Probable overturning of Roe v Wade

[mchammer]

With the harassment of conservative Supreme Court Justices, can't we admit that the Left is in firm control of the institutions and unashamedly uses coercion, violence, and power to get want they want.

They don't care about free speech, or rule of law, or tolerance.

Look up Repressive Tolerance from Herbert Marcuse. It explains the play book.

They are mentally ill.

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

The last clinic attack was 2015. Before that it's hard to find but early 2000's might be it. The guy in 2015 had a diagnosed mental condition.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Who the He## thinks up the chit? And who allows it to be published??
Supreme Court’s Roe ruling would trample the religious freedom of every Jewish American

When they used the term "pregnant people" they sorta gave away the game. And the Exodus reference is kinda interesting. Did these same folks refer to Leviticus when the gay marriage ruling was handed down? I'm going to assume they did not.

Ultimately, it's political shock to scare Jews that have been kicking the tires on the GOP because of the antisemitism of the Left.

 

[guy4321]

If I were them I would spray paint right below it "unless its a vaccine" and leave it up. I guarantee the morons who did this will come back again and get infuriated. Do it for giggles.

That's how you catch the vandals. They'll be back to clean off the "unless its a vaccine" within the week!

 

[Horn6721]

I think LIFE is the quintessential ideology.

 

[mchammer]

 

[BrntOrngStmpeDe]

those Catholics showed more restraint than I would have.

 

[Sangre Naranjada]

Frankly, I think the best thing the entire Cathedral full of people could have done is to recite the Hail Mary loudly, repeatedly, and non-stop. Those protestors would not have been able to bear it for long.

 

[BrntOrngStmpeDe]

The problem with the debate about abortion access is that each side can claim with authority that politicians haven't done what the majority of Americans want. The GOP overshoots with their efforts towards total ban and the Dem's overshoot with their unfettered access. It is not where i personally want the law to rest but the majority of America could probably live with a 10 week ban. That is the point where you have to move from Medical abortion to the next type. Something like 98% of abortions have typically taken place before 10 weeks and it is barely after the 'heartbeat' element that many conservatives want to tie into.

This is one topic that we really need a national referendum to resolve. You could probably get 60% of the public to vote for 10 weeks. 20% would think it's too strict and 20% would think it's too lenient, but neither could argue that it didn't represent the majority opinion of America.

 

[guy4321]

The problem with the debate about abortion access is that each side can claim with authority that politicians haven't done what the majority of Americans want. The GOP overshoots with their efforts towards total ban and the Dem's overshoot with their unfettered access. It is not where i personally want the law to rest but the majority of America could probably live with a 10 week ban. That is the point where you have to move from Medical abortion to the next type. Something like 98% of abortions have typically taken place before 10 weeks and it is barely after the 'heartbeat' element that many conservatives want to tie into.

This is one topic that we really need a national referendum to resolve. You could probably get 60% of the public to vote for 10 weeks. 20% would think it's too strict and 20% would think it's too lenient, but neither could argue that it didn't represent the majority opinion of America.

The problem is that the two sides can't agree on what to debate. One side wants it to be life / no-life while the other side wants to debate woman's body / whose choice.

But most people don't want to debate it so I agree that they'll accept a number in the middle like 10 or 12 weeks, which seems to be what many European countries have settled on.

 

[BrntOrngStmpeDe]

The problem is that the two sides can't agree on what to debate. One side wants it to be life / no-life while the other side wants to debate woman's body / whose choice.

But most people don't want to debate it so I agree that they'll accept a number in the middle like 10 or 12 weeks, which seems to be what many European countries have settled on.

i don't know that those things aren't both the same debate. Like most things it is not typically the facts that are in question, it is the value/weight you give those facts in your decision making. It is undeniable that an abortion terminates a life. The only evidence you need to support this fact is that without active intervention measures that would eventually be a baby. It is also undeniable that for most women having an unplanned baby is life altering. To the point of wrecking most of the self-fulfillment dreams they had as young women. Those are two sides of the debate. Those are both facts. The only difference is which one you chose to make more important in your decision making process. The one thing that i see as fact that the left does not want to admit is a fact is that how/when/why you choose to have sex w/ or w/o protection is the actual CHOICE. They almost always have choice and control, they just don't always choose wisely about exercising those elements in a preventative measure versus a curative manner.

 

[OUBubba]

The last clinic attack was 2015. Before that it's hard to find but early 2000's might be it. The guy in 2015 had a diagnosed mental condition.

The people on the right who do these things are diagnosed with mental conditions. Those on the left are antifa, right?

 

[OUBubba]

i don't know that those things aren't both the same debate. Like most things it is not typically the facts that are in question, it is the value/weight you give those facts in your decision making. It is undeniable that an abortion terminates a life. The only evidence you need to support this fact is that without active intervention measures that would eventually be a baby. It is also undeniable that for most women having an unplanned baby is life altering. To the point of wrecking most of the self-fulfillment dreams they had as young women. Those are two sides of the debate. Those are both facts. The only difference is which one you chose to make more important in your decision making process. The one thing that i see as fact that the left does not want to admit is a fact is that how/when/why you choose to have sex w/ or w/o protection is the actual CHOICE. They almost always have choice and control, they just don't always choose wisely about exercising those elements in a preventative measure versus a curative manner.

Well, some choice is different than other choice.

I think we all agree that we are against abortion. I think a majority of the country could agree on abortion up to a reasonable time period with exceptions for the health of the mother, product of rape/incest, etc. The issue is that the people driving the bus on each end of this rope are way out on the end of the spectrum. They're either against all abortion (some even counting birth control as abortion). They consider the Plan B pill that is taken the day or two after the possible conception abortion. Or, they are against any limits of choice on the mother. A small % of voters inhabit each of these positions. I think this is one where we could appoint Judge Judy to the SCOTUS for a week and she could provide us with a solution that 75% of Americans would find preferable to any outcome of this process.

I listened to a podcast where they discussed three options of who leaked the draft, which was written in early February.

1. Democrat judge/clerk. This doesn't serve much. The theory is if this were a democratic leak it would have taken place in February.
2. A right wing clerk/judge. The theory is that the WSJ wrote a piece a week or two ago indicating that there is a rumor that at least one judge was a soft yes on the draft that was being circulated and that Roberts was working to bring them to a middle ground. This would serve to solidify the vote.
3. That the document was actually "found" by someone and given to one of the reporters on the byline. Apparently one of them does not typically cover areas of the SCOTUS but is a national security writer but has his name on the story. The theory is that someone found a draft and scuttled it to him who got it to the right level at politico.

Interesting stuff. Too bad Trump isn't still in office so Rudy could have a hair dye tainted press conference in front of the four seasons landscape office.

 

[mchammer]

The problem with the debate about abortion access is that each side can claim with authority that politicians haven't done what the majority of Americans want. The GOP overshoots with their efforts towards total ban and the Dem's overshoot with their unfettered access. It is not where i personally want the law to rest but the majority of America could probably live with a 10 week ban. That is the point where you have to move from Medical abortion to the next type. Something like 98% of abortions have typically taken place before 10 weeks and it is barely after the 'heartbeat' element that many conservatives want to tie into.

This is one topic that we really need a national referendum to resolve. You could probably get 60% of the public to vote for 10 weeks. 20% would think it's too strict and 20% would think it's too lenient, but neither could argue that it didn't represent the majority opinion of America.

Absent a federal law along the outlines that you listed above, differing laws in 50 states will suffice.

 

[BrntOrngStmpeDe]

the truth is that it ginned up anger in all corners and this will be an issue politicians can now grandstand on for 5 months in both directions. The only people this helped are the people that make a living off of division (politicians). They really do need to ruin the career of whoever leaked it. That person did make it virtually impossible for the SCOTUS members to now trust each other and their staffs. That makes future case deliberations that much harder because they won't feel as comfortable discussing controversial subjects.

 

[OUBubba]

the truth is that it ginned up anger in all corners and this will be an issue politicians can now grandstand on for 5 months in both directions. The only people this helped are the people that make a living off of division (politicians). They really do need to ruin the career of whoever leaked it. That person did make it virtually impossible for the SCOTUS members to now trust each other and their staffs. That makes future case deliberations that much harder because they won't feel as comfortable discussing controversial subjects.

[lobs grenade]They should start by looking at all of the justices who perjured themselves during the appointment process.[/lobs grenade]

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

The people on the right who do these things are diagnosed with mental conditions. Those on the left are antifa, right?

This guy was apparently medically/clinically diagnosed.

"Subsequent mental competency evaluations ordered by the state court determined Dear to be delusional. The judge presiding over the state case ruled in May 2016 that Dear was incompetent to stand trial and ordered him indefinitely confined to a Colorado state mental hospital, where he has remained ever since."

I don't know what the mostly peaceful terrorists on the left are. Maybe you can find a CNN article to enlighten us?

 

[OUBubba]

This guy was apparently medically diagnosed before he attacked the clinic. I don't know what the mostly peaceful terrorists on the left are. Maybe you can find a CNN article to enlighten us?

I'm reasonable enough to know that crazy people from both sides of the aisle do crap as well as sane but flawed people too.

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

I'm reasonable enough to know that crazy people from both sides of the aisle do crap as well as sane but flawed people too.

Except these are the same people who spent 4 years destroying cities like Portland & Minneapolis all across the country. Unless you're suggesting there is a large group of mental ill leftists out there it's an organized problem. The kook I'm talking about is a one off. The last attack before him was nearly 20 years ago.

 

[Sangre Naranjada]

Unless you're suggesting there is a large group of mental ill leftists

This is a primary theme of at least one poster on the West Mall.

 

[guy4321]

i don't know that those things aren't both the same debate. Like most things it is not typically the facts that are in question, it is the value/weight you give those facts in your decision making. It is undeniable that an abortion terminates a life. The only evidence you need to support this fact is that without active intervention measures that would eventually be a baby. It is also undeniable that for most women having an unplanned baby is life altering. To the point of wrecking most of the self-fulfillment dreams they had as young women. Those are two sides of the debate. Those are both facts. The only difference is which one you chose to make more important in your decision making process. The one thing that i see as fact that the left does not want to admit is a fact is that how/when/why you choose to have sex w/ or w/o protection is the actual CHOICE. They almost always have choice and control, they just don't always choose wisely about exercising those elements in a preventative measure versus a curative manner.

Have you ever heard a pro-choicer say this sentence "It is undeniable that an abortion terminates a life."? I haven't. Your next sentence is what they use "The only evidence you need to support this fact is that without active intervention measures that would eventually be a baby." Emphasis mine because pro-choicers are saying it's not currently a baby and there's nothing wrong with stopping a person from being created because it's within a woman's body over which she should have total control. Pro-choicers don't even have to get into your more complicated tier for their decision making process.

Pro-lifers also operate under a simple argument, but a different one. It's a person and killing a person who has done nothing illegal is wrong. They also don't have to get into a complicated scenario.

They're both right because it's two different arguments.

If one side ventures into the other's argument, they will lose. Pro-choice can't say, "It's a person, but murder should be legal if it impacts a woman." Pro-life can't say, "It's not yet a person, but women shouldn't have control over their own bodies."

 

[Sangre Naranjada]

Pro-life can't say, "It's not yet a person, but women shouldn't have control over their own bodies."

Because at the moment of the sperm fusing with the egg and creating a unique human genetic code, it IS a person.

 

[guy4321]

Because at the moment of the sperm fusing with the egg and creating a unique human genetic code, it IS a person.

For the record, I agree with you. The work is to convince the pro-choice side to argue when the offspring becomes a person. And their work is to convince folks that the offspring is never a person until point X, where X is something they support like 6 months, 9 months, 35 minutes after birth, whatever the hell they want).

I imagine the argument was very similar in the 19th century.

"Blacks are people just like us!"

"Blacks are property!"

Eventually the abolition side got enough "blacks are property" believers to switch arguments. We all believe people can't be owned, but we all believe we get to use our property.

 

[Mr. Deez]

[lobs grenade]They should start by looking at all of the justices who perjured themselves during the appointment process.[/lobs grenade]

Which is none of them.

 

[Horn2RunAgain]

The people on the right who do these things are diagnosed with mental conditions. Those on the left are antifa, right?

Those on the left become professors at Columbia

 

[OUBubba]

Except these are the same people who spent 4 years destroying cities like Portland & Minneapolis all across the country. Unless you're suggesting there is a large group of mental ill leftists out there it's an organized problem. The kook I'm talking about is a one off. The last attack before him was nearly 20 years ago.

They've been attacking abortion clinics since before my balls dropped and I'll be on Medicare before Texas is back. [couldn't resist, and I'm probably wrong]

Don't play that one off thing when you've had hundreds of shootings/bombings/threats. Just once say, you know, you're not wrong. Both sides can be right sometimes. Zero sum games get you a polarized world. Legalized but limited abortion is preferred by 70%ish of the population. You don't get that kind of simpatico by playing it black/white.

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

They've been attacking abortion clinics since before my balls dropped and I'll be on Medicare before Texas is back. [couldn't resist, and I'm probably wrong]

Don't play that one off thing when you've had hundreds of shootings/bombings/threats. Just once say, you know, you're not wrong. Both sides can be right sometimes. Zero sum games get you a polarized world. Legalized but limited abortion is preferred by 70%ish of the population. You don't get that kind of simpatico by playing it black/white.

Sigh....I'm not accepting any idiot who attacks, kills, etc for some "just cause" on any level. But to pretend this is an issue of "today" is obtuse. You're right, it seemed to be or was an organized effort 35 years ago, but today it's a one off kook just like I said. What's happening now by the left is a movement that started when orange man was elected.

While doing some researching I noticed the left is already rousing up fear in the base saying to expect violence against abortion clinics if R vs W is "overturned". You are falling right in line with that trying to make it seem like there is some major activism out there to attack abortion clinics. There's not and why would that happen anyway.

 

[OUBubba]

Sigh....I'm not accepting any idiot who attacks, kills, etc for some "just cause" on any level. But to pretend this is an issue of "today" is obtuse. You're right, it seemed to be or was an organized effort 35 years ago, but today it's a one off kook just like I said. What's happening now by the left is a movement that started when orange man was elected.

While doing some researching I noticed the left is already rousing up fear in the base saying to expect violence against abortion clinics if R vs W is "overturned". You are falling right in line with that trying to make it seem like there is some major activism out there to attack abortion clinics. There's not and why would that happen anyway.

And I said first it will be abortions and then it will be contraception and then same sex marriage. Bills are being proposed in all red states to attack these things. You're naive if you think abortion clinics in blue states won't be targeted.

Welcome to Gilead.

 

[theiioftx]

Anybody that thinks a Supreme Court nominee didn’t expect that question and have a carefully well thought out answer has never seen Better Call Saul.

 

[OUBubba]

Anybody that thinks a Supreme Court nominee didn’t expect that question and have a carefully well thought out answer has never seen Better Call Saul.

Best show out there.