Overturning Roe v Wade?

[djAdvocate]

May 13, 2022 16:07:45 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

May 13, 2022 10:38:45 GMT -5 Opti said:

I think its simple. I don't think its compassion. Punishing doctors is the easiest and quickest way to discourage abortions. Punishing every woman would cost more and be less effective. Plus the MAGAs and forced birth folks want us to become a third world country and destroy our economy.

Maybe some of these reality challenged folks should consider that part of the reason China is on the upswing is from their old policy of only allowing one child per family thus concentrating support and resources to fewer children. All those scary brown people coming to the US are generally coming from countries with very restrictive abortion policies. Maybe conservatives can find all those countries with restrictive abortion laws and crappy social welfare and show how rich and wonderful they are for most of their citizens. 

And punishing employers that hire undocumented workers would be the most efficient way to slow illegal immigration- but they still insist the best way to stop it is walls, border control and such. But, why would a politician (of either party) who is bought and paid for by corporate money put in a policy like that. I guess doctors don't donate enough.

thyme- this is so true.  i bring this up every time this subject is debated.  it shows who is really in charge of government, right?  i mean, if we ENFORCED $50k fines (most states have this kind of fine for failure to document workers.  California does.  i have NEVER been inspected for this, btw), and maybe had mandatory jail sentences for second and third offenses, "illegal" immigration (made possible by opportunity) would DRY UP OVERNIGHT.

it should be noted that a person can be here "without papers" for 90 days.  that is perfectly legal.  you just need to fill out an I-765.  that allows you to work the entire time you are on your visa.  

so, it is POSSIBLE (you don't know without checking) that the people that Americans call "wetbacks" (seasonal workers) are here perfectly legally.  this is why i always put "illegals" in quotations.  it is a derogatory term, because even "non citizens" is ONLY correct if you know for sure that they are not second and third generation migrants, who may have been born here in the US.

the whole debate has a serious racist, nationalistic, and above all, ignorant overtone.

[Opti]

May 13, 2022 11:47:59 GMT -5 Opti said:

May 13, 2022 11:25:46 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

this is one of the many reasons i think that abortion is a Trojan Horse for neo-fascism.

It reminds me of the worst of the Catholic church. All the abuses of unmarried pregnant girls along with the organizational desire to punish. 

@tiny I'm hoping I'm not reading this wrong...


Uggh... that teenage girls (not white) account for most abortions thing... fries my hide!

My above post had nothing to do whatsoever with who gets most of the abortions. It was about how I feel about the current forced birth climate. In intention it reminds me of how the Catholic church treated unmarried pregnant girls before I was born. 

[Icelandic Woman]

[justme]

May 13, 2022 21:52:04 GMT -5 Icelandic Woman said:

I've seen it in several places that say some form of "everyone who actually has read the entire Bible is no longer a Christian". Obviously that's not entirely true, but it's not that far from the truth.

[scgal]

May 10, 2022 15:41:50 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 10, 2022 14:50:27 GMT -5 scgal said:

I said it could have some merit but i wouldn't support it. I didn't go into detail about the merit. I would rather see it go to the state level. To me though if there would be a national ban I would hope they would put a medical provision in there. Is that better. And no it doesn't have to be just for or against. I would like to see some sort of compromise 

See, you cannot even say you do not want a national ban. Just shows your hypocrisy. If it is a state issue, the federal government needs to stay out of it. No ifs, ands, or buts. You will accept a national ban because you agree with it. Just accept that

If that is what you take from my passage good for you. All or nothing no if's ands, or buts huh. Pure ignorance no compromise. 

[pulmonarymd]

May 14, 2022 6:41:43 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 10, 2022 15:41:50 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

See, you cannot even say you do not want a national ban. Just shows your hypocrisy. If it is a state issue, the federal government needs to stay out of it. No ifs, ands, or buts. You will accept a national ban because you agree with it. Just accept that

If that is what you take from my passage good for you. All or nothing no if's ands, or buts huh. Pure ignorance no compromise. 

Did you not state this was a state issue? Yes or no? Did you actually believe what you said, or were you trying to look reasonable. If you believe it is a state issue, then you would oppose a national ban.

Logic is easy, and having the fortitude in your convictions is admirable. Too bad you failed the test. I am only quoting you. Did you not believe what you wtote

[Opti]

www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/lifestyle-buzz/a-tiktoker-is-leading-a-campaign-to-call-anti-abortion-groups-and-demand-to-know-if-they-support-forced-birth/ar-AAXfkP9?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=6c7240a39dc746adbcff45555591d594


Strange then said that she was trying to ascertain the Pro-Life Alliance's official position on forced birth.



"Is your organization's official stance that you are pro-forcing people to give birth against their will?" she asked.



Brenda seemed reluctant to answer the question.



"That is a rather convoluted way to say it really because we don't force people to get pregnant," Brenda replied in lieu of answering directly.



"But if they do then there's a life and that life takes precedence over the distress that they might have of pregnancy and birth."



Strange persisted. "So the answer is 'yes,' the organization is in favor of forcing adult people or teenagers ... to give birth against their will," she said.



"I would not say those words," Brenda said, also calling Strange's question "convoluted" and a "twisted way" to put it.

[weltschmerz]

May 13, 2022 23:26:20 GMT -5 justme said:

May 13, 2022 21:52:04 GMT -5 Icelandic Woman said:

I've seen it in several places that say some form of "everyone who actually has read the entire Bible is no longer a Christian". Obviously that's not entirely true, but it's not that far from the truth.

I read the bible cover to cover, in three languages. Yes, it drove me straight into the arms of atheism. 
As a matter of fact, I was at a bible study in LA, when the thought hit me. ''What the hell am I doing here? I no longer believe!"

[djAdvocate]

May 14, 2022 10:43:54 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

May 13, 2022 23:26:20 GMT -5 justme said:

I've seen it in several places that say some form of "everyone who actually has read the entire Bible is no longer a Christian". Obviously that's not entirely true, but it's not that far from the truth.

I read the bible cover to cover, in three languages. Yes, it drove me straight into the arms of atheism. 
As a matter of fact, I was at a bible study in LA, when the thought hit me. ''What the hell am I doing here? I no longer believe!"

were you a US resident at the time?

[weltschmerz]

May 14, 2022 11:26:16 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

May 14, 2022 10:43:54 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

I read the bible cover to cover, in three languages. Yes, it drove me straight into the arms of atheism. 
As a matter of fact, I was at a bible study in LA, when the thought hit me. ''What the hell am I doing here? I no longer believe!"

were you a US resident at the time?

Yes. I was at a San Pedro bible study.

[scgal]

May 14, 2022 7:09:40 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 14, 2022 6:41:43 GMT -5 scgal said:

If that is what you take from my passage good for you. All or nothing no if's ands, or buts huh. Pure ignorance no compromise. 

Did you not state this was a state issue? Yes or no? Did you actually believe what you said, or were you trying to look reasonable. If you believe it is a state issue, then you would oppose a national ban.

Logic is easy, and having the fortitude in your convictions is admirable. Too bad you failed the test. I am only quoting you. Did you not believe what you wtote

I believe exactly what I wrote. You just don't agree with it, or comprehend it. Either way i'm good

[pulmonarymd]

Should the federal government pass a law outlawing abortion? Simple question. Your answer will show if you truly believe it is an issue for the states, or if you are a hypocrite, My reading comprehension is fine. You are avoiding the question. You were the one who said you were glad Roe vs Wade was overturned because it was an issue for the states to decide. Or do you not remember it?

[thyme4change]

If we can't get abortion rights codified (which we won't), I think it is time to turn all that shit back to state's rights. Let them go back to segregation, anti-gay and Jim Crow laws. Let's let these people show their true colors.

[pulmonarymd]

Oh, I think we know their true feelings. Given some of the crazy things being proposed, it is not going up take them long to do some of those things

[justme]

Holy shit. My friend just told me his company announced that they're going to start covering up to 5k in travel costs "to cover reproductive" as he said. Don't know specific wording.

I hope more companies do this!

[chiver78]

May 14, 2022 17:20:31 GMT -5 justme said:

Holy shit. My friend just told me his company announced that they're going to start covering up to 5k in travel costs "to cover reproductive" as he said. Don't know specific wording.

I hope more companies do this!

there's a bunch of companies that have come out with these new policies to allow bodily autonomy. I love it, and I hope more continue to join the party.

[Knee Deep in Water Chloe]

May 14, 2022 13:56:53 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

Should the federal government pass a law outlawing abortion? Simple question. Your answer will show if you truly believe it is an issue for the states, or if you are a hypocrite, My reading comprehension is fine. You are avoiding the question. You were the one who said you were glad Roe vs Wade was overturned because it was an issue for the states to decide. Or do you not remember it?

I know you're not speaking to me, but here's where I'm confused: 

Why is it even being considered as a state law?
If we take the religious component out of it, what medical procedures are illegal?
Of those, which are state law and which are federal law?
For example, I live in a state that allows doctor assisted suicide for the terminally ill. 
This state also allowed medical marijuana pretty early compared to other states, and the federal government still has laws against marijuana usage. 

I certainly don't want to end up like in a society like The Giver by Lois Lowry in which only certain women are allowed/forced to be the birthers. 

[pulmonarymd]

May 14, 2022 18:07:23 GMT -5 Knee Deep in Water Chloe said:

May 14, 2022 13:56:53 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

Should the federal government pass a law outlawing abortion? Simple question. Your answer will show if you truly believe it is an issue for the states, or if you are a hypocrite, My reading comprehension is fine. You are avoiding the question. You were the one who said you were glad Roe vs Wade was overturned because it was an issue for the states to decide. Or do you not remember it?

I know you're not speaking to me, but here's where I'm confused: 

Why is it even being considered as a state law?
If we take the religious component out of it, what medical procedures are illegal?
Of those, which are state law and which are federal law?
For example, I live in a state that allows doctor assisted suicide for the terminally ill. 
This state also allowed medical marijuana pretty early compared to other states, and the federal government still has laws against marijuana usage. 

I certainly don't want to end up like in a society like The Giver by Lois Lowry in which only certain women are allowed/forced to be the birthers. 

Female circumcision has been made illegal by some states. I am sure everyone would agree this is a good idea. So there is precedence. I don’t think abortion should be outlawed, but we have decided some procedures should not be legal

[happyhoix]

May 14, 2022 8:10:28 GMT -5 Opti said:

www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/lifestyle-buzz/a-tiktoker-is-leading-a-campaign-to-call-anti-abortion-groups-and-demand-to-know-if-they-support-forced-birth/ar-AAXfkP9?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=6c7240a39dc746adbcff45555591d594


Strange then said that she was trying to ascertain the Pro-Life Alliance's official position on forced birth.



"Is your organization's official stance that you are pro-forcing people to give birth against their will?" she asked.



Brenda seemed reluctant to answer the question.



"That is a rather convoluted way to say it really because we don't force people to get pregnant," Brenda replied in lieu of answering directly.



"But if they do then there's a life and that life takes precedence over the distress that they might have of pregnancy and birth."



Strange persisted. "So the answer is 'yes,' the organization is in favor of forcing adult people or teenagers ... to give birth against their will," she said.



"I would not say those words," Brenda said, also calling Strange's question "convoluted" and a "twisted way" to put it.

One one small step from preventing a woman from getting an abortion fir the good of the baby to locked women trying to get abortions into birthing camps for the good of the baby- and one further small step to forced adoptions so the babies get to live in good two parent Christian homes - all for the good of the baby.

Margaret Atwood was right.

[teen persuasion]

DS2 was over for dinner tonight. He commented that corpses would have more rights than living women - unless you have expressly given prior permission, after your death your organs cannot be taken/used, even to save lives.

I'd seen the argument that you cannot be compelled to donate organs, or even blood, while living (even if it means someone will die) - but I'd never thought to extend that argument to after death.

[andi9899]

May 14, 2022 17:56:20 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

May 14, 2022 17:20:31 GMT -5 justme said:

Holy shit. My friend just told me his company announced that they're going to start covering up to 5k in travel costs "to cover reproductive" as he said. Don't know specific wording.

I hope more companies do this!

there's a bunch of companies that have come out with these new policies to allow bodily autonomy. I love it, and I hope more continue to join the party.

I wonder if there is a list somewhere. I'd love to support these businesses.

[thyme4change]

May 14, 2022 17:56:20 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

May 14, 2022 17:20:31 GMT -5 justme said:

Holy shit. My friend just told me his company announced that they're going to start covering up to 5k in travel costs "to cover reproductive" as he said. Don't know specific wording.

I hope more companies do this!

there's a bunch of companies that have come out with these new policies to allow bodily autonomy. I love it, and I hope more continue to join the party.

They will pay 5 grand to make sure they don't have to pay for maternity leave, have an open job for a few weeks for FMLA or add a kid onto insurance. Pretty sweet deal for the company.

I wonder how many people would feel comfortable telling their company they are aborting a pregnancy - especially if they know their boss is a certain religion or aligns with the conservatives for other issues. I know they technically can't hold it against you, but there are so many ways employees can be discriminated against that you just can't prove.

I think this is theater.

[djAdvocate]

May 15, 2022 15:37:28 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

May 14, 2022 17:56:20 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

there's a bunch of companies that have come out with these new policies to allow bodily autonomy. I love it, and I hope more continue to join the party.

They will pay 5 grand to make sure they don't have to pay for maternity leave, have an open job for a few weeks for FMLA or add a kid onto insurance. Pretty sweet deal for the company.

I wonder how many people would feel comfortable telling their company they are aborting a pregnancy - especially if they know their boss is a certain religion or aligns with the conservatives for other issues. I know they technically can't hold it against you, but there are so many ways employees can be discriminated against that you just can't prove.

I think this is theater.

perhaps.  but i think your first paragraph is closer to the mark.
a company would MUCH rather keep an employee and pay for abortion services than lose them to an unexpected pregnancy.  and if they are OFFERING this service, you don't have to guess what their politics are.  unless it is a sugar trap, which i seriously doubt.
i think it is pure economics.  and smart.

[Tennesseer]

Opinion On Roe, Alito cites a judge who treated women as witches and property

In his recently leaked draft majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. presents what he sees as his most convincing arguments for permitting legislatures to ban abortion. So what is the best Alito can do? One of his prominent strategies is to repeatedly quote and discuss someone he describes as a “great” and “eminent” legal authority, Sir Matthew Hale.

Most Americans have probably never heard of Hale, an English judge and lawyer who lived from 1609 to 1676. Hale was on the bench so long ago that his judgeship included presiding over a witchcraft trial where he sentenced two “witches” to death.

Nonetheless, we are still living in the world that Hale helped create. And as that witchcraft trial suggests, Hale’s influence has not been a “great” development if you believe women have equal humanity with men.

Hale is best known for his “History of the Pleas of the Crown,” a treatise published posthumously in 1736 that became wildly popular with judges and lawyers in England and America. In my years studying women’s legal history, I have read hundreds of American judicial opinions quoting Hale’s treatise.

Hale was not writing for women, who were excluded from the legal profession and judiciary. But he had much to say about women. For example, his pronouncements on rape were bedrocks of American law for generations, and their influence persists.

Hale believed that authorities should distrust women who reported having been raped. In his mind, rape was “an accusation easily to be made and hard to be proved, and harder to be defended by the party accused, tho never so innocent.” Judges and lawyers endlessly quoted Hale’s canard well into the second half of the 20th century. Echoes of Hale’s suspicion of women still reverberate in American law and culture, helping rapists avoid punishment.

Hale also wrote what became the most frequently cited defense of the marital rape exemption, the doctrine that shielded a husband from prosecution if he raped his wife. Hale explained that a woman’s agreement to marry meant that she had placed her body under her husband’s permanent dominion. In Hale’s words: “The husband cannot be guilty of a rape committed by himself upon his lawful wife, for by their mutual matrimonial consent and contract the wife hath given up herself in this kind unto her husband, which she cannot retract.”

Rest of article here: Opinion On Roe, Alito cites a judge who treated women as witches and property

[chiver78]

Hale is not a shining example to follow. 👎

[justme]

May 15, 2022 15:37:28 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

May 14, 2022 17:56:20 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

there's a bunch of companies that have come out with these new policies to allow bodily autonomy. I love it, and I hope more continue to join the party.

They will pay 5 grand to make sure they don't have to pay for maternity leave, have an open job for a few weeks for FMLA or add a kid onto insurance. Pretty sweet deal for the company.

I wonder how many people would feel comfortable telling their company they are aborting a pregnancy - especially if they know their boss is a certain religion or aligns with the conservatives for other issues. I know they technically can't hold it against you, but there are so many ways employees can be discriminated against that you just can't prove.

I think this is theater.

I think part of it is, though I think the majority of companies only offer maternity leave under short term disability (ie they pay for it a little bit under insurance rates and coverage but not 1:1). Though it's possible the companies doing this have better maternity leave.

As for telling bosses, I haven't seen the exact wording and my friend mentioned reproductive so theoretically trying to have a baby could fall under that same as not. Presumably these companies have a good way to apply for it.

[daisylu]

May 15, 2022 11:30:39 GMT -5 andi9899 said:

May 14, 2022 17:56:20 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

there's a bunch of companies that have come out with these new policies to allow bodily autonomy. I love it, and I hope more continue to join the party.

I wonder if there is a list somewhere. I'd love to support these businesses.

Starbucks is now paying for travel fees too. 

[daisylu]

Another reason to be glad I do not live in Nebraska, Oklahoma, or Mississippi:


If Roe v. Wade is overturned by the Supreme Court, Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts wants to ban abortion in his state, and he wants that ban to apply to victims of rape.



CNN’s State of the Union host Dana Bash asked the governor about a recent effort he supported to pass a “trigger” abortion ban that would go into effect immediately if the Supreme Court rules to overturn abortion rights, which appears to be imminent considering the recently leaked Supreme Court draft opinion.



“Nebraska, your state, does not have a so-called trigger law on the books. But there was an effort, as you know, to pass one,” Bash said in a Sunday interview with Ricketts. “It failed by only two votes last month. The abortion ban that you tried to pass did not include any exceptions for rape or incest.”



The host then asked, “Do you think that the state of Nebraska should require a young girl who was raped to carry that pregnancy to term?”



Ricketts replied, “So, Nebraska is a pro-life state. I believe life begins at conception. And those are babies too. So, if Roe vs. Wade, which was a horrible constitutional decision, gets overturned by the Supreme Court, which we’re hopeful of, here in Nebraska, we’re going to take further steps to protect those pre-born babies.”



“Including in the case of rape or incest?” Bash clarified.



“They’re still babies too. Yes, they’re still babies,” the Republican replied.


Also on Sunday, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt endorsed his state’s law banning abortion that includes no exceptions for rape or incest.



“Now, your law as I understand, it has no exemptions for rape or incest. And the argument is a victim may not know at six weeks that she is pregnant,” host Shannon Bream said to Stitt when he appeared on Fox News Sunday. “So, what do you say to a woman who finds herself in that situation, lives in your state and feels like she’s got no options?”



“Well, first off, super compassionate about that. I have daughters, cannot even imagine what that would be like and that hardship,” Stitt responded. But despite his superficial compassion, Stitt would still force victims to have a baby.



“You have to choose,” Stitt continued. “That is a human being inside the womb. And we’re going to do everything we can to protect life and love both the mother and the child. And we don’t think that killing one to protect another is the right thing to do either.”



Bream followed-up by asking Stitt how he as governor will help these children conceived in trauma and born by force, considering Oklahoma’s abysmal track record in child wellbeing (it ranks 42nd in the nation). Stitt went on to blast the “socialist Democrat left” and said it is “just ridiculous to even kind of quote those types of stats.”



“We have a free market in Oklahoma,” Stitt said. “We believe that God has a special plan for every single life and every single child, and we want everybody to have the same opportunities in Oklahoma. And aborting a child is not the right answer.”

Ricketts and Stitt join fellow Republican Governor Tate Reeves of Mississippi in callously defending abortion laws without certain exemptions. Last week, Reeves defended Mississippi’s trigger law that would force victims of incest to have their assailant’s child if they become pregnant.



Even abortion bans with rape and incest exceptions are dangerous to pregnant people. Although a person may be eligible for an exception in a state where the law includes such allowances, it is still often extremely difficult or impossible for them to obtain an abortion because those laws can contain requirements, like mandating a rape victim file a police report in order to qualify.






link

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

Gotta love conservative states. We're going to make you have a child but you better not dare ask us for help.

Because after all you chose to wear a short skirt, walk at night, let him in or whatever reason we need to use to prove it was 100% your fault and you need to own the consequences.

It only becomes your choice once it pops out.

[andi9899]

May 16, 2022 10:30:09 GMT -5 daisylu said:

May 15, 2022 11:30:39 GMT -5 andi9899 said:

I wonder if there is a list somewhere. I'd love to support these businesses.

Starbucks is now paying for travel fees too. 

Like I needed another reason to feed my Starbucks addiction.