US Supreme court have overturned Roe V Wade
Discussion
Electro1980 said:
No, I’m saying it’s a complicated issue where there are two camps shouting down everyone who disagrees. Just as you are doing. For a start you keep referring to religious fundamentalists, which firstly is an emotive pejorative, and secondly completely fails to understand the issue around the judgment which, for many, is not about abortion but about states rights.
I'm afraid you've been taken in if you genuinely believe that. Certain groups might have said that, in an attempt to make their actions seem more reasonable.But this is a naked, stated, and long-term goal of the fundamentalist Christian right in the southern US for many years - decades. The Federalist Society and their cohorts have played a very long game of political lobbying and funding of specific, right-wing politicians and have recently seen all their plans come to fruition with Trump enabling the far-right and stuffing the courts with far-right sympathisers. The final step was the blatant Republican obstruction of Supreme Court appointments on one side, and rushing them through on the other, that finally managed to get the super-majority they needed to repeal RvW, and it didn't take them long to get the ruling through once all the pieces were in place.
This is nothing, especially, to do with state's rights - the same group of people are quite happy for gun rights, for example, to be mandated by the Constitution and the Supreme Court.
Ridgemont said:
If Kavanaugh holds to the line he illustrated then those in states inclined to ban will surely seek an alternative state to travel to. Again not optimal but hardly the introduction of Gilead? And one the EU seemed content with for a long period? Or am I missing something?
Because it restricts abortion only to those who can afford (financially, time wise or physically) to travel to get one.If you're having an abortion because you can't afford a child, are you really going to be able to afford the hundreds of dollars to travel to a different state to get one? Are you going to be able to afford 4 days off work (1 day to travel, 1 day for the appointment, 1 day to recover, and 1 day to travel home) for it?
If you're pregnant because your abuser has repeatedly raped you, because he knows that your pregnancy will stop you leaving him, then can you spare the days to travel? So much easier to go quickly and quietly somewhere that's 30 minutes away, and then lie and say you miscarried so he doesn't beat you half to death for upsetting his plan.
If you are disabled, can you physically get to another State? Can you even do it independently? Or do you have to "confess" to a friend or family member and hope that you've judged them right and they won't report you to the police?
Stating that you can travel completely ignored that many people on a low income cannot afford to travel, and they are the ones most likely to need an early abortion. It restricts abortion to being a luxury for able-bodied middle class people.
And following on from what I said about miscarriage treatment earlier, total bans within states make that difficult too. So if you have an ectopic pregnancy and you're bleeding out, you can either try to drive the 3 hours to the border and hope there's a hospital nearby, or lie in the ER for 3 hours bleeding out while the doctor phones around the hospital lawyers to check you can be treated. That has happened before and will happen again.
Or alternatively if you're a woman who's 30 weeks pregnant and has been told your baby's skull has failed to grow over their brain, so they'll die within hours of birth, you have a choice. Continue the pregnancy for another 8 weeks until you go into labour naturally, knowing you have to go through at least another 60 days of pregnancy to deliver a baby that will die soon after. Or travel away from your support network, and away from the medical team who are caring for you, to deliver the baby early among strangers and then get the ashes posted back to you via FedEx. And again, that has happened before and it will happen again.
The UK abortion law is also piss poor but at the moment it doesn't infringe on the rights of people miscarrying or being told their baby is dead. Americans have no such qualms.
InitialDave said:
Electro1980 said:
not about abortion but about states rights.
I notice it isn't their rights to, for example, give women a free cupcake on the second Tuesday of the month, or anything like that.deckster said:
Electro1980 said:
for many, is not about abortion but about states rights.
I'm afraid you've been taken in if you genuinely believe that…This is nothing, especially, to do with state's rights - the same group of people are quite happy for gun rights, for example, to be mandated by the Constitution and the Supreme Court.
Electro1980 said:
Both of you clearly don’t understand US politics or the ruling by the SCOTUS. Is there a significant right wing Christian influence? Yes, absolutely. There is also left wing Christian groups and states rights groups. It’s far more complex than the polarised positions that are claimed.
Oh, we understand just fine."It's about states' rights"?
Simple question. States' rights to do what?
Electro1980 said:
Which is a terrible argument. Plenty of things are legislated and decided upon by people who are not impacted directly. That is nothing more than an attempt to shut down any discussion. The fact is that most people don’t want to have a reasonable discussion about a complex issue. They want a reductive argument where you are either right or wrong.
This misses the point of the SCOTUS ruling’s effect. The SCOTUS ruling has given states a power to legislate over abortion rights and removed those rights from federal law. Plenty of states have immediately moved to ban abortions outright - mainly on religious grounds, bypassing any “reasonable discussion about a complex issue”, and instead adopting an extreme binary position. Other, mainly democratic states, preserve abortion rights up to particular points during pregnancy, reflecting the outcome of a “reasonable discussion. About a complex issue”. Fears that menstrual tracking apps could be used to incriminate women in the US.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-61952794
Great news for the fundamentalists on here no doubt
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-61952794
Great news for the fundamentalists on here no doubt
InitialDave said:
Electro1980 said:
Both of you clearly don’t understand US politics or the ruling by the SCOTUS. Is there a significant right wing Christian influence? Yes, absolutely. There is also left wing Christian groups and states rights groups. It’s far more complex than the polarised positions that are claimed.
Oh, we understand just fine."It's about states' rights"?
Simple question. States' rights to do what?
Electro1980 said:
Both of you clearly don’t understand US politics or the ruling by the SCOTUS. Is there a significant right wing Christian influence? Yes, absolutely. There is also left wing Christian groups and states rights groups. It’s far more complex than the polarised positions that are claimed.
Go on then. As we're all clearly ignorant, please enlighten us as it seems very simple from where I'm standing.(1) Fundamentalist Christians disagree with Roe vs Wade because their church tells them it's wrong
(2) Fundamentalist Christians spend four decades politicking and bankrolling anybody who they think will further their cause
(3) Fundamentalist Christians find a convenient patsy in the form of Donald Trump, who makes all their Supreme Court dreams come true
(4) Supreme Court, pretty much as soon as is possible, reverse Roe vs Wade
It's not about State rights, as these very same people are exceedingly vocal in keeping 2nd amendment rights and any idea of gun control out of State hands.
BlackWidow13 said:
This misses the point of the SCOTUS ruling’s effect. The SCOTUS ruling has given states a power to legislate over abortion rights and removed those rights from federal law. Plenty of states have immediately moved to ban abortions outright - mainly on religious grounds, bypassing any “reasonable discussion about a complex issue”, and instead adopting an extreme binary position. Other, mainly democratic states, preserve abortion rights up to particular points during pregnancy, reflecting the outcome of a “reasonable discussion. About a complex issue”.
There wasn’t a “reasonable discussion. About a complex issue” in the first place, which is why this mess exists. It’s based on a Supreme Court ruling that abortion laws are a federal issue, and a following one that they are not. The discussion never happened, people just kicked it down the road and let that ruling stand knowing full well the risk. Had politicians actually dealt with the issue, rather than refusing to deal with it, we would not be in this position. Now we just have two groups shouting at each other and attacking anyone that disagrees with them. It’s yet more polarised modern politics where you are either right or wrong.deckster said:
Go on then. As we're all clearly ignorant, please enlighten us as it seems very simple from where I'm standing.
(1) Fundamentalist Christians disagree with Roe vs Wade because their church tells them it's wrong
(2) Fundamentalist Christians spend four decades politicking and bankrolling anybody who they think will further their cause
(3) Fundamentalist Christians find a convenient patsy in the form of Donald Trump, who makes all their Supreme Court dreams come true
(4) Supreme Court, pretty much as soon as is possible, reverse Roe vs Wade
It's not about State rights, as these very same people are exceedingly vocal in keeping 2nd amendment rights and any idea of gun control out of State hands.
For some it is. Until people start to understand that the world is binary, good vs evil, we are not going to get anywhere. We currently have:(1) Fundamentalist Christians disagree with Roe vs Wade because their church tells them it's wrong
(2) Fundamentalist Christians spend four decades politicking and bankrolling anybody who they think will further their cause
(3) Fundamentalist Christians find a convenient patsy in the form of Donald Trump, who makes all their Supreme Court dreams come true
(4) Supreme Court, pretty much as soon as is possible, reverse Roe vs Wade
It's not about State rights, as these very same people are exceedingly vocal in keeping 2nd amendment rights and any idea of gun control out of State hands.
One side sees the other as all being right wing, white, fundamentalist, evangelical Christians who just want to control people
The other seeing the opposition as far left, ANTIFA terrorist, Marxist radicals.
Both are represented within those groups but do not represent all of those groups.
InitialDave said:
liner33 said:
InitialDave said:
Simple question. States' rights to do what?
Represent their electorate An important point that is being missed is that the States that already have abortion restrictions/bans/triggers in place have them because that’s what the electorate of those states wanted, and had all voted in favor of.
Has that caught a few states and their electorate out as they never anticipated Roe v Wade ever being overturned? Very likely. But now the electorate of each state is free to determine what they want to do around abortion at the ballot box, and without federal interference.
FWIW, I’m appalled by the decision, but just trying to help explain what it actually means from a practical perspective.
Electro1980 said:
deckster said:
Go on then. As we're all clearly ignorant, please enlighten us as it seems very simple from where I'm standing.
(1) Fundamentalist Christians disagree with Roe vs Wade because their church tells them it's wrong
(2) Fundamentalist Christians spend four decades politicking and bankrolling anybody who they think will further their cause
(3) Fundamentalist Christians find a convenient patsy in the form of Donald Trump, who makes all their Supreme Court dreams come true
(4) Supreme Court, pretty much as soon as is possible, reverse Roe vs Wade
It's not about State rights, as these very same people are exceedingly vocal in keeping 2nd amendment rights and any idea of gun control out of State hands.
For some it is. Until people start to understand that the world is binary, good vs evil, we are not going to get anywhere. We currently have:(1) Fundamentalist Christians disagree with Roe vs Wade because their church tells them it's wrong
(2) Fundamentalist Christians spend four decades politicking and bankrolling anybody who they think will further their cause
(3) Fundamentalist Christians find a convenient patsy in the form of Donald Trump, who makes all their Supreme Court dreams come true
(4) Supreme Court, pretty much as soon as is possible, reverse Roe vs Wade
It's not about State rights, as these very same people are exceedingly vocal in keeping 2nd amendment rights and any idea of gun control out of State hands.
One side sees the other as all being right wing, white, fundamentalist, evangelical Christians who just want to control people
The other seeing the opposition as far left, ANTIFA terrorist, Marxist radicals.
Both are represented within those groups but do not represent all of those groups.
I won't hold my breath though
deckster said:
Go on then. As we're all clearly ignorant, please enlighten us as it seems very simple from where I'm standing.
(1) Fundamentalist Christians disagree with Roe vs Wade because their church tells them it's wrong
(2) Fundamentalist Christians spend four decades politicking and bankrolling anybody who they think will further their cause
(3) Fundamentalist Christians find a convenient patsy in the form of Donald Trump, who makes all their Supreme Court dreams come true
(4) Supreme Court, pretty much as soon as is possible, reverse Roe vs Wade
It's not about State rights, as these very same people are exceedingly vocal in keeping 2nd amendment rights and any idea of gun control out of State hands.
Gun control is very much in State hands. That’s the main part of that particular problem; lax federal oversight, and consequently massive inconsistencies between States.(1) Fundamentalist Christians disagree with Roe vs Wade because their church tells them it's wrong
(2) Fundamentalist Christians spend four decades politicking and bankrolling anybody who they think will further their cause
(3) Fundamentalist Christians find a convenient patsy in the form of Donald Trump, who makes all their Supreme Court dreams come true
(4) Supreme Court, pretty much as soon as is possible, reverse Roe vs Wade
It's not about State rights, as these very same people are exceedingly vocal in keeping 2nd amendment rights and any idea of gun control out of State hands.
smn159 said:
Given that you keep saying over and over again how the two sides of this 'debate' are polarised, it should be easy for you to describe what might be a moderate position on this issue
I won't hold my breath though
Do stop sealioning. It’s not helpful, and the answer is right there. The moderate position is to not paint anyone who disagrees or holds a different opinion as one of the two caricatures. I won't hold my breath though
Electro1980 said:
To set their own laws. It is exactly the same as the Brexit debate. If you don’t understand the fight around state vs federal power, no, you don’t understand US politics.
As I said, I understand just fine.I think you are viewing things too simplistically and at face value.
Where the American right push something as being for "states' rights", do not be taken in by the idea that it is some academic legal principle.
They mean "we want to do [thing]", and [thing] is usually bad and regressive.
InitialDave said:
As I said, I understand just fine.
I think you are viewing things too simplistically and at face value.
Where the American right push something as being for "states' rights", do not be taken in by the idea that it is some academic legal principle.
They mean "we want to do [thing]", and [thing] is usually bad and regressive.
I’m taking things at face value? I didn’t say it was all states rights, but that this was one of the groups. For some it is a vehicle to move power to politicians they have more influence over. For others it absolutely is about a deeply held belief in the supremacy of state over federal government. I think you are viewing things too simplistically and at face value.
Where the American right push something as being for "states' rights", do not be taken in by the idea that it is some academic legal principle.
They mean "we want to do [thing]", and [thing] is usually bad and regressive.
Electro1980 said:
BlackWidow13 said:
This misses the point of the SCOTUS ruling’s effect. The SCOTUS ruling has given states a power to legislate over abortion rights and removed those rights from federal law. Plenty of states have immediately moved to ban abortions outright - mainly on religious grounds, bypassing any “reasonable discussion about a complex issue”, and instead adopting an extreme binary position. Other, mainly democratic states, preserve abortion rights up to particular points during pregnancy, reflecting the outcome of a “reasonable discussion. About a complex issue”.
There wasn’t a “reasonable discussion. About a complex issue” in the first place, which is why this mess exists. It’s based on a Supreme Court ruling that abortion laws are a federal issue, and a following one that they are not. The discussion never happened, people just kicked it down the road and let that ruling stand knowing full well the risk. Had politicians actually dealt with the issue, rather than refusing to deal with it, we would not be in this position. Now we just have two groups shouting at each other and attacking anyone that disagrees with them. It’s yet more polarised modern politics where you are either right or wrong.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff