Roe v Wade Overturned

paqman

“the looks of that picture”, what does that mean exactly?

HeavyG

paqman said:

“the looks of that picture”, what does that mean exactly?

Given who posted it I'm sure it was intended as a misogynistic insult.

HeavyG

Margaret Atwood’s cease-and-desist letter to the United States for plagiarizing the plot of The Handmaid’s Tale

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2022/09/27/humour/margaret-atwood-cease-desist-letter-us-plagiarizing-handmaids-tale

...running to Costco to get a few bottles of Canadian maple syrup...

JohnInCarolina

paqman

HeavyG said:

Margaret Atwood’s cease-and-desist letter to the United States for plagiarizing the plot of The Handmaid’s Tale

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2022/09/27/humour/margaret-atwood-cease-desist-letter-us-plagiarizing-handmaids-tale

...running to Costco to get a few bottles of Canadian maple syrup...

In french we say “C’est pas parce qu’on rit que c’est drôle!” which translates to “it is not because we laugh that it is funny”.  Sadly, this made me laugh but it isn’t funny!

nolaegghead

WildmanWilson said:

JohnInCarolina said:

This is Kansas.  Who knew?

Kansas is sparsely populated by the looks of that picture. 

Is that the feeling you get from your vagina?

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/sueonthetown/status/1582113254687772673?s=20&t=hLuIcHeQLQqNzmEDjP3Dyg

Legume

One of the stations here ran a lead in for their news saying doctors were struggling with the out of state abortions streaming into the state.  I didn’t watch, but not surprising.

REB17

Help me understand Biden’s plea for the election to codify Roe? Democrats already have the majority so why not codify now? 

HeavyG

REB17 said:

Help me understand Biden’s plea for the election to codify Roe? Democrats already have the majority so why not codify now? 

Read up on the rules of the Senate.

REB17

HeavyG said:

REB17 said:

Help me understand Biden’s plea for the election to codify Roe? Democrats already have the majority so why not codify now? 

Read up on the rules of the Senate.

So this years election matters how? How many seats will make a difference? 

JohnInCarolina

REB17 said:

HeavyG said:

REB17 said:

Help me understand Biden’s plea for the election to codify Roe? Democrats already have the majority so why not codify now? 

Read up on the rules of the Senate.

So this years election matters how? How many seats will make a difference? 

In the Senate?  It depends on whether or not it’s only Manchin and Sinema who oppose ending the filibuster (I have my doubts).  But if that’s correct they would need at least two more.  

JohnInCarolina

And they’d need to hold the House, which seems very unlikely.

HeavyG

REB17 said:

HeavyG said:

REB17 said:

Help me understand Biden’s plea for the election to codify Roe? Democrats already have the majority so why not codify now? 

Read up on the rules of the Senate.

So this years election matters how? How many seats will make a difference? 

When the Women’s Health Protection Act was voted on earlier this year the vote was very close and fell mostly along predictable party lines.

When SCOTUS overturned Roe the GOP was extremely excited and seemed content to leave it up to individual states to decide abortion laws. However, the Kansas vote a few weeks afterwards seemed to have shocked the socks off the GOP. Suddenly the notion that many, if not most, states might actually vote to keep Roe as the standard caused many of them to change their thinking in that maybe abortion laws should be set at the federal level. Also, there are probably some GOP Senators and Representatives who are now finding that some of the states that want outright bans in all cases and also want to criminalize the actions of anyone helping someone obtain an abortion in another state as going a step too far.

Sen. Graham forgot how much he loved "state's rights" and proposed a federal ban at 15 weeks. Some GOP Senators like that idea and some still, for the time being anyway, want to leave it to the states. There are at least two other GOP Senators who might also vote for enacting laws at the federal level (Collins and Murkowski).

The current thinking is that the Dems will lose control of the House which is historically the pattern. However,many new GOP House members might feel similar to Graham and take the stance that perhaps abortion laws should be set at the federal level. So, if there is interest among both parties to enact abortion laws at the federal level the devil then becomes one of just details.

Is that really just pie in the sky thinking on Bidens part that Roe can be protected at the federal level this year or next? I have no idea but I guess we'll find out in just a few weeks.

nolaegghead

The whole calculus gets even more complicated as pro-life and pro-choice are not cut and dry down party lines, more than ever, we are seeing this now. 

We are going down a path that is, in context of developed nations, not something commonly done. Rolling back the clock on individual liberties at such an invasive level.  This isn't good for society.  Never mind the majority of people don't want this ban. 

Gulfcoastguy

HeavyG said:

REB17 said:

HeavyG said:

REB17 said:

Help me understand Biden’s plea for the election to codify Roe? Democrats already have the majority so why not codify now? 

Read up on the rules of the Senate.

So this years election matters how? How many seats will make a difference? 

When the Women’s Health Protection Act was voted on earlier this year the vote was very close and fell mostly along predictable party lines.

When SCOTUS overturned Roe the GOP was extremely excited and seemed content to leave it up to individual states to decide abortion laws. However, the Kansas vote a few weeks afterwards seemed to have shocked the socks off the GOP. Suddenly the notion that many, if not most, states might actually vote to keep Roe as the standard caused many of them to change their thinking in that maybe abortion laws should be set at the federal level. Also, there are probably some GOP Senators and Representatives who are now finding that some of the states that want outright bans in all cases and also want to criminalize the actions of anyone helping someone obtain an abortion in another state as going a step too far.

Sen. Graham forgot how much he loved "state's rights" and proposed a federal ban at 15 weeks. Some GOP Senators like that idea and some still, for the time being anyway, want to leave it to the states. There are at least two other GOP Senators who might also vote for enacting laws at the federal level (Collins and Murkowski).

The current thinking is that the Dems will lose control of the House which is historically the pattern. However,many new GOP House members might feel similar to Graham and take the stance that perhaps abortion laws should be set at the federal level. So, if there is interest among both parties to enact abortion laws at the federal level the devil then becomes one of just details.

Is that really just pie in the sky thinking on Bidens part that Roe can be protected at the federal level this year or next? I have no idea but I guess we'll find out in just a few weeks.

Just as a point of interest, the Mississippi bill that was nixed by the feds and upheld by the Supremes , was abortions up to 15 weeks. The feds gambled and lost resulting to a default to the pre Roe vs Wade law of 0 weeks. It looks like they could have already had a nation wide law limiting it to 15 weeks. 15 weeks is nearly 4 months, if a woman misses 3 periods it's pretty obvious what has happened.

JohnInCarolina

Gulfcoastguy said:

HeavyG said:

REB17 said:

HeavyG said:

REB17 said:

Help me understand Biden’s plea for the election to codify Roe? Democrats already have the majority so why not codify now? 

Read up on the rules of the Senate.

So this years election matters how? How many seats will make a difference? 

When the Women’s Health Protection Act was voted on earlier this year the vote was very close and fell mostly along predictable party lines.

When SCOTUS overturned Roe the GOP was extremely excited and seemed content to leave it up to individual states to decide abortion laws. However, the Kansas vote a few weeks afterwards seemed to have shocked the socks off the GOP. Suddenly the notion that many, if not most, states might actually vote to keep Roe as the standard caused many of them to change their thinking in that maybe abortion laws should be set at the federal level. Also, there are probably some GOP Senators and Representatives who are now finding that some of the states that want outright bans in all cases and also want to criminalize the actions of anyone helping someone obtain an abortion in another state as going a step too far.

Sen. Graham forgot how much he loved "state's rights" and proposed a federal ban at 15 weeks. Some GOP Senators like that idea and some still, for the time being anyway, want to leave it to the states. There are at least two other GOP Senators who might also vote for enacting laws at the federal level (Collins and Murkowski).

The current thinking is that the Dems will lose control of the House which is historically the pattern. However,many new GOP House members might feel similar to Graham and take the stance that perhaps abortion laws should be set at the federal level. So, if there is interest among both parties to enact abortion laws at the federal level the devil then becomes one of just details.

Is that really just pie in the sky thinking on Bidens part that Roe can be protected at the federal level this year or next? I have no idea but I guess we'll find out in just a few weeks.

Just as a point of interest, the Mississippi bill that was nixed by the feds and upheld by the Supremes , was abortions up to 15 weeks. The feds gambled and lost resulting to a default to the pre Roe vs Wade law of 0 weeks. It looks like they could have already had a nation wide law limiting it to 15 weeks. 15 weeks is nearly 4 months, if a woman misses 3 periods it's pretty obvious what has happened.

Please.  If this wasn’t turned over the Mississippi case, it would have been some other state.  It was just a matter of time.  Several suits from different states were in the pipeline.  Once the Supreme Court had enough right-wing justices, this was baked into the cake.

Gulfcoastguy

The point is that they had a year plus to codify a nationwide abortion law just under the current president. Then there was Obama’s 8 year reign and Clinton’s also.

JohnInCarolina

Gulfcoastguy said:

The point is that they had a year plus to codify a nationwide abortion law just under the current president. Then there was Obama’s 8 year reign and Clinton’s also.

Not under Biden they didn’t.  They didn’t have the votes in the Senate. 

With Obama and Clinton, Roe was the law of the land.  It really wasn’t foreseeable under either of them that it would be overturned.

Gulfcoastguy

Actually some of the senators from purplish states would have gone along with it. Even a few of the more pragmatic red state senators who had 4 or 5 years until reelection time. But that would have meant talking to them. It’s the democratic senators who wouldn’t have survived such an attempt.

nolaegghead

Generally, unless it’s to get people on the record voting against a bill, they don’t make it to a vote unless they have the votes and you can simply read every senator and representative’s policy web page and screen the majority to yay or nay without even talking to them.  Muthafuckin math n sheit!

JohnInCarolina

Gulfcoastguy said:

Actually some of the senators from purplish states would have gone along with it. Even a few of the more pragmatic red state senators who had 4 or 5 years until reelection time. But that would have meant talking to them. It’s the democratic senators who wouldn’t have survived such an attempt.

Which planet are you living on?  

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/winterjessica/status/1582406400034058240?s=20&t=nvviYVITaCMiocaWbkftYQ

dmchicago

JohnInCarolina

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1591451897638313986?s=20&t=S059rSZGLc8FySs_NDHJWA

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/therecount/status/1597733202839629825?s=20&t=MPVQKzurgR2quQQIWYBU4w

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/imillhiser/status/1602659974555095042?s=20&t=3JchpavYGnp6W_U3OF0zZA

dmchicago

“ A former lawyer at a religious conservative litigation shop, Kacsmaryk denounced, in a 2015 article, a so-called “Sexual Revolution” that began in the 1960s and 1970s, and which “sought public affirmation of the lie that the human person is an autonomous blob of Silly Putty unconstrained by nature or biology, and that marriage, sexuality, gender identity, and even the unborn child must yield to the erotic desires of liberated adults.”
I mean, I’ve seen pictures of some of y’all and blobs of silly putty come to mind, so…

JohnInCarolina

This story out of Ohio is pretty effing terrifying:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/08/health/ohio-abortion-long/index.html