impact on their image. In November, the abortion issue may not be the hottest one in the election, and there will be ample time stoke anger against the arrogant "woke" Democrats, who will be dealing with simultaneous inflation and a recession. That's what happened to Jimmy Carter when OPEC caused a huge spike in oil prices and cars formed lines at gas stations. Interest rate hikes may cool down the job market. I already have one Facebook friend who is so outraged at the cost of filling his diesel-guzzling truck that he vows not to vote for Democrats in November.

Exactly right. Abortion is a raw meat issue for mad dog GQPers. They'd do more law and order but I think they've gotten the message that too many black people vote and people are noticing the not so subtle ways the GQP is trying to discourage that in states they control. Best not rile up the black folk or the woke whites.

But we haven't had a good abortion throw down for a while. That always opens the pocketbooks of those who just cannot believe that women should be able to control an intimate aspect of their lives such as their body.

Gas prices and inflation are great issues, too.

But Gospel is right. Never underestimate angry women.

 

[lpetrich]

With the "life begins at conception" ideology, not only abortion but some means of birth control are at risk.

Roe v. Wade’s Fall Could Threaten Birth Control and IVF Access | WIRED - "In certain states, politicians could leap on the opportunity to push for the criminalization of certain methods of birth control and to impair access to IVF."

On fetal personhood:

Not only does such terminology outlaw abortion, it could jeopardize access to certain forms of birth control, such as intrauterine devices, as well as emergency contraception like Plan B. This is because these forms of contraception are considered by some anti-abortion advocates to be abortifacients—substances that induce abortion—when interpreting life as beginning at fertilization. (This is despite IUDs and emergency contraception largely preventing pregnancy by stopping eggs from being fertilized or from being released, respectively, rather than interacting with eggs after fertilization.) It could also impair access to assisted reproductive therapy, namely IVF.

In-vitro fertilization will also be affected.

A further knock-on effect of these laws could be to impair access to IVF, where superfluous embryos are part and parcel of the procedure—multiple eggs are harvested and fertilized to raise the likelihood of the process being successful, with those embryos not immediately needed often being frozen, to potentially be used in later rounds. “The entire practice is predicated on some embryo disposal,” says Eliza Brown, a sociologist at UC Berkeley who specializes in reproduction. This is especially true if the clinic is employing methods such as preimplantation genetic testing to look for and dispose of embryos with genetic abnormalities, which is becoming the standard of care. Another commonly used procedure is selective reduction. In IVF, multiple embryos are often transferred into the uterus to up the chances of conception. If a person is found to be carrying multiple fetuses after the embryos have been transferred, which is common in IVF, clinicians will reduce this number to increase the chances of a healthy pregnancy; instead of carrying quintuplets, a mother might instead choose to carry twins.

But in a post-Roe world, these standard interventions could be deemed illegal. Typically, a person with frozen embryos has three options: to discard them, to donate them to research, or to donate them to another couple. The latter, called embryo donation, is the approach most favored by the pro-life movement. The former could be under serious threat; IVF clinics found to be disposing of unused embryos could be subject to criminal charges. “In a state that says a frozen embryo is a person, then basically, you are destroying a kid,” says Kimberly Mutcherson, a professor at Rutgers Law School who focuses on reproductive justice and bioethics.

Then discussing how birth control may be next, noting the Hobby Lobby case. In it, the management of that chain of craft stores refused to cover birth control in its employees' medical benefits, in violation of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). This was because of their religious beliefs, that some forms of birth control are baby killing, just like abortion. The case went all the way up to the Supreme Court, and that court decided that that mandate violated Hobby Lobby's religious freedom.

That in itself opens up a can of worms. Will the more strict Jews and Muslims object to pork? Will the more strict Hindus object to beef?

 

[lpetrich]

I note that some anti-abortionists compare Mississippi's current abortion law with the laws in many European countries. But the European countries don't have a lot of anti-abortion TRAP-law obstructions, and they allow abortions for medical necessity after the first three months.

That's rather strange, because they would thus be accepting abortion over much of the pregnancy -- and accepting it over when the embryo is the least like some itty bitty baby.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I suspect that the timing for this decision may have had something to do with the election coming a half year later, giving the GOP candidates time to work on softening the negative impact on their image. In November, the abortion issue may not be the hottest one in the election, and there will be ample time stoke anger against the arrogant "woke" Democrats, who will be dealing with simultaneous inflation and a recession. That's what happened to Jimmy Carter when OPEC caused a huge spike in oil prices and cars formed lines at gas stations. Interest rate hikes may cool down the job market. I already have one Facebook friend who is so outraged at the cost of filling his diesel-guzzling truck that he vows not to vote for Democrats in November.

Except this isn’t about abortion, it never has been. This is about regulating sex and states are already pushing legislation to ban birth control. This isn’t giving anyone cover. There is still time to write rebuttals and once this comes out, we’ll realize the most important elections of our time was every single election from 2000 to 2016.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Not for the first time this reminds me that while I would crawl through broken glass and have my face melted by acid if it meant being able to consent to having a child,

What a goddam boy.

Trust me. Pregnancy is no cake walk.

I grew up in a huge Irish Catholic family. Pregnant women were just a regular fact of life. By the time my youngest aunt was birthing her last child, my oldest cousin was married and trying to get pregnant. It was just everywhere.

Believe me when I say. You don't wanna get pregnant. For some people it's not a bigger comittment than a summer garden. For some, it's much more involved. For some others, it's a life or death situation.

Do not take it lightly. It's a big fucking deal!
Tom

I think this post might win the prize for most tone deaf post evar in the history of the internets.

Runner up in the lack of reading comprehension category!

 

[Worldtraveller]

Are you suggesting the tyranny of the minority is preferable?

Certainly not. It is always a balancing act. The majority is not always right and neither is the minority always right. If we ever work out how to balancing all those competing and sometimes contradictory wishes it will be wonderful.

Pregnancy is perhaps the most intimate and invasive thing a human being can go through. At its very least, it is an extraordinary sacrifice.

What?

Pregnancy is perhaps the most intimate and invasive thing a human being can go through. At its very least, it is an extraordinary sacrifice.

I assume you mean this definition of sacrifice:

a : destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else
b : something given up or lost

I mean the part where there is suffering, compromise, and even a bunch of pain. While I'm glad you think pregnancy is roses and lilacs with cherubs floating around for over nine months, that isn't exactly how it works.

I didn't say pregnancy and birth were 'roses and lilacs'. I asked what was given up or lost because of pregnancy?

Many women even plan and want to get pregnant.

And marathon runners want to run in a marathon. That doesn't mean it isn't hard and painful.

I know a marathon runner. I doubt he would call his training an act of sacrifice.

I'm certain you are going to get to some point here. Was it that the state should be allowed to force a woman to endure a pregnancy? Because your mom was overjoyed over conception?

My point is nothing about the State allowing or forbidding abortion. It's that calling every pregnancy 'an extraordinary sacrifice' seems like you understand neither the word 'extraordinary' or 'sacrifice'.

Well, I’ve led a horse to water, not much else can be done.

Drowning comes to mind....

 

[Gospel]

Previous elections =/= coming elections (which is what I was talking about).

TomC is not wrong. There is not much of a gender difference in opinions on whether abortion should be legal. Appealing to the "war of the sexes" narrative, a feminist instinct, is not likely to be fruitful.

The whole "Women's March" was also a bad idea for this reason and others (including Islamists and racists as part of the leadership team being a big one).

Record amounts of Chinese, black & female niggas came out to vote for Obama. Reason? Inspiration. If you think this draft isn't inspiration you're in for a surprise.

White people[/URL], now, there is a group to blame for the GOP winning.

Always blame whitey for everything!
Dems are not at all at fault for pretty much abandoning the white working class. And still, in the post-Obama era, insisting that racial preferences should be upheld.

Agreed, although you should note that republicans don't help them either, they give tax breaks to the wealthy.

 

[ZiprHead]

Is the draft a leak or a trial balloon?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Is the draft a leak or a trial balloon?

Way too long to be a trial balloon. NPR suggested that it was a conservative leaking it to keep the majority strong.

The other side, if this were a balloon, imagine the right-wing rage if SCOTUS steps it back! And the rage wouldn't be targeted at the Dems.

 

[Politesse]

You think? Seems to me that they would just blame the failure of the decision on the "outraged woke mob" that "persecuted the judges" after the evil communist Democrats illegally stole and leaked the unfinished draft.

 

[southernhybrid]

If a government can force a woman to have a baby when she wants to have an abortion, why cannot that same government force a woman to have an abortion when she wants to have a baby?

If the government should be empowered to do the former but not the latter, I ask, why? What legal principle distinguishes one from the other?

When the issue is put this way, it becomes plain that there is no legal or constitutional issue here. There is only religion.

Life, the anti-abortion crowd yammers, begins at conception! But what does that mean? Do they hold that a zygote is a person? No one could be so daft. A zygote is not sentient. It does not feel pain. It does not think. It cannot in any way care for itself.

But apparently a certain sort of religious dementia teaches their adherents that a zygote is ensouled. Ah, there it is! It has nothing to do with constitutional principle or even personhood — it has only to do with the fact that people believe in non-existent souls! And because of this stupid belief, we are going back to the coat-hanger confederacy that existed pre-Roe v. Wade.

That stupid belief is driving us back there, and the equally stupid and sinister belief that women are appliances for men to use as they see fit.

The Democrats are now talking about passing a federal law to permit abortion, even though they know that it cannot pass the current evenly divided Congress. Hmm? Why the hell did they not do that when they had actual Democratic majorities under the corporate-bought milquetoasts Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama?

Meanwhile, Moscow Mitch McConnell is talking about a federal ban on abortion if the GOP regains Congress, meaning the ban on abortion would be nationwide. A house divided against itself cannot stand, warned Lincoln in 1858, predicting that the house of the union would indeed stand, but only because it would soon become all free or all slave.

This Supreme Court decision, if it comes down as leaked, will be the most infamous decision since Dred Scott and must awaken the Blue State majority — not just because of this, but as the culmination of all the other Red State aberrations imposed by Red upon Blue, including the election of two Republican presidents in sixteen years who lost the popular vote but were elected because of the reactionary anachronism of the Electoral College. Confederate secession occurred a few years after Dred Scott, even though the decision went their way, because Lincoln and his fellow Republicans (the opposite of today’s Republicans) would not bow before it — Dred Scott, Lincoln said, was not a “Thus saith the Lord.”

Blue State secession must be contemplated now, not only because of this decision but for myriad other reasons. The Blue and Red states are two different nations de facto and perhaps it is time to recognize this fact de jure. Even Lincoln, who opposed secession, conceded that peaceful divorce was possible, that the two sides in a dispute could agree to dissolve the contract between them. Maybe peaceful separation is the way to go.

I've heard this blue/red state thing before. But, the problem is that there really aren't any red or blue states. Florida used to be very blue, but now it appears to be very red. Georgia is now moving toward being blue, but I won't be surprised if it's very red in the fall. And, if you really believe that there are states that are permanently blue or red, most of them are on the west and east coasts. Just how do you make a country out of New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, etc. along with California, and a couple of other western states? And what about Illinois? What if Georgia turns bright blue? it borders on Alabama, Florida and SC. Georgia has voted blue for federal office holders but we have red state officials. Even New Jersey has had several red governors, as has Massachusetts. What do you do with that mess?

The division is more along the lines of rural verses urban, with a big mix in the sunburn areas. I live on a street that is mixed race and mixed politically. Most or all of my black neighbors are Democrats while many if not most of my white neighbors are Republicans. Imo, it's very unrealistic to think that the country can be divided based on politics. How would you do it? You'd have to have a civil war first and then how would you unite states that are on opposite sides of the country? There's not going to be a peaceful division. That's wishful thinking.

It might be better if we Dems spent less time fighting culture wars and more time concentrating on things that would help the majority of people. I'm not suggesting we forget about things like abortion and gay civil rights etc, but I do think that cancel culture, defund the police etc. have done real damage to the Democratic Party. I think it might have been Bill Maher or one of his guests who said last week, "The Democratic Party was once the party of the working class but it's become the party of the faculty lounge". That's the problem. Too many average working class people haven't been helped by the Democrats which has allowed the Republicans to use the culture wars to lure them into their party.

 

[Jarhyn]

You think? Seems to me that they would just blame the failure of the decision on the "outraged woke mob" that "persecuted the judges" after the evil communist Democrats illegally stole and leaked the unfinished draft.

Wouldn't it be a mindfuck if that were the play:

Give up the battle in a way that creates a phyrric victory for democrats so as to win the "midterm war".

What ought the counterplay be?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I've heard this blue/red state thing before. But, the problem is that there really aren't any red or blue states. Florida used to be very blue, but now it appears to be very red. Georgia is now moving toward being blue, but I won't be surprised if it's very red in the fall. And, if you really believe that there are states that are permanently blue or red, most of them are on the west and east coasts. Just how do you make a country out of New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, etc. along with California, and a couple of other western states? And what about Illinois? What if Georgia turns bright blue? it borders on Alabama, Florida and SC. Georgia has voted blue for federal office holders but we have red state officials. Even New Jersey has had several red governors, as has Massachusetts. What do you do with that mess?

The division is more along the lines of rural verses urban, with a big mix in the sunburn areas. I live on a street that is mixed race and mixed politically. Most or all of my black neighbors are Democrats while many if not most of my white neighbors are Republicans. Imo, it's very unrealistic to think that the country can be divided based on politics. How would you do it? You'd have to have a civil war first and then how would you unite states that are on opposite sides of the country? There's not going to be a peaceful division. That's wishful thinking.

Whites vote 3 to 2 for whomever the GOP nominates. Minorities 3 to 1 for the Dems (except in Florida if you use the s-word). 3 to 2 is a very solid majority on paper (20 points!!!) but in a large stadium, 3 to 2 doesn't look quite as impressive a majority. I looked at Ohio, the rural rural counties were 7 to 3 / 8 to 2 Trump in 2020. The mainly white, but linked to civilization counties (Lake, Medina, Ashtabula) were batting the 3 to 2 advantage for Trump (similar to white folk in general).

There seems to be two classes of white people, those involved with metropolitan areas and those that are rural. It is so easy to continue living in 1930 in the rural areas, where as being kind and nice and allowing different people the modesty of owning property forces the evolution of social change a lot faster in the city. And when the rural people hear that things are changing, they get whiny and bitchy. Why? Because they don't live in an actual civilization that is more than one or two degrees of separation of who they are.

It might be better if we Dems spent less time fighting culture wars and more time concentrating on things that would help the majority of people. I'm not suggesting we forget about things like abortion and gay civil rights etc, but I do think that cancel culture, defund the police etc. have done real damage to the Democratic Party. I think it might have been Bill Maher or one of his guests who said last week, "The Democratic Party was once the party of the working class but it's become the party of the faculty lounge". That's the problem. Too many average working class people haven't been helped by the Democrats which has allowed the Republicans to use the culture wars to lure them into their party.

Isn't this patently false? Democrats have been fighting for tax policy that benefits the workers. Democrats support retraining workers, but those workers want to put toothpaste back in the tube (and the GOP keeps telling them they will). Go to West Virginia and Obama is the reason for all the coal losses, yet the coal industry was hemorrhaging jobs since Reagan. I'm sick of hearing how the Democrats don't care about 'the people'. It is all the Democrats do. Biden got an infrastructure bill passed, more Covid support, etc... and people are whining he isn't doing anything for 'the people'.

 

[Worldtraveller]

It shows how effective the right wing smear machine is that even sohy buys into the "cancel culture" bullshit. That whole last paragraph could have come out of any right wing radio show.

And that's just fucking depressing.

 

[Politesse]

You think? Seems to me that they would just blame the failure of the decision on the "outraged woke mob" that "persecuted the judges" after the evil communist Democrats illegally stole and leaked the unfinished draft.

Wouldn't it be a mindfuck if that were the play:

Give up the battle in a way that creates a phyrric victory for democrats so as to win the "midterm war".

What ought the counterplay be?

I wish I knew. It doesn't seem like their base is very responsive to things like evidence or logical refutation. We could figure out exactly who leaked the documents, prove it beyond any shadow of a doubt, put their face on the front page of every center-left media outlet in the country for two weeks, and most people would still beleive whatever narrative best suits their politics of the moment. If you're on the defensive in a propaganda war, you've lost before you start.

 

[southernhybrid]

I've heard this blue/red state thing before. But, the problem is that there really aren't any red or blue states. Florida used to be very blue, but now it appears to be very red. Georgia is now moving toward being blue, but I won't be surprised if it's very red in the fall. And, if you really believe that there are states that are permanently blue or red, most of them are on the west and east coasts. Just how do you make a country out of New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, etc. along with California, and a couple of other western states? And what about Illinois? What if Georgia turns bright blue? it borders on Alabama, Florida and SC. Georgia has voted blue for federal office holders but we have red state officials. Even New Jersey has had several red governors, as has Massachusetts. What do you do with that mess?

The division is more along the lines of rural verses urban, with a big mix in the sunburn areas. I live on a street that is mixed race and mixed politically. Most or all of my black neighbors are Democrats while many if not most of my white neighbors are Republicans. Imo, it's very unrealistic to think that the country can be divided based on politics. How would you do it? You'd have to have a civil war first and then how would you unite states that are on opposite sides of the country? There's not going to be a peaceful division. That's wishful thinking.

Whites vote 3 to 2 for whomever the GOP nominates. Minorities 3 to 1 for the Dems (except in Florida if you use the s-word). 3 to 2 is a very solid majority on paper (20 points!!!) but in a large stadium, 3 to 2 doesn't look quite as impressive a majority. I looked at Ohio, the rural rural counties were 7 to 3 / 8 to 2 Trump in 2020. The mainly white, but linked to civilization counties (Lake, Medina, Ashtabula) were batting the 3 to 2 advantage for Trump (similar to white folk in general).

There seems to be two classes of white people, those involved with metropolitan areas and those that are rural. It is so easy to continue living in 1930 in the rural areas, where as being kind and nice and allowing different people the modesty of owning property forces the evolution of social change a lot faster in the city. And when the rural people hear that things are changing, they get whiny and bitchy. Why? Because they don't live in an actual civilization that is more than one or two degrees of separation of who they are.

It might be better if we Dems spent less time fighting culture wars and more time concentrating on things that would help the majority of people. I'm not suggesting we forget about things like abortion and gay civil rights etc, but I do think that cancel culture, defund the police etc. have done real damage to the Democratic Party. I think it might have been Bill Maher or one of his guests who said last week, "The Democratic Party was once the party of the working class but it's become the party of the faculty lounge". That's the problem. Too many average working class people haven't been helped by the Democrats which has allowed the Republicans to use the culture wars to lure them into their party.

Isn't this patently false? Democrats have been fighting for tax policy that benefits the workers. Democrats support retraining workers, but those workers want to put toothpaste back in the tube (and the GOP keeps telling them they will). Go to West Virginia and Obama is the reason for all the coal losses, yet the coal industry was hemorrhaging jobs since Reagan. I'm sick of hearing how the Democrats don't care about 'the people'. It is all the Democrats do. Biden got an infrastructure bill passed, more Covid support, etc... and people are whining he isn't doing anything for 'the people'.

I agree that the Dems support those things, but they do a terrible job of marketing them, or getting things passed, so the sleazy Republicans take the most extreme parts of the culture war and pretend they are the biggest issues of interest in the Democratic Party. It's all about perception. The perception seems to be that the Dems don't care about the mostly white working class.

The working class doesn't want to see all college loans forgiven, or the police funding cut back, or being forced to use new pronouns for groups that they aren't familiar with and at least for now, hold some prejudice towards. They've been persuaded that people like Trump have their best interests at heart because they scream that they care about them and they aren't going to let those libs teach their children scary things about gay and trans folks or make them feel guilty due to systemic racism. It's not that I'm against any of those things, but maybe Dems have put too much emphasis on those things and not enough on the fact that they passed the infrastructure bill etc. Then again, it's hard to fight against the disinformation on Fox or other far right sites.

I'm afraid the Dems need to learn how to play dirty and put less emphasis on the social things and more emphasis on the things that help everyone. Sadly, most dumbass Republicans don't realize that their party would love to end or drastically reduce social security benefits and Medicare. Sadly, many poor white people who are on M'caid, have been lured in by false claims that the Dems want to destroy Christianity or force their little girls to share a bathroom with a trans girl who still has a penis. Idiots fall for this shit and I'm afraid it has hurt the Dems to the point where people are voting against their best interest out of fear of what the liberals are going to do to them.

I don't know. Maybe it's hopeless, especially if people don't even bother to vote. I read yesterday that here in Georgia, early voting is breaking records. Unfortunately, the Republicans are coming out in much larger numbers than the Democrats. I hope that changes soon. They will drop you from the rolls in Georgia if you miss voting in two consecutive elections. I assume that includes primary elections.

 

[Elixir]

I already have one Facebook friend who is so outraged at the cost of filling his diesel-guzzling truck that he vows not to vote for Democrats in November.

That’s fine. Will he vote Dem when it’s even worse with a GQP Congress?