Breaking... US Supreme Court overturns Roe v Wade

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119265909#Comment_119265909

It's controversial amongst Orthodox Jews.

There isn't blanket support for abortion within Judaism.

https://www.israel365news.com/270736/orthodox-jewish-groups-celebrate-cancellation-of-roe-v-wade/

Igotadose

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119265968#Comment_119265968

One can never state overall direction for Judaism - there's not one group that makes policy and sets attitudes like, in, say the RCC. And there are Catholics who support abortion, too

growleaves

St. Thomas Aquinas was famously more 'liberal' on abortion than a strict Catholic of 2022.

Medical technology and greater medical knowledge of foetuses has changed perspectives among the religious.

Also does anyone here remember that in 1983 the eight amendment brought with it accusations of 'sectarianism'?

Because opposition to abortion was considered a Catholic thing at that time.

Fast forward to 2022 and many Protestants are as passionately opposed to abortion as Catholics are.

growleaves

If we absorb a million hard-line Protestants into a United Ireland, could a dream team of Iona Institute Catholics and the DUP hold a coalition government or two to ransom?

Interesting times ahead anyway.

ArthurDayne

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119265856#Comment_119265856

Yeah, pretty much.

Worth noting though that the dissenting justices pointed out that Roe's striking of balance between early and late abortions did actually have historical rhyme in historical American law. The majority opinion cited authority from the 13th century(!) and then kinda fast-forwarded through time to find convenient authority -- casually shrugging off that old British / colonial and subsequently post-revolution common law did not treat abortion as a crime 'pre-quickening'. So there was a historical thread of law which drew distinction between early and late abortions, along similar lines to the balance struck in Roe.

Roe v Wade didn't purport to "settle" the issue, it struck a balance and has provided that balance as a safety net for women against the failure of legislators to actually legislate. It is in fact this latest Supreme Court decision which purports to settle the issue -- by setting out unequivocally that from the moment of fertilisation a woman has absolutely no right to speak of -- none whatsoever -- when it comes to her decision on whether to proceed with it or not. And as you say, such thinking if applied consistently could be applied to many other modern rights.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119265892#Comment_119265892

So bleedin' what?

Yet another totally off-topic non-sequitur

In terms of human history Christianity is a recent innovation

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119266060#Comment_119266060

Talk about strange bedfellows.

What is the basis for your assumption that all Protestants in NI are "hard-line" and anti-choice?

How many votes do the Iona Institute get? None as they won't register with SIPO as a lobby group, never mind as a party or run candidates.

How many votes do Catholic/Christian conservative independents (and all of the tiny alphabet soup Catholic/Christian conservative parties which existed in the past) get? Almost none. They struggle to reach three figures.

Your wet dream of a christofascist coalition holding this country to ransom is not going to come to pass. It'd be suicide for any ex-RoI party to do a deal with the DUP in a united Ireland - that's assuming there's any DUPpers left as Arlene and others are on record that they'll go to Scotland! (Lucky Scotland, eh...)

SusieBlue

I see we’ve come full circle back to people advocating for children to be brought into the world for the sole purpose of being used as punishments for their sl*tty/irresponsible/selfish mothers.

How very pro life. Quite baffling that all these people who are trying to save the lives of children would be willing to trust a potential murderer with the upbringing and wellbeing of a baby? It’s almost as though they don’t really believe abortion is the murder of a child?

I had serious flashbacks to spring 2018 on Boards when reading this thread today.

Tonesjones

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119265902#Comment_119265902

"Fine"

What do you mean? Are you in agreement with me?

Hotblack Desiato

Yep, same shít different year...

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119264308#Comment_119264308

These posts don’t evidence wanting to chop someone’s dick off.

all of these posts are simple: the last time republicans banned or regulated a gun it was because it was being held by black men. Response: non whites and liberals should arm up as much as the gun nuts do and see how really comfortable they are with their OWN IDEA: arm the teachers arm the moms arm the dads arm the cashiers you have a gun she has a gun everybody has a gun opera.gif

what this does not translate to, is any open call for violence. Arranging to open carry is not against the law.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119266952#Comment_119266952

Well Ireland (or Scotland?) will become more conservative I think.

Whether that has any policy consequences... Dunno.

I couldn't see RoI parties forming a cordon-sanitaire around ex-unionists that would come across as sectarian imo.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119266929#Comment_119266929

How is it off-topic to discuss historical attitudes to abortion in a thread like this?

Bang me on Ignore or maybe I should bang you on Ignore?

Report my comments if you think they're against the rules or better yet don't read them.

To my mind replying to a post with "SO BLEEDIN' WHA'?" is a worthless contribution

Overheal

Considering the Dodds decision the court used relied upon historical precedent it seems perfectly apt to discuss abortion history

Overheal

So violent...

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119264350#Comment_119264350

Again, that’s your own interpretation of what actually happened, based upon the narrative you wish to promote as being what actually happened. It’s not what actually happened though. In the most basic terms - the school over-reached, and got told nope, can’t do that.

There is no disagreement that he chose to come off the sidelines and kneel and pray at the halfway line - the most central and public part of the field. It isn't my interpretation of what happened - it is literally what happened.

Interpretation is what the SC did by calling this action 'personal religious observance'.

 Nobody is telling anyone what they can and can’t do with their own bodies, it’s the law which determines the freedoms and limitations on what anyone can or cannot do with their own bodies, and what freedoms and limitations anyone has with anyone else’s body either, such as abortion services providers who receive Federal and State funding, or bodies like the FDA who will try and find a way to challenge legislation which prohibits the procurement of abortion pills by telesales, etc.

You talk about laws as if they just magically appear. These laws in states are generally voted for by rich, white, and old men who come from extremely gerrymandered areas. My passing these laws they are setting up big government to tell women what they can do with their bodies.

Instead of taking your “my hands are clean, my conscience is clear” approach to addressing the main causes of socioeconomic deprivation by means of having the Federal and State taxes provide funding for abortion providers operating in socioeconomically deprived areas in the US, I mean, it’s one way of trying to eliminate a whole underclass of people living in poverty, do you think a better strategy might be to provide funding for supports and services which will enable and encourage socioeconomic equality, rather than having women forced into a position where they are faced with no other choice but to have an abortion? That’s not choice. That’s not choosing what they want to do with their own bodies. It’s promoting abortion, and attempting to sell it as healthcare.

You need people to be stupid enough to buy into it. It’s already a no-brainier for anyone who wants an easy way to avoid any social responsibility they have towards other people in society - wash your hands of it and pretend you’re arguing for anyone to be given the freedom to do what they want with their own bodies, and if it weren’t for 'big-government' mostly full of old white men, they would be too. But you treat everyone as individual human beings… of course you do, looks like it and all 😒

How deep is your head in the sand? Democrats and pro-choice folk are consistently trying to get more money for those in socioeconomically deprived areas while those Republican and pro-birth are consistently fighting any move to improve payments to these people or improving their healthcare opportunities.

Republicans are pro-birth and then wipe their hands of supporting families afterwards.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119264520#Comment_119264520

I've asked you the same question twice and you've failed to answer repeatedly - it says it all.

You're the one who responded to my OP with an incredibly weak attempt at whataboutery conflating abortion access to vaccine mandates to try and ending up failing to show some hypocrisy.

I'll try a third time, over the multi-year pandemic name just one Democrat ran US state which brought in jail term for those who simply refused to get vaccinated? It is obvious why you can't answer because it doesn't exist and your original attempt at point scoring was built on nothing

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119264401#Comment_119264401

See that is the problem, you can twist the words of the constitution into anything you want them to be. Bullets were not even invented when the the constitution was written.

The argument is being made in relation to Roe that you have to look at it from the perspective of the time then it should stand the same for the 2nd amendment. If they are saying that abortion isn't a right then a whole host of others that have been provided based on the same approach shouldnt be either, but all but one of the SCs are saying that isnt the case (for now anyway).

xxxxxxl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119267610#Comment_119267610

Is the person pregnant and having to make a life and death choice at this moment ?

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119262639#Comment_119262639

I don't know, where?

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119262692#Comment_119262692

What could eventually be a baby. There is no guarantee that a pregnancy will produce a viable foetus. That this has to be pointed out to you is shocking.

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119262718#Comment_119262718

What people would that be? What goalposts do you think are being moved?

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119262835#Comment_119262835

Im fully aware of what autonomy means. It's your desperate attempt to compare abortion with vaccines is where the problems arise.

I personally don't care if people take a vaccine s or not. I never suggested people should be made to. Now you just seem to be resorting to attributing claims to me, that I didn't make.

What I did say was how ridiculous your comparison was and the mental gymnastics you engaged in to support that comparison.

What did you set out here to demonstrate?

nullzero

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119267916#Comment_119267916

I've repeatedly stated that I'm talking about the seeming indifference some people have with regards to bodily autonomy in one situation and how that clashes with their demands that it be respected in others.

Vaccines and abortions are the issues where attitudes towards bodily autonomy seem to be fluid.

I'm not discussing the morality of vaccines or abortions, I talking about the inconsistent morality of some people with regard to bodily autonomy.

You're just picking an argument for no reason at this point.

TomTomTim

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119267866#Comment_119267866

Ridiculous. This is nitpicking in its purest form, as the vast majority of pregnancies, once not aborted of course, result in a baby. Literally a few percent don't.

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119267984#Comment_119267984

It's been explained to you multiple times why the comparison you are desperate to make doesn't work. Yet you blindly persist.

For there to be inconsistency, both situations would need to be the same.

Well this isn't an arguement and if it was, the reason would be highlighting your ridiculous comparison.😉

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119267366#Comment_119267366

No basis for saying that. In fact all demographic trends point the other way.

RoI public opinion is pro-choice.

NI public opinion is pro-choice.

Public opinion in a future united Ireland will be pro-choice.

Nobody is obliged to form a government with anybody else, as SF have found out recently on both sides of the border.

Excluding the DUP is not excluding unionists. The DUP certainly do not represent all unionists or Protestants as you sought to imply earlier. It's very hard to see how abortion, which NI now has, which the rest of the UK has had for decades, could be at the forefront of unionists' concerns if a UI was on the cards.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119267916#Comment_119267916

The poster in question obviously set out with a simple aim to point score against 'the left' with mental gymnastics and just landed flat on their face.

They can't even support their position by answering simple questions.

Given the much more extreme big-government restrictions by the Republicans and the right with abortion laws and associated sanctions while claiming bodily autonomy when it came to simple mask wearing, if anyone should be called out for obvious hypocrisy it should be them but this poster has continued to refuse to do so by name.

nullzero

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119267668#Comment_119267668

I've outlined the comparison I was making an exhaustive amount of times at this stage.

Just because something is pointed out that doesn't suit your argument doesn't mean that you can make out that the person doing so is being unreasonable.

You're asking me questions I've already addressed, the issue was never laws that were actually passed, it was the rhetoric people were pushing. This seems to be lost on you for some reason. We could literally have this conversation forever at the rate you absorb information.

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119267995#Comment_119267995

In what way is it nitpicking? You said guaranteed.! 10-20% of known pregnancies end in miscarriage.