Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

US Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs Wade

Options
12357…33

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Fandymo
    Registered Users Posts: 4,177 ✭✭✭Fandymo


    Crazy how mentioning one religious grouping will get you banned, threads locked and removed.

    But abusing another is perfectly fine.

    The added wailing and gnashing of teeth for "empathy" is especially humourous when you consider that in some cultures, a woman who is raped either marries the rapist or gets stoned to death or honour killed as an adultress, a lot of the time by her own family. If only empathy was blind, eh?

    As for the OP, put it to a vote and let the people decide.



  • Options
    #123
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,458 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119009948#Comment_119009948

    you mean muslims? no problem mentioning them. I've just done it. They just aren't relevant to the thread.



  • Options
    #124
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119009948#Comment_119009948

    The influence of the religious right in America is pretty well established in US politics... They're also the primary group on the offensive against abortion. The Irish equivalent are amateurs next to them.



  • Options
    #125
    RobbieTheRobber
    Registered Users Posts: 6,830 ✭✭✭RobbieTheRobber


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119009948#Comment_119009948

    🤣🤣🤣

    Me thinks the lady doth deflect too much!



  • Options
    #126
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,589 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119009948#Comment_119009948

    As for the OP, put it to a vote and let the people decide.

    If only they could!!!

    That is the core problem , it's never been put to a vote because it's almost impossible to do that because of the utter disfunction of the legislative process in the US.

    Congress can't vote on it because the filibuster means a single Senator can block something even getting to the floor for consideration.

    The people can't vote on it , because bringing forward a constitutional amendment is next to impossible due the the ridiculously high bar set for advancement.

    The whole system is broken beyond belief.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,896 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010033#Comment_119010033

    Even if you could, you'd still have some daft electoral college type system where the losing option could very well win.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Options
    #128
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119008899#Comment_119008899

    That would be hard for them to do, unless they somehow determine the unborn are "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States.



  • Options
    #129
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119009193#Comment_119009193

    How often are abortions performed that late? Oh, it's exceptionally rare and done when medically necessary to save a life....



  • Options
    #130
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119009966#Comment_119009966

    Few places have examples of the anachronistic vitriol of the US religious right. People do hold personal contradictory positions here but we are far more likely to respect others rights to their own opinions. It's a very European notion which did once set sail for America but was quickly supplanted by descendants of Puritan zealotry dictating to others.



  • Options
    #131
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119009342#Comment_119009342

    Because, well, as I understand it, abortions are quite often considered bad behavior, "murder" even.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,589 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010052#Comment_119010052

    It's beyond ridiculous - This is what's required to change the constitution.

    An amendment may be proposed by a two-thirds vote of both Houses of Congress, or, if two-thirds of the States request one, by a convention called for that purpose. The amendment must then be ratified by three-fourths of the State legislatures, or three-fourths of conventions called in each State for ratification.

    So to actually raise an amendment you need to get 2/3rd of both the House and Senate to agree or for 2/3rds of the States to ask for one.

    And then it requires 75% of States to approve the amendment.

    All utter ridiculously high thresholds thereby making amending the Constitution functionally impossible.



  • Options
    #133
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010132#Comment_119010132

    And/or get 2/3rds of the states to propose one, not both.

    The Equal Rights Amendment died this way. Southern States took too long to ratify and the amendment expired. It would have made all sex discrimination unconstitutional, and it would have made this ruling effectively baseless.

    There aren't enough States that would support - or oppose - a constitutional amendment on abortion one way or the other. Too many state legislatures are locked up by the same people we've been talking about all thread, especially evangelical politicians.



  • Options
    #134
    Donald Trump
    Registered Users Posts: 19,846 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010065#Comment_119010065

    Many States recognise unborn children as victims for criminal purposes.

    i.e. if I shoot a pregnant woman dead, I can be charged with killing her and the unborn child.



  • Options
    #135
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,896 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010132#Comment_119010132

    Yep. It's such a hideously broken mess of a country and in their two-party system, one party has to exploit this because it can't actually win the requisite votes.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Options
    #136
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010228#Comment_119010228

    Right, but that doesn't mean the fetus is 'subject to the jurisdiction.' Double-homicide laws don't confer fetal-personhood.



  • Options
    #137
    Donald Trump
    Registered Users Posts: 19,846 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010237#Comment_119010237


    If you have case law to suggest otherwise, please provide it. Else it is undecided at the highest level and therefore open to a challenge. It does not only apply to death. It can also apply to injury.


    https://web.archive.org/web/20170312231159/http%3A//news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/abortion/unbornbill32504.html


    That law has an exception for abortion. Which might very well be challenged should that be removed as a Constitutional right.



  • Options
    #138
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,589 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010170#Comment_119010170

    Exactly - The entire Legislative process in the US is broken.

    It is functionally impossible to pass anything but the most banal forms of legislation.

    Almost none of the key rights of US citizens have today are actually based in legislation , they only have the notional protection of a SCOTUS ruling.

    • Gay Marriage - Only "legal" due to Obergefell vs. Hodges
    • Contraception - Only "legal" due to Griswold vs. Connecticut
    • Inter Racial Marriage - Only "legal" due to Loving vs. Virginia
    • Homosexuality - Only "legal" due to Lawrence vs Texas

    None of these fundamental rights are actually written into Federal law or the US Constitution.

    The same people that have been fighting Roe vs. Wade will absolutely go after most if not all of the above if given the opportunity.

    And the only reason they can "go after" them is because it's impossible to pass federal legislation in the US if it offends any fringe group with a bit of focus.



  • Options
    #139
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010245#Comment_119010245

    You can just look up fetal personhood in the United States. For example, my Congressman supports a fetal personhood bill, but that personhood does not exist in the United States currently. States have tried to challenge the courts before with state level fetal personhood bills.

    https://lawreview.wlulaw.wlu.edu/category/online/roundtables/fetal-personhood/#:~:text=It%20redefines%20an%20%E2%80%9Cunborn%20child,goal%20of%20overturning%20Roe%20v.




  • Options
    #140
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,718 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119008492#Comment_119008492

    It's cheap labour force. That's all it is. 

    If this is the case, then why are most conservatives against cheap latino migrants coming into the US and taking jobs?


    There is a lot of straw-manning going on at the moment.



  • Options
    #141
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,589 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010237#Comment_119010237

    Correct , which is why Health Insurance companies could do utterly heinous things like declaring a birth defect as a "pre-existing condition" because the child doesn't legally exist until they are born so because you have to be born before you can be added to the Insurance policy , the insurance company could deny you coverage.

    The law was changed in 2010 , but only specifically in the case of Health care coverage , it didn't confer "personhood" on a fetus.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,896 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010280#Comment_119010280

    Racism.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Options
    #143
    Donald Trump
    Registered Users Posts: 19,846 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010261#Comment_119010261


    Not talking about legislation. Was talking about Constitutional protection. Which will only be decided in case law. Should the current draft become official, it would make that route easier. A foetus does not have to be considered a person to be afforded protections. Those people were trying to classify it as such so that it would automatically gain it.

    For example, there are many rights which are guaranteed to US citizens by the Constitution. Although not explicitly enshrined therein, I as a vistor to the US could also be afforded those rights. Should I become a citizen, I would be guaranteed those explicitly. But I can also be granted them without being a citizen.


    Am I saying it would be successful? No. I am merely saying it would probably be challenged on that basis at some stage



  • Options
    #144
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.mediaite.com/news/video-of-susan-collins-repeatedly-insisting-justice-kavanaugh-wont-vote-to-overturn-roe-v-wade-goes-viral/

    Susan Collins has been roasted all night, for her defense of Kavanaugh during his confirmation, when she insisted he would do nothing to touch Roe v Wade, in numerous statements she made. She was also the Senator who voted to acquit Donald Trump during the first impeachment, telling the media 'I think he's learned his lesson' for trying to politically influence the 2020 election with Zelensky and holding up aid - but he then proceeded to rig the postal service against mail in ballots, declared the election a fraud and sparked an insurrection which he was impeached for, again. She acquitted him, again.

    There's talk but probably no action, similarly, of going after Kavanaugh for Perjury, when he said 'roe v wade' was "settled law"

    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010252#Comment_119010252

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

    May 3, 2022


    Statement by President Joe Biden


    We do not know whether this draft is genuine, or whether it reflects the final decision of the Court.

    With that critical caveat, I want to be clear on three points about the cases before the Supreme Court.

    First, my administration argued strongly before the Court in defense of Roe v. Wade. We said that Roe is based on “a long line of precedent recognizing ‘the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty’… against government interference with intensely personal decisions.” I believe that a woman’s right to choose is fundamental, Roe has been the law of the land for almost fifty years, and basic fairness and the stability of our law demand that it not be overturned.


    Second, shortly after the enactment of Texas law SB 8 and other laws restricting women’s reproductive rights, I directed my Gender Policy Council and White House Counsel’s Office to prepare options for an Administration response to the continued attack on abortion and reproductive rights, under a variety of possible outcomes in the cases pending before the Supreme Court. We will be ready when any ruling is issued.


    Third, if the Court does overturn Roe, it will fall on our nation’s elected officials at all levels of government to protect a woman’s right to choose. And it will fall on voters to elect pro-choice officials this November. At the federal level, we will need more pro-choice Senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe, which I will work to pass and sign into law.


    https://www.mediaite.com/news/read-president-joe-bidens-full-statement-trashing-leaked-roe-draft-opinion/




  • Options
    #145
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,589 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010280#Comment_119010280

    They're not really against them coming in and doing the work.

    What they are against is them having any rights or being able to gain citizenship and being able to vote.



  • Options
    #146
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,718 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119009313#Comment_119009313

    The right to an abortion could be added to the constitution but that is up to the legislative to sort out. It's very very difficult to do. Hence why it won't be added.



  • Options
    #147
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010296#Comment_119010296

    They want all the 'taxation' they don't want to do any of the 'representing'

    Cheap migrant labor, cheap US labor now again too.

    Alito in his decision PDF even mentions the idea that abortion is a conspiracy against black babies. Maybe that was the aim of a group 50 years ago, it's not the intent of anyone now. Anyone of any color can choose to terminate a pregnancy. I just wonder, what will Alito and the Tucker Carlsons think about a dwindling white majority if there are, suddenly, much higher birth rates among minorities than among whites.

    Also, heard a lot of 'thank gods' from evangelicals and 'finally owning the libs' from MAGA but I'm not hearing a lot of 'now we can finally focus on taking care of the born children' from those that support the repeal of Roe.



  • Options
    #148
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,718 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010287#Comment_119010287

    It must be great to see the world in such a 8-bit colour, but alas we all know its a bit more complicated than that.



  • Options
    #149
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,896 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010312#Comment_119010312

    Care to elaborate?

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Options
    #150
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,718 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010296#Comment_119010296

    You may be have right before Trump, the GOP on the face of it was against illegal immigration but secretly happy because it was good for business and kept the price of labour down. Post Trump though the GOP have gone a different way on it, they don't really care all that much what business has to say when it comes to the question of immigration.

    Hence why Penn's assertion that the whole thing is about wanting a cheap workforce and stopping abortion is one way of achiveing this.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010312#Comment_119010312

    You asked why most conservatives are against southern migration, that was your answer. Racism.

    Most conservatives watch the #1 'news' shows in America: Hannity and Carlson, who both have been evidenced working directly as a Republican apparatus (direct communication with Trump WH on what to propagandize, new texts reveal and older call logs already showed) and these shows routinely push Great Replacement Theory, a racist conspiracy theory. As I also mentioned above, the conservative movement also seems obsessed with black abortion rates.

    We can talk about that in 8-bit, 32-bit or 512-bit if you want but I think that would be getting off track. Suffice to say, racism is indeed a critical part of why most conservatives do not want foreigners in their country. Where in the US do you live? I'm in South Carolina and I certainly see indications of racism out in public quite often.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement