Let's get one fact straight about the Constitution

Problem solved.

Access to free birth control reduces abortion rates – Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis (wustl.edu)

 

Great.

Now people who have the newest iPhone can also be bothered to pick up a free condom.

 

To be fair, that's actually the definition of democracy. Hence why we're a Constiutional Republic. In fact, the refrain of democracy has created the current circumstances of today. People believe that the government can grant them 'x things', and elect other people on that purpose when that had never been the intent of the founding of this country. Socialists, the Framers were far from.

 

So you care more about money than stopping abortions. Got it.

 

Clearly the people who get pregnant because they can't spend $100 a year on a pill or condoms do.

 

Well I know your not pro-life.

 

Sure you do.

 

Finally you figured it out. This isn’t a democracy. It’s a republic of states.

 

Yep, you value money more preventing abortions.

 

And the issue will be placed in the hands of the people in those states, where it belongs.

 

No it doesn't.

 

It absolutely does. If the citizens of those states want legal abortion, they can vote for pro-choice legislators.

 

Only in a democracy can the people feel they have control over those with property. So long as the democrats constantly attack property rights, free markets, and guns you will always get those who vote for a Republican order.

 

Choice should not have been taken away.

 

I don't give a damn what you think 'all it does' or your crummy logic.

Scotus granted women the right to abortion, it lasted for 50 years, and now they are taking it away.

That is the salient fact, and all the arguments for today's ruling really don't mean squat to those who have to live the nightmare this ruling is going to cause.

I mean, Republicans in red states are going to get real nasty about this, take this for example:

https://www.11alive.com/article/new...-wade/85-7e78facf-b673-4775-8a09-9a45e3a794b2

“We have a case out of Oklahoma right now in which a 19-year-old woman went to the hospital because she was experiencing a miscarriage. She was subsequently charged with manslaughter and she is currently serving a four-year term,” Sussman said.

Four ****ing years for a miscarriage? You see, we can't trust republicans if Roe is killed, and we're soon going to find out more **** like this, it's happening. Republicans are bonkers maniacs on the subject of abortion or anything the suspect that comes close to it.

And that was BEFORE today's SCOTUS ruling. What's it going to be like in the hard right states?

R v W was ruled 7 - 2, five of whom were republicans, It was upheld a number of times.

So, you think it's legitimate to kill it?

NO, it's not. What this court said today is that there is no inherent right to privacy. And rulings in the past that were based on the Penumbra right to privacy are fair game, Justice Thomas put out the clarion call. He argued in a concurring opinion released on Friday that the Supreme Court “should reconsider” its past rulings codifying rights to contraception access, same-sex relationships and same-sex marriage, he stated it indirectly by mentioning the cases where those issues were settled, (Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell) they are now fair game. By doing that, he's telling people 'bring us some cases so we can take away more rights we gave in past, we want to set the clock back on liberal accomplishments back to the 50s. Whoopeee, ain't we gonna have fun living in a hard right wing world? which is nice, since 70% of the nation don't want it.

This court has made and incredible blunder, and the right is going to pay for it.
You really don't get it, you don't have a clue as to the gravity of this blunder. No one is gonna care about the polemics, the court gave it, we had it for 50 years, and now they took it away. That's the only bitter flavor people whose lives this ruling affects will taste. The rest is intellectual bullshit. The only hope for those whose right has been taken away are democrats, and they are now going to vote for us. By the time 2024 rolls around, inflation will have settled a few years prior, and this won't be forgotten. More nightmare cases will make the news, and the MSM is going plaster it, front and center, in the face of Republicans, we're not going to let anyone forget the epic injustice the court has incurred, today.

I remember in 1965, my 15 year old sister almost died during a DIY abortion. and republicans' want to bring us back to the 50s and 60s.

Brilliant.

 

Thanks, Captain Obvious.

 

Brittany Poolaw told doctors she used meth during her pregnancy, records show, and a cause of death for her baby was never determined. She was charged with manslaughter anyway.

Jones was pregnant when she was shot. The fetus died and Jones was arrested because prosecutors said she initiated the fight.

And now you know....the rest of the story.

 

the day will come, the country is gradually shifting leftward, where we will be able to achieve a few amendments, but it's at least a decade away.

The senate has a built in advantage for the right and the house is disproportionately gerrymandered on the right, and we got a 6/3 court,

so the minority has a stranglehold on the country.

The only fix is democracy, and as the country shifts leftward, they are growing ever increasingly sick of the tyranny of the minority

There is no idea more powerful than an idea whose time has come.

And that idea is Democracy.

 

REpubs have done a great job on promoting a certain narrative. It's a bogus narrative, but they are master propogandists.

That just might change, with r v w gone. Let's see what the polls say a couple of years from now, after inflation has settled, and nightmares of women being forced to carry rape babies to term, women getting charged with murder for miscarriages, etc etc etc, which MSM will make a lot of hay, about.

Pence just called for a nationwide abortion ban. Makes a nice soundbite, dems will be sure to use it against repubs.

The show ain't over 'till it's over.

 

It's not crumbling, it's recovering from a pandemic which reeked havoc on the nation.

 

I respect the free market, what I don't respect is a structure which allows capital and power to flow to fewer and fewer hands.

As a liberal, the only points in a free market I would attack are those aspects which allow that to occur.

Wtih the advent of neoliberalism, capital and power have been allowed to aggregate to fewer and fewer hands.

Neoliberalism is the enemy of freedom and a free economy. Neoliberalism has been pretty much the policy of all presidents since Reagan, even Biden, though he is trying, can't do much about it. The Senate repubs are always in the way. They love oligarchical rule. They love neoliberalism.

What is neoliberalism? It's the idea that no regulation is best for the country. Let the the free market have it's way, completey.

Let it discriminate, let it exploit workers and resources to it's hearts content, and let it become so big that if it fails, it endangers national security.

Neoliberalism has brought our country to where it is today, and most people don't even know what the word means. It is the reason why the upper 50% own 99% of the nation's wealth, and the top 1% own about 40% of the nation's wealth ( yes, bernie loves to exaggerate these stats, but they are still bad).

Listen to the many lectures by Nick Hanauer on YouTube, who is a 1/10th of 1 per center, a super rich owner of many corporations, who is blowing the whistle on his class.

 

It's in the link above.

 

Sure, in your wall of text.

Tell us what happens to parents that get their kids killed because of drugs or because they get into fights that get their kids killed.

 

The same people that claim to be pro-choice want to ban guns.

 

SCOTUS has no legitimate right to "grant" abortion.

The States are free to do as the citizens of each state wish.

If she's currently serving, then this occurred under Roe and Casey and you are making no point.

In his opinion, and none of the other nine concurred with it, the Due Process clause of the 14th amendment guarantees Due Process and it's the Privileges and Immunities Clause that undergirds unenumerated rights that the Court instead anchors in a fiction for which the term of art is "Substantive" Due Process.

He's simply saying that they should be anchored in the correct clause. This isn't new, he has made this same point every time a right is anchored in the fiction of "Substantive" Due Process rather than the Privileges and Immunities Clause as his point was perfectly clear here, which you would know if you bothered to actually read his concurrence.

I can't decide if your claims are more false or hysterical.