Roe v Wade is on deck

[Politesse]

I'm not seeing anyone commenting on the fact the this ruling not only removes the right to abortion but the right to privacy itself. Do you conservatives agree the American citizen doesn't have a right to privacy?

Only "good" Americans deserve privacy. "Bad" Americans neither deserve nor should possess an inalienable right to privacy. Females in particular must adhere to a very high ethical standard in order to earn their right to hide anything from the government. Raped? Get ready to get friendly with the fingers of a police examiner reinvading your private places for four hours to administer a "rape kit" to ensure you aren't lying. Pregnant? You have no right to conceal or end the pregnancy in any way, or to have any time off for the birth. Too masculine in looks? You may not refuse invasive examinations of your body at school or the gym to "confirm" your biological sex. Want to vote, but accustomed to wearing the burqa or other traditional wear that covers the face? Get ready to get naked in public or give up on the vote. Really, there's no bad reason to invade a woman's privacy, from a conservative point of view. Every personal invasion is a fresh opportunity to reinforce their totalitarian theocratic views, to the benefit of all. Independent women are an inherent threat to their political regime, and must be under special scrutiny at all times.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'm not seeing anyone commenting on the fact the this ruling not only removes the right to abortion but the right to privacy itself.

It doesn't kill the right to privacy explicitly. It hangs it out there though to be plucked.

 

[Elixir]

I heard this morning there's been a sharp uptick of voter registrations by women. Reminds me of a quote by a Japanese admiral about awakening and sleeping giants.

Yah, I hope that's a portent of things to come. But I'm not optimistic.
I think the GQP calculus is correct:
'Murkins will forget all about it by November, amid the wailing GQP cries of "DEMOCRAT SOCIALIST INFLATION!!" and "STOLEN ELECTION!!".

Except that if they reverse Roe as per the Alito draft, it is the Wild West in the US regarding birth control, abortion access, and access to abortion across the border. This doesn't end at this case, this case is just the beginning. And the immediate impact will be felt almost immediately as legislation is already passed in several states to trigger on this ruling. Women aren't going to forget in a couple months that abortion was made illegal... because it'll still be illegal!

And with no right to abortion, immediate challenges to abortion restrictions no longer led to a pause in the new laws. So women will immediately suffer from the consequences of this in many states. The consequences of what are to be determined if they do ban the abortion pill and then general pill birth control.. condoms?

But how that translates in November is hard to tell, especially seeing we don't even have a ruling yet.

The whole societal shift that the GQP is trying to realize, involves multiple unrealities. A society WITHOUT abortions is one of them. Start with a few States.

Of course if you're rich enough and your girlfriend or your daughter becomes inconveniently pregnant she can get one, but she has to travel for decent care if y'all are in a Taliban State. (There will be no reproductive care other than OB care in Taliban States, no qualified Doctors whatsoever.). If you're not rich enough? Get married or get shunned for living in sin and having a baby. Or take your chances in the back alleys.

Just keep your mouth shut, because we don't have abortions here!
They'd like that utopia to be visited upon the whole blessed Country eventually, just as God intended.
And they will, if they can continue to leverage the corruption of SCOTUS from the top down.

How it impacts November... may depend on Democrats becoming a LOT better at scaremongering about what Republicans are doing. We're becoming Venezuela, JUST AS REPUBLICANS WARNED US WE WOULD (if we elected Hillary, or Biden).

 

[ZiprHead]

Earlier this week the office of a Wisconsin anti abortion organization was firebombed.

I have received a statement from the group claiming responsibility. They call themselves "Jane's Revenge" (a reference to the Jane Collective).

More follows.

The statement was sent to me through an anonymous intermediary I trust. It is hosted on a Tor site (link to follow). The statement is titled "first communique" and opens with the words, "This is not a declaration of war".

They go on to state that this Molotov attack was "only a warning". Positioning themselves in response to lethal attacks on healthcare providers by anti-choice activists, they promise to adopt "increasingly extreme tactics" to maintain control over their own bodies.

They are issuing a 30 day ultimatum for all anti choice organizations and fake clinics (crisis pregnancy centers) to disband. They claim to have the ability to reach multiple states and repeat that the attack in Wisconsin was just a "warning"

They conclude by noting they are made up of several organizations: "We are in your city. We are in every city. Your repression only strengthens our accompliceship and resolve."

Graffiti on the attacked office read "If abortions aren’t safe then you aren’t either.”

 

[Politesse]

I heard this morning there's been a sharp uptick of voter registrations by women. Reminds me of a quote by a Japanese admiral about awakening and sleeping giants.

Yah, I hope that's a portent of things to come. But I'm not optimistic.
I think the GQP calculus is correct:
'Murkins will forget all about it by November, amid the wailing GQP cries of "DEMOCRAT SOCIALIST INFLATION!!" and "STOLEN ELECTION!!".

Except that if they reverse Roe as per the Alito draft, it is the Wild West in the US regarding birth control, abortion access, and access to abortion across the border. This doesn't end at this case, this case is just the beginning. And the immediate impact will be felt almost immediately as legislation is already passed in several states to trigger on this ruling. Women aren't going to forget in a couple months that abortion was made illegal... because it'll still be illegal!

And with no right to abortion, immediate challenges to abortion restrictions no longer led to a pause in the new laws. So women will immediately suffer from the consequences of this in many states. The consequences of what are to be determined if they do ban the abortion pill and then general pill birth control.. condoms?

But how that translates in November is hard to tell, especially seeing we don't even have a ruling yet.

The whole societal shift that the GQP is trying to realize, involves multiple unrealities. A society WITHOUT abortions is one of them. Start with a few States.

Of course if you're rich enough and your girlfriend or your daughter becomes inconveniently pregnant she can get one, but she has to travel for decent care if y'all are in a Taliban State. (There will be no reproductive care other than OB care in Taliban States, no qualified Doctors whatsoever.). If you're not rich enough? Get married or get shunned for living in sin and having a baby. Or take your chances in the back alleys.

Just keep your mouth shut, because we don't have abortions here!
They'd like that utopia to be visited upon the whole blessed Country eventually, just as God intended.
And they will, if they can continue to leverage the corruption of SCOTUS from the top down.

How it impacts November... may depend on Democrats becoming a LOT better at scaremongering about what Republicans are doing. We're becoming Venezuela, JUST AS REPUBLICANS WARNED US WE WOULD (if we elected Hillary, or Biden).

And then 1950s will come again, then Jesus shortly after to reward them for their faithfulness.

 

[ZiprHead]

Can you imagine the corporate windfall the removal of the right to privacy would be?

 

[Elixir]

And then 1950s will come again, then Jesus shortly after to reward them for their faithfulness.

If Putler doesn't "rapture" the whole planet first, as a tribute to his own glory the glory of the motherland on his way out...

 

[lpetrich]

PolitiFact | No evidence Blackburn wants to limit birth control to married couples only

Prior to the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, Blackburn released a video where she described the 1965 Supreme Court ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut — one that overturned a state ban on contraception — as "legally unsound."

"Constitutionally unsound rulings like Griswold v. Connecticut, Kelo v. the city of New London, and NFIB vs. Sebelius confused Tennesseans and left Congress wondering who gave the court permission to bypass our system of checks and balances," Blackburn said in the video, where she expressed her opposition to Jackson’s nomination.

The 7-2 court ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut said the Constitution’s First, Third, Fourth and Ninth Amendments created a right to privacy in a marriage, which the Connecticut law banning contraception violated. (The other cases Blackburn mentioned were about eminent domain and the Affordable Care Act.)

The Griswold ruling was later cited as precedent in Roe v. Wade in 1973.

So Senator Marsha Blackburn seems to want the issue to be left to the states and/or Congress and the President.

 

[Politesse]

And then 1950s will come again, then Jesus shortly after to reward them for their faithfulness.

If Putler doesn't "rapture" the whole planet first, as a tribute to his own glory the glory of the motherland on his way out...

Don't worry, the Bible says he will attack Israel, not the US.

 

[Derec]

Can you imagine the corporate windfall the removal of the right to privacy would be?

Why would it be a "corporate windfall"?

The problem with the "right to privacy" is that it has never been applied consistently, as I have pointed out many times.
If the right to privacy includes right to abortion and right to gay sex (both of which I agree with btw) then why should it not include the right to choose to have sex with someone while money is (overtly) exchanged? There is no logical reason to draw the line there. The only reason is political.

"Pro-choice" == right to choose only if "pro-choicers" agree with that choice

Since abortion was based on political, not principled considerations like "right to privacy" or "right to choose what to do with ones body" it is hardly surprised it is being undone with similarly naked political reasoning.

 

[Derec]

Only "good" Americans deserve privacy. "Bad" Americans neither deserve nor should possess an inalienable right to privacy.

That has been the position of the feminist left, particularly of the SWERF variety. Right to privacy for "good" Americans like women seeking abortions or gays, but no right to privacy for "bad" Americans like sex workers and men hiring them.

Raped? Get ready to get friendly with the fingers of a police examiner reinvading your private places for four hours to administer a "rape kit" to ensure you aren't lying.

Do you really have a problem with police actually seeking to collect evidence before they charge somebody with a serious felony like rape? No due process or presumption of innocence for men accused of rape?

Want to vote, but accustomed to wearing the burqa

Now you are defending fucking burqas? Btw, there is no way to tell who is under the burqa. You should have to demonstrate your identity in order to vote. Or cash a check. Or drive. Or fly. Or enter government buildings.

 

[Derec]

Are they?
Hillary Clinton got more votes.

That and about three fiddy will get her coffee at Starbucks.
We run our elections by Electoral College. If US was (like France) electing presidents on popular vote, campaigns would use different strategies and vote totals would have been very different.

You cannot use metric from a different set of rules and pretend to predict what the outcome would have been.

Donald Trump appointed three SCOTUS judges.

RBG should have retired when she had the chance.

Who do you think is doing the governing here?
Tom

Right now, Biden, but his options are limited and will remain so unless Dems manage to hold the House and expand the Senate majority. A tall order, especially with inflation and economy but maybe anger at RvW decision will compensate for that.
It will be interesting Midterms.

 

[Derec]

Graffiti on the attacked office read "If abortions aren’t safe then you aren’t either.”

So more "peaceful" protests like throughout 2020?

 

[ZiprHead]

Graffiti on the attacked office read "If abortions aren’t safe then you aren’t either.”

So more "peaceful" protests like throughout 2020?

 

[Angry Floof]

That has been the position of the feminist left,

No, it isn't. Feminists overwhelmingly promote respect and equality for sex workers.

particularly of the SWERF variety.

They're out there, but there's no good reason to imply that this is a problem of feminism in general.

and men hiring them.

I agree there is no shame in hiring sex workers.

 

[lpetrich]

Only "good" Americans deserve privacy. "Bad" Americans neither deserve nor should possess an inalienable right to privacy.

That has been the position of the feminist left, particularly of the SWERF variety. Right to privacy for "good" Americans like women seeking abortions or gays, but no right to privacy for "bad" Americans like sex workers and men hiring them.

What's a SWERF?

Raped? Get ready to get friendly with the fingers of a police examiner reinvading your private places for four hours to administer a "rape kit" to ensure you aren't lying.

Do you really have a problem with police actually seeking to collect evidence before they charge somebody with a serious felony like rape? No due process or presumption of innocence for men accused of rape?

I love it when right-wingers turn into born-again civil libertarians. Whenever it is a crime that they feel like they might be suspected of, they want squishy softness on crime.

 

[ZiprHead]

What's a SWERF?

Sex Worker-Exclusionary Radical Feminist

 

[Elixir]

Graffiti on the attacked office read "If abortions aren’t safe then you aren’t either.”

So more "peaceful" protests like throughout 2020?

Totally not.
Shooting at and bombing the right wing extremist shooters and bombers would be entirely new. That’s why this made news.

 

[Derec]

What's a SWERF?

As Zipr has said, it stands for Sex Worker Exclusionary Radical Feminist.

Think Toni as the SWERF type specimen on this forum.

I love it when right-wingers turn into born-again civil libertarians.

I am not a right-winger. For example, I support things like legal abortion, legal weed and gay marriage. I support levying a carbon tax to encourage decarbonization. I am in favor of people paying their fair share of taxes (although I disagree with confiscatory taxation or anti-billionaire rhetoric so common within the contemporary Left, e.g. Sens. Warren and Sanders). There is nothing right-wing about me.

Whenever it is a crime that they feel like they might be suspected of, they want squishy softness on crime.

It's not being "squishy soft" to say that police should investigate and collect evidence before they charge somebody with a crime. They should not just take the accuser's word for it. Regardless of what that crime is. Rape should not be an exception. It should not treated as a crime for which normal rules of due process do not apply, because feminism.

And do not be deceived. Any man can be falsely accused of rape. You being a left-winger does not make you not susceptible to it.

 

[Derec]

No, it isn't. Feminists overwhelmingly promote respect and equality for sex workers.

I am sure there are some who do, but that is not the dominant/orthodox position among feminists.

They're out there, but there's no good reason to imply that this is a problem of feminism in general.

If SWERFS were a minority position among feminism, then anti-sex work legislation and policies would not enjoy this much support on the left side of the aisle. In US, but also internationally. It is not the right who pushed for the Nordic Model in countries like Sweden, Iceland and France.

I agree there is no shame in hiring sex workers.

Thanks, I guess.