News Roe v. Wade overturned

[Zorba]

After a handful of months, it most certainly is. Where do YOU think people come from?

After a few minutes a sprem combines with an egg to fertilize it. So, better not be spilling any seed over there.

Is there any line to be drawn before birth when we tell a person that they cannot abort unless it is medically necessary? Very few US states have no restrictions on abortion.

For example in California, you cannot get a Abortion unless it is medically necessary after the fetus has viability. In Colorado you can get a abortion throughout the term of pregnancy.

Viability is a good line in the sand, IMHO. Except for medical need, which is between a woman and her doctor. Almost no abortions happen that late, and even fewer optional ones.

 

[K1052]

Viability is a good line in the sand, IMHO. Except for medical need, which is between a woman and her doctor. Almost no abortions happen that late, and even fewer optional ones.

I don't think it would be unreasonable to cut off elective abortions at 16 weeks provided access was low cost and convenient. Along with making contraceptives (including Plan B) extremely cheap or even free. Therapeutic abortions should be not limited by law and are a matter of health the state shouldn't be sticking its nose in.

Conservatives simply want an end to all of it (abortion, contraceptives, pre-marital sex) with force of law so it's not like this is a position that can be achieved anyway.

 

[ivwshane]

There is also the rational case of optics, you could of course blast this opinion loud and clear, and lose every single undecided vote come elections… might as well run on banning ALL the guns.

That’s true and you could also continue using the false narrative the anti choice people have created and perpetuate the need for more and more restrictive abortion rights and the false justification of needing to restrict a woman’s bodily autonomy.

So the choice is to either keep the narrative the same or change it. Apparently most here prefer to keep the narrative the same. No wonder the left is so ineffectual with change.

 

[cytg111]

That’s true and you could also continue using the false narrative the anti choice people have created and perpetuate the need for more and more restrictive abortion rights and the false justification of needing to restrict a woman’s bodily autonomy.

So the choice is to either keep the narrative the same or change it. Apparently most here prefer to keep the narrative the same. No wonder the left is so ineffectual with change.

If you want to change it you start by shutting down Fox.
Right to bodily autonomy… how about suicide? Where you land on that?

 

[ivwshane]

Well you guys keep hoping those changes will come while being tenuous against the removal of rights that’s happening right now. I’m sure it’ll work out for you.

After a few minutes a sprem combines with an egg to fertilize it. So, better not be spilling any seed over there.


Viability is a good line in the sand, IMHO. Except for medical need, which is between a woman and her doctor. Almost no abortions happen that late, and even fewer optional ones.

I don't think it would be unreasonable to cut off elective abortions at 16 weeks provided access was low cost and convenient. Along with making contraceptives (including Plan B) extremely cheap or even free. Therapeutic abortions should be not limited by law and are a matter of health the state shouldn't be sticking its nose in.

Conservatives simply want an end to all of it (abortion, contraceptives, pre-marital sex) with force of law so it's not like this is a position that can be achieved anyway.

 

[ivwshane]

If you want to change it you start by shutting down Fox.
Right to bodily autonomy… how about suicide? Where you land on that?

Shutting down fox isn’t going to happen so that’s a non starter.

I’m also all for suicides but with regulations in place to protect the person from murder and harming others. Of course I’m also for free (as in paid for by taxes) universal health care including mental health. Because like abortions, the goal should be to prevent people from getting to that point in the first place. People will always find ways to kill themselves or get an abortion so making it harder to obtain doesn’t help anyone, but making it less likely for someone to have an unwanted pregnancy (free contraception, sex Ed, etc), or having better support structures for mental health so people can not only have easy access for help but also better education on recognizing when they need help, will all help to reduce the need for suicides and abortions.

Which part of that do you disagree with?

 

[K1052]

while being tenuous against the removal of rights that’s happening right now

That's what you've decided to read in my reply. I, in fact, do not support Roe/Casey reversal and certainly not by the horribly regressive opinion that asshole Alito wrote which is going to justify all sorts of bullshit.

It is possible to have an opinion, recognize that implementation of that preference is unrealistic, and firmly support the status quo due to that lack of alternative.

 

[ivwshane]

That's what you've decided to read in my reply. I, in fact, do not support Roe/Casey reversal and certainly not by the horribly regressive opinion that asshole Alito wrote which is going to justify all sorts of bullshit.

It is possible to have an opinion, recognize that implementation of that preference is unrealistic, and firmly support the status quo due to that lack of alternative.

Except that’s not what you are doing. Your post said you think it’s acceptable to restrict abortion access to 16 weeks (currently it’s at 22 weeks as the recognized time of viability).

Acquiescing to more restrictions is hardly “firmly supporting the status quo”.

 

[K1052]

Except that’s not what you are doing. Your post said you think it’s acceptable to restrict abortion access to 16 weeks (currently it’s at 22 weeks as the recognized time of viability).

Acquiescing to more restrictions is hardly “firmly supporting the status quo”.

I'm not acquiescing to anything because my policy preference is not even remotely on the table.

 

[ivwshane]

I'm not acquiescing to anything because my policy preference is not even remotely on the table.

Well I don’t know what to tell you then because I’m not sure how anyone can interpret a post that says you’d be for more restrictions if X takes place, as anything other than a policy preference. And if it’s not your preferred policy it’s certainly an acquiescence of that particular policy.

If that’s not the intention of your post then fine, I certainly don’t think you are lying, but that’s how it read.

 

[fskimospy]

Well I don’t know what to tell you then because I’m not sure how anyone can interpret a post that says you’d be for more restrictions if X takes place, as anything other than a policy preference. And if it’s not your preferred policy it’s certainly an acquiescence of that particular policy.

If that’s not the intention of your post then fine, I certainly don’t think you are lying, but that’s how it read.

He’s saying he would take a deal where he gave up something in exchange for conservatives giving up something.

 

[uclaLabrat]

I don't think it would be unreasonable to cut off elective abortions at 16 weeks provided access was low cost and convenient. Along with making contraceptives (including Plan B) extremely cheap or even free. Therapeutic abortions should be not limited by law and are a matter of health the state shouldn't be sticking its nose in.

Conservatives simply want an end to all of it (abortion, contraceptives, pre-marital sex) with force of law so it's not like this is a position that can be achieved anyway.

All of this. Expand access to actual, proper healthercare and family planning and watch abortion rates plummet. If they really wanted to minimize abortion instead of outright banning it, they would propose this.

 

[cytg111]

Shutting down fox isn’t going to happen so that’s a non starter.

I’m also all for suicides but with regulations in place to protect the person from murder and harming others. Of course I’m also for free (as in paid for by taxes) universal health care including mental health. Because like abortions, the goal should be to prevent people from getting to that point in the first place. People will always find ways to kill themselves or get an abortion so making it harder to obtain doesn’t help anyone, but making it less likely for someone to have an unwanted pregnancy (free contraception, sex Ed, etc), or having better support structures for mental health so people can not only have easy access for help but also better education on recognizing when they need help, will all help to reduce the need for suicides and abortions.

Which part of that do you disagree with?

That shutting down Fox is a non starter.

 

[fskimospy]

All of this. Expand access to actual, proper healthercare and family planning and watch abortion rates plummet. If they really wanted to minimize abortion instead of outright banning it, they would propose this.

But then how are they supposed to punish the slutty sluts?

 

[Pens1566]

Been said before, but overturning Roe doesn't limit abortions. It limits safe abortions.

 

[cytg111]

I don't think it would be unreasonable to cut off elective abortions at 16 weeks provided access was low cost and convenient. Along with making contraceptives (including Plan B) extremely cheap or even free. Therapeutic abortions should be not limited by law and are a matter of health the state shouldn't be sticking its nose in.

Conservatives simply want an end to all of it (abortion, contraceptives, pre-marital sex) with force of law so it's not like this is a position that can be achieved anyway.

Why doesnt a womans right to bodily autonomy trump any consideration of a fetus uptil birth?

 

[uclaLabrat]

But then how are they supposed to punish the slutty sluts?

Same way they have since 1973: by talking to them. This is like one nationwide incel movement.

 

[ivwshane]

That shutting down Fox is a non starter.

Well if you have a legal means to do it then let’s hear it!

 

[cytg111]

Well if you have a legal means to do it then let’s hear it!

Jan 6th legal or what are we talking about?

 

[ivwshane]

He’s saying he would take a deal where he gave up something in exchange for conservatives giving up something.

So he supports the, “I’ll take a hamburger today and pay you next Tuesday”, approach to negotiating with republicans, that is he’ll give up rights in exchange for something that will never happen. Smart/eyeroll

 

[ivwshane]

Jan 6th legal or what are we talking about?

Lol

If you aren’t talking about lawful means then yeah it’s still a non starter. I have no interest in killing my fellow Americans no matter how deplorable or brainwashed they are.

Now if you have some legal means that our society deems acceptable (historically speaking) then by all means do it.

 

[cytg111]

Lol

If you aren’t talking about lawful means then yeah it’s still a non starter. I have no interest in killing my fellow Americans no matter how deplorable or brainwashed they are.

Now if you have some legal means that our society deems acceptable (historically speaking) then by all means do it.

Killing not required .. but you could organize a mass protest somewhere close .. and then march to Fox HQ.. and then............

 

[ivwshane]

All of this. Expand access to actual, proper healthercare and family planning and watch abortion rates plummet. If they really wanted to minimize abortion instead of outright banning it, they would propose this.

Of course! But because they are absolutely against that, it should be pretty easy to spot their intentions. If this whole thing really isn’t about protecting unborn children then why the fuck would anyone make any sort of compromise that not only endangers the mother more, causes a greater burden on the mother AND society, and will more than likely increase abortions later in the pregnancy?

For fuck sakes we’ve been all participating in threads on this forum for decades that show, time and time again, republicans not only argue in bad faith but also negotiate in bad faith and yet here we are again, holding the football because this, this is the time that republicans are actually going to kick the ball and not us.

How freaking dumb do we have to be before we catch on to their plays?

 

[ivwshane]

Killing not required .. but you could organize a mass protest somewhere close .. and then march to Fox HQ.. and then............

…normal political discourse. I get it, I’m just not ok with it.

 

[SMOGZINN]

How freaking dumb do we have to be before we catch on to their plays?

The problem is that the only other option is to walk away, which still leaves the ball in the Republican's hands.