US Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs Wade

05-05-2022 6:49pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020506#Comment_119020506

You'll also find that the rate has been naturally dropping among all racial groups. And the thing is people such as yourself and members of the GOP don't give a crap about providing fiscal and social supports for those raising children. Things like that will reduce abortions. Making them illegal only makes women put their lives at risk to have an abortion without medical supports.

Rjd2 · 05-05-2022 6:49pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020100#Comment_119020100

The GOP have been making impressive inroads with the Hispanic community recently tbf.

The polling on abortion in the Hispanic community is soft and skewered by each side to get their desired outcome, but their is clearly support to be made when it comes to abortion restrictions.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Poll-reveals-Texans-views-on-abortion-law-that-16566587.php

Sean.3516 · 05-05-2022 6:57pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119016685#Comment_119016685

Look, my point is that in a nation like the US or the UK for that matter, countries with a long and stable constitutional system and tradition, for any attempted coup to be successful it must have widespread institutional support. Without that it always fails.

Trump's hope for Jan 6th was that Republicans in the Senate would challenge votes from states where "dubious" voting practices had occurred. This had support from about half of Republicans in the House but had less support in the Senate where the process actually takes place. Yes, some Trumpy characters like Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz supported it but a lot of Republican Senators opposed it too. Mike Lee, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham etc. all opposed it. We now know that Kevin McCarthy in the House was livid with Trump at the time.

7 out of 50 Republican Senators cast votes to overturn elections in certain states. With four of those reversing themselves after the riots. VP Mike Pence rejected the strategy completely. This strategy had nowhere near enough support among Republicans to be successful.

As for the riots, I don't believe for a second that Trump intended for the crowd to storm the Capitol. This does not excuse Trump for lying to them and letting them believe the election was stolen and not ardently condemning them when the riots started. The riots were put down within hours and the election was certified that day. As I said, this was the worst planned and executed insurrection in American history. It was dealt with at the time and people on both sides need to get over it.

Rjd2 · 05-05-2022 6:58pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020092#Comment_119020092

Sure.

I think for both parties is how do you get the balance right going forward?

Tim Ryan refused to say he supported any abortion restriction in a fox clip which has gone viral, it was a gotcha and while I sympathize with him, best of luck with that stance in Ohio.

Although if you are Glenn Youngkin who pulled off a very impressive win in Virginia,,,would he have won if this was an issue back then? Nope.

Anyway its a while until November, so looking closer , their is a Dem primary coming up soon between a Dem "pro life" candidate and pro choice one.

Clyburn has got involved and obviously has decided to back the candidate who is more likely to win in November. He gets a lot of slack online, but Clyburn is a winner.

https://twitter.com/PatrickSvitek/status/1521989731629867008

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/04/jim-clyburn-henry-cuellar-democrats-abortion-election/

05-05-2022 7:00pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020554#Comment_119020554

Whatever about the principle, has that borne out anywhere? Because living in a shithole with zero supports tends to indicate far, far higher birthrates. Scandinavia with their excellent healthcare, childcare, all the usual lefty stuff has consistently had low birthrates. Same in most of the most-developed countries.

Morgans · 05-05-2022 7:13pm

And policies like that helped Finland have a 34 year old female Prime Minister.

Can't have that happening.

Sean.3516 · 05-05-2022 7:41pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119017544#Comment_119017544

All of your posts responding to me have proven that people on your side have no interest in debate or discussion at all.

This tiresome trend of using the term "misinformation" to label anything one disagrees with as not simply an honest difference of opinion, something that might be discussed and hashed out, but rather a malicious and cynical attempt to deceive people.

This term that was originally used to describe attempts by foreign governments to deceive us has now filtered down into every political issue and is being thrown around like a frisbee to shut down conversations. It spells the death of civil dialogue and you seem to be wholeheartedly embracing it.

Nonsense.

Prisoners, black people, and school children have heartbeats and feel pain but somehow the American right is more than happy with their being murdered.

It's about misogyny and control. Nothing else.

Really? Putting aside what a complete red herring this is since America had 45,000 gun deaths in 2020, 54% of which were suicides leaving about 20,000 homicides. As for black people, about 13 unarmed blacks were killed by police in 2019, the year before George Floyd was killed in a country with 42 million black people. Meanwhile 1 million unborn humans are aborted year on year in the US and you question which is of greater concern to the pro-life right?

That said do you actually think the right is happy with blacks and school children being murdered?

"misogyny and control"... Simple as that eh?

I guess the advantage of being as ideologically possessed as you are is that you always have a simple answer for everything.

Quin_Dub · 05-05-2022 7:42pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020554#Comment_119020554

I'd love to see that data based simply on socio-economic and educational data which I suspect would have far greater correlation.

Generally speaking Back people in the US are much more likely to be living at or below the poverty line ,much less likely to have completed high-school or any kind of tertiary education etc.

The complete lack of Social supports and education absolutely leads to these scenarios.

The "racist" element is not Abortion but the lack of care and attention paid to the poorest and least educated elements of society long before it ever comes to someone having to make that kind of decision.

Overheal · 05-05-2022 7:44pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020422#Comment_119020422

They state:

"This much is true: In the United States, the abortion rate for black women is almost five times that for white women. Antiabortion activists, including some African-American pastors, have been waging a campaign around this fact, falsely asserting that the disparity is the result of aggressive marketing by abortion providers to minority communities."

This angle of attack seems to have pepped up in the last couple of days in the online zeitgeist. This is particularly the reason why if someone is going to quote someone who is doing that, that they at least get their numbers right..

https://triblive.com/opinion/gary-franks-black-babies-are-nearly-40-of-us-abortions/

So why is this happening? Is it a silent genocide within America? After all, abortions would amount to a 50% reduction of the Black population. Today, there are 46 million Black Americans.

I supported the so-called pro-choice position while in Congress. These are votes I regret today, and I pray for God’s forgiveness on so many levels.

I am not declaring Planned Parenthood during the early part of the 20th century a racist organization, and definitely not today. But you can judge for yourself based on the content of this column.

Which is a bit gaslighty, like if I said don't picture your mother having hot moaning sex with your dad, because hot moaning sex with your dad isn't the point I'm making, I'm just over here fanning rose perfume and slow jazz and it's not at all my intention to make you picture your parents having coitus even though I can't stop mentioning it in my article. If it makes you feel better I had to think about my own parents in the making of this post.

One eyed Jack · 05-05-2022 8:04pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119019213#Comment_119019213

You don’t give any indication of whether or not you agree or disagree with the Senators comments being presented out of context in the headline, but for what it’s worth, this was the context in which she said what she said:

“Rape is a difficult issue,” Schmidt said. “But if a baby is created, it is a human life and whether that mother ends that pregnancy or not the scars will not go away, period. It is a shame that it happens, but there’s an opportunity for that woman – no matter how young or old she is – to make a determination about what she’s going to do to help that life be a productive human being … That child can grow up and be something magnificent, a wonderful family person, cure cancer, etc.”

…

Schmidt’s remarks were delivered in reply to a Democratic colleague had specifically asked her if her bill would force a 13-year-old girl who is raped to have the baby.

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/apr/30/ohio-republican-jean-schmidt-pregnancy-rape-opportunity

It was a loaded question asked in bad faith, but apart from that, it also exposes another issue - the idea of the assumption that women and girls in the US who become pregnant as a result of being raped, should automatically want to have an abortion. It’s impossible to get reliable statistics on the numbers of women and girls in the US who become pregnant as a result of rape, who then choose of their own volition to have an abortion, but the number of women and girls who give pregnancy as the result of being raped as the reason they choose to have an abortion, is approximately 1% of the total figure of women and girls who have abortions, or 25,000 in 3 million -

On the other hand, smaller proportions of women in 2004 than in 1987 said that having a baby would interfere with their job or career (38% vs. 50%), that they were not mature enough (22% vs. 27%), that their husband or partner wanted them to have an abortion (14% vs. 24%), and that they and their partner could not or did not want to get married (12% vs. 30%). In both surveys, 1% indicated that they had been victims of rape, and less than half a percent said they became pregnant as a result of incest.

https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf

In the most basic terms - abortion does nothing to address the issue of men who commit rape.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119019272#Comment_119019272

In Senate hearings, nominees to the Court are questioned more on political and social matters, than on legal ones.

Nominees are questioned on political and social matters rather than legal ones in order to assess their moral character and fitness to hold office. Questioning nominees for their legal opinion on legal matters would be over-politicising and would inevitably lead to accusations of political bias from all sides. Had it not been for McConnell acting the prick, Gorsuch would not have been appointed.

While initially there were cheers from those people who claim to hold conservative values - generally misanthropes, miscreants and outright spiteful sorts who are in favour of abortion when the outcome means that fathers would not have to pay child support if there is no child to support, let alone saving the State (or from their perspective, “taxpayers”) needing to provide financial support to unmarried mothers for their children, the kind of idiot who attempts to argue in favour of “paper abortions, cos equaliteeee”, they were actually very quick to criticise when Gorsuch did what Gorsuch was appointed to do -

https://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2017-05-10/conservatives-cheer-neil-gorsuch-on-the-supreme-court?context=amp

https://newrepublic.com/amp/article/157418/neil-gorsuch-lgbtq-rights-conservatives

The decision in Dobbs v Jackson Womens Healh Organisation might well be the undoing of Roe v Wade, or it might not. It depends upon how the law is interpreted and applied, and to whom it applies -

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/05/roe-decision-constitution-wasnt-written-for-women.html

Overheal · 05-05-2022 8:14pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020506#Comment_119020506

Black women continue to have the highest abortion rate at 27.1 per 1,000 women compared with 10 per 1,000 for white women, according to a study published in the American Journal of Public Health.

According to which study? You have not cited.

You say it continues but my best guess is your elusive citation is an article that is a study from between 2008 to 2014. The thrust of the paper being that Abortions were going down overall fell by 25% across the time period.

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2017.304042

Conclusions

Disparities in abortion rates correspond with disparities in unintended pregnancy.

Not only do women of color and those with family incomes less than 100% of the federal poverty level have higher rates of abortion than do White women and those with higher incomes, but they also have higher rates of unintended birth. Equitable access to widerange family planning and contraceptive services would better allow women in underserved populations to avoid unintended pregnancy, but these efforts alone will not eliminate these disparities. Efforts should also be devoted to making sure that women who want abortions are able to have them without having to overcome financial and logistical barriers.

Laws and policies that make abortion more difficult to access have a disproportionate impact on groups overrepresented among abortion patients, particularly those who are poor or low income. Future research and interventions focused on abortion and unintended pregnancy should seek to understand the underlying causes of disparities in these outcomes, because this information could inform a comprehensive set of policies and programs that benefit all women

The paper makes no attempt to suggest that certain groups of people are culturally or racially predisposed to seeking out pregnancy more often. The study's conclusion was that the disparity was chiefly explicable by disparities in wealth and healthcare access, not as is being eluded to, some conspiracy to target black fetuses for termination procedures.

Also from their abstract:

Results. Between 2008 and 2014, the abortion rate declined 25%, from 19.4 to 14.6 per 1000 women aged 15 to 44 years. The abortion rate for adolescents aged 15 to 19 years declined 46%, the largest of any group. Abortion rates declined for all racial and ethnic groups but were larger for non-White women than for non-Hispanic White women. Although the abortion rate decreased 26% for women with incomes less than 100% of the federal poverty level, this population had the highest abortion rate of all the groups examined: 36.6. If the 2014 age-specific abortion rates prevail, 24% of women aged 15 to 44 years in that year will have an abortion by age 45 years.

Conclusions. The decline in abortion was not uniform across all population groups.

Unless there has been some more recent study showing that the abortion rates have spiked in any or all of these groups I don't think we can assuredly say that it hasn't gotten better, reportedly the longitudinal trend is downward as wealth and access to proper facilities increases not just for abortions where necessary, but contraception and family planning education and access.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020571#Comment_119020571

You'd have to elaborate, I have no awareness of your question as a fact. I'm up to the gills with Tim Scott's supporters in my State who blame Democrats for our poor education system, when this state is consistently ranked at the bottom, and has been perennially governed by Republicans at every level of local and state government. I think people who may pick up or repeat the line that 'Democrats Cities are where all the Blacks are' may not, exactly, have all of their ducks and a row, either.

I don't think the latter part of your question is pertinent to the thread, neither is it accurate, and that is a much larger discussion. I mentioned Tim Scott, he is just one example, of exemplification that not all purple voters are necessarily swayed by the same views as race as you or I. Republicans have made noteworthy political gains in appealing themselves to Black American voters in recent years, and so this false axiom that Democrats and Black Americans are culturally and institutionally one and the same or something, is getting increasingly obsolete...

Overheal · 05-05-2022 8:21pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020579#Comment_119020579

I'm not sure I agree with much of any of that take but I think we'd be getting off the rails; it's all debatable right now, perhaps I will see you in a thread in June when the insurrection public hearings happen. There will be much more known and less unknown then about the extent or lack thereof of institutional supports for keeping Trump in power.

One eyed Jack · 05-05-2022 8:54pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020876#Comment_119020876

Republicans have made noteworthy political gains in appealing themselves to Black American voters in recent years, and so this false axiom that Democrats and Black Americans are culturally and institutionally one and the same or something, is getting increasingly obsolete...

It’s become obsolete as a result of Black Americans becoming increasingly disenchanted with Democratic politics though. Democrats have made it easy for Republicans to gain ground, not least in part due to their own gaffes - Hillary when she gaffed about referring to anyone outside of the Eastern seaboard as a basket of deplorables, doubled down, displaying egregious hubris.

Biden at least showed some humility when he gaffed that if black people voted for Trump, they ain’t black. ‘Twas an awful gaffe, and it would be uncharitable to put too much emphasis on it when the intent was obviously coming from a good place, but there is real hope for Biden if he manages to pull off his plan for American recovery with specific focus on issues which Black American voters actually care about, and not what Democrats argue Black American voters should care about, such as easier access to abortion, when what they really care more about easier access to education, healthcare and employment. It’ll be interesting to see does the plan live up to the hype -

https://prismreports.org/2021/10/27/to-build-back-better-we-must-build-back-black/

Because for all his talk of “Yes we can”, the fact is that Obama, didn’t -

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/13/barack-obama-legacy-racism-criminal-justice-system

Overheal · 05-05-2022 9:09pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021060#Comment_119021060

None of that shift has regarded abortion or a genocide conspiracy though. Obama overpromised what Article II cannot deliver on its own. He also got completely roped into several years of trying to "reach across the aisle" to a party that was never there in good faith to begin with; you have to understand, President Obama had to hear arguments from actual white nationalists in Congress on a regular basis, even if everyone was trying to gaslight him. You had the spin machine every day on Fox putting out propaganda that made POTUS wonder if intervention would be political ammunition for the whackadoodles who were already saying and doing things about him that made him sound like an autocratic clone of Adolf Hitler long, long before it became an outcry issue that Obama was not more political or vocal about the criminal incidents involving police brutality. Very effectively, stupidly, and frustratingly, the conservative movement bluffed Obama into a number of moves during his presidency that included scaring him out of taking a Trump-like vocal opinion on individual criminal cases even if they concerned members of law enforcement committing hate crimes. It was also seemingly that the GOP duped him into nominating Merrick Garland in the first place, as once Orrin Hatch name dropped Garland in this famous and viral quote, he was so-nominated within 24 hours:

“The president told me several times he’s going to name a moderate [to fill the court vacancy], but I don’t believe him. [Obama] could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man. He probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election. So I’m pretty sure he’ll name someone the [liberal Democratic base] wants.”

The GOP, famously, spent months then refusing to hold so much as a hearing for Garland, saying Garland was a radical, extremely left socialist plant etc. etc. and leaving the seat vacant and advancing us to the stage we now find ourselves in with the imminent overthrow of Roe.

Overheal · 05-05-2022 9:52pm

I don't feel like I made that loud enough in my last post,

The GOP kept Scalia's seat vacant, to overthrow Roe

The GOP appointed Gorsuch, to overthrow Roe

The GOP appointed Kavanaugh, to overthrow Roe

The GOP appointed Barrett, to overthrow Roe (and to satisfy Trump's stipulation the nominee would be a Woman)

We know this, because Trump told us this when he was running for office as the leader of the Republican Party, whose own charter now basically just reads "whatever Trump says" (Compare, prima facie, to the 2012 RNC Platform: https://ballotpedia.org/The_Republican_Party_Platform,_2012)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dLgk6qufYk

The Republican voter would ordinarily be cheering something like this as a campaign promise spectacularly delivered, but they aren't, because of the political backlash of actually getting rid of abortions.

05-05-2022 9:54pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020762#Comment_119020762

Wtf are you on about?

Yous asked about details/sources surronding the 40%/disparity in numbers,someone highlight it long term known and yous start talking about me mother having sex,whats wrong with you

Overheal · 05-05-2022 9:59pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021284#Comment_119021284

I'm responding to the source of the claim. I apologize if the example I used was upsetting to criticize their blatant attempt at manipulating their readers into subscribing to an opinion that the author all but winks and nudges at them being urged to take.

05-05-2022 10:01pm

USA: If you can't afford kids, don't have them

Same USA: We're forcing you to have this kid

USA: Spend millions to fight for unborn

Same USA: Once born the child is on their own, no matter the poverty

These "conservatives" are not pro-life, just pro-birth. Or have I missed where they are accepting of higher taxes to fund true welfare state?

Accessible healthcare, employment protections, accessible education etc?

Astartes · 05-05-2022 10:07pm

The democrats could codify Roe tonight. Why won't they?

Overheal · 05-05-2022 10:14pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021352#Comment_119021352

They cannot. The votes do not exist, even if you were to assume that the filibuster wasn't in the way or that Republicans would agree to a floor vote.

https://www.mediaite.com/news/psaki-reminds-reporters-on-af1-there-were-not-enough-votes-to-codify-roe-even-if-the-filibuster-were-overturned/

Q So, the President spoke pretty passionately on the tarmac about the Alito draft being an affront to basic rights. But he also said he was not ready to commit to ending the filibuster to codify Roe. Why?

And is there a disconnect here between the passion and what needs — what he believes needs to be done?

MS. PSAKI: Well, first, let me say the President’s position is that we need to codify Roe, and that is what he has long called on Congress to act on.

What is also true is that there has been a vote on the Women’s Health Protection Act which would do exactly that, and there were not even enough votes, even if there was no filibuster, to get that done.

So, I would note, in his written statement that we released this morning — I’m just going to reiterate what he said in this statement. He said, “…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” — to do exactly that. “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.” And that was speaking to exactly where we are with the votes.

I would note that while we’ve been in the air, Leader Schumer noted that he had plans to bring this up for a vote.

In actual point of fact then the Democrats have already been trying for months in the 117th Congress to get the WHPA passed through the Senate.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3755/actions

It passed the House in September by a slim majority of votes, staunchly along the party line.

Effectively, the issue boils down to Democratic Senators who oppose ending the filibuster.

Two Senate Republicans – Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska – have introduced their own legislation earlier this year to codify Roe v. Wade into law. But it adds in exceptions, including a “conscience” measure that would keep in place laws protecting health care providers who object to performing the procedure on religious or moral grounds. Collins, at least, has indicated she won’t get on board with the bill Schumer plans to bring up next week.

With the threat of another filibuster, Democrats acknowledge they can’t advance such legislation with it in place. That reality has sparked another round of calls to gut the filibuster, or at least do so to specifically strengthen abortion rights.

But Democrats still don’t have the votes to make a rules change and reform the filibuster, and they’d need all 50 to agree. Democrats tried the approach earlier this year when they sought a one-time talking filibuster to help them break the logjam on voting rights legislation, but two of their own – Manchin and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona – opposed the effort.

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2022-05-05/senate-to-vote-next-week-on-codifying-roe-v-wade-into-law-but-obstacles-remain

extra gravy · 05-05-2022 10:34pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021322#Comment_119021322

They wouldn't budge on their precious gun rights even after Sandy Hook. They don't give a shït about children and are the first in line for an abortion themselves when it suits them. Absolute cünts.

Overheal · 05-05-2022 10:39pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021467#Comment_119021467

I can never get a "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" bot to tackle my straight to the chase, if not intentionally reductive question: what stops me from giving out free hand grenades to Trick or Treaters, etc.

Because it forces an acknowledgement that that right to keep and bear arms is not "unlimited," which is in part, the holding of the SCOTUS from District of Columbia v Heller. (4 of the 5 conservative justices who decided it still sit there)

It's no secret, that the pro-life movement isn't really interested in the judicial or legislative process here, but simply the most expedient way to do whatever they want, when it suits them - Shall not be Infringed for me, Well regulated for thee.

Manic Moran · 05-05-2022 10:54pm

Are there any? I’m about as strident a 2A supporter as there is on Boards, and I have never claimed that the right is unlimited.

Overheal · 05-05-2022 11:12pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021536#Comment_119021536

Politicians with their mast on that, not that I'm aware of, just voters.

Today's convo on a Government Officials page; I have mutual friends from out of state with Blue (I'm Green) so I have no reason to believe it is a Bot, in fact.

Which sadly never touched on the theme of my question or the choices I might be free to take if the right was unlimited. But it does appear to endorse the argument that the right is unlimited..

05-05-2022 11:24pm

Originally the right to bear arms referred to citizens defending themselves against a government that was against the States. Over time and going by different interpretations it has evolved into thinking everyone has the right to own weapons, including assault weapons. And yes that is our **** up but its been allowed to go on for so long that there is now no way to curb it.And yes most of my fellow countrymen are ignorant of their own constitution and rights.

Manic Moran · 06-05-2022 12:28am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021629#Comment_119021629

That is something of a myth. 2A was added to ensure that the States could bring forth the militia for their own protection against insurrections, specifically at the time the Shays Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion. The States did not want the federal government disarming them and, indeed, they were hugely distrustful of a standing federal military, which led to subsequent problems in the British/American and Indian wars, but their protection against Federal interference was the underfunding of the Federal military, not the ability to create a militia.

However, it was also a given that the reason that the States could call upon an effective militia was that most everyone had a gun anyway. That was protected, if they felt sufficiently paranoid to think it necessary, by the State constitution. Remember, the Commerce Clause thing was still 150 years away, and incorporation over 200 years, the idea that gun laws affecting the individual person could be created by the Federal Government was not contemplated at the time.

Overheal · 06-05-2022 1:25am

Public freakout...

https://twitter.com/ColinGBooth/status/1522232989941485568?s=20&t=oZwI3h7bmmfeoVsbnVEhfQ

Goldengirl · 06-05-2022 1:45am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020498#Comment_119020498

And values women .

So much anti abortion sentiment appears to come from an an angle that seeks to punish and criminalise instead of helping and supporting .

The problem with leaving it up to the individual states is

1. Is it in the interests of the majority in that state or is it just laws being made for the majority a powerful minority?

2. Not acceptable to criminalise those that then have to travel to have a termination and those that help ...

It is very cruel and retrograde no matter how it is presented.

On another note while I find this thread and the comments excellent and interesting , it is surprising, to say the least , that their is no thread discussion of our own current local interest story about the proposed National Maternity Hospital and the SVUH setting up a holding company with a catholic agenda to lease the land to the state .. have I missed it ?

Goldengirl · 06-05-2022 1:58am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021710#Comment_119021710

It's not the same at all.

People in Ireland own guns yes.

They are not allowed walk around in public places armed to the teeth at various outdoor events .

And am sure that many in the US don't carry arms in the street either but watching Election 2020 one would be forgiven for thinking that it was part of the uniform for many Republicans .

One eyed Jack · 06-05-2022 2:44am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021270#Comment_119021270

The Republican voter would ordinarily be cheering something like this as a campaign promise spectacularly delivered, but they aren't, because of the political backlash of actually getting rid of abortions.

Reading the above, I’m wondering is there an assumption that Republicans generally speaking care about abortion to even the same degree as they care about other issues besides abortion. I think the perception is certainly that they care about preventing abortion, at least it’s framed that way, but even from the Republican Charter you linked to earlier, Republicans don’t think in those terms -

DEFEND AMERICAN VALUES

Continue nominating constitutionalist Supreme Court and lower court judges
Protect unborn life through every means available
Defend the freedoms of religious believers and organizations
Support the exercise of Second Amendment rights

We know from numerous surveys that one of the main reasons given for why women have abortions is because of socioeconomic circumstances, so it would seem reasonable to focus on addressing the underlying socioeconomic circumstances than focusing on funding abortion providers. While I understand the reasons why you suggested Obama was faced with some difficult choices, the fact that he chose to withdraw funding from Texas Womens Healthcare programme because they wouldn’t provide abortions is hardly extending an olive branch, it’s putting people on low incomes living in poverty in an even poorer position -

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-contraception-texas-idUSBRE82E1CR20120316

Again, Trump restored funding -

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/01/22/donald-trump-restores-womens-health-funding-texas-stripped-obama/amp/

Not only did Trump restore funding for women’s healthcare in Texas though, he promised to remove funding for abortions provided by Planned Parenthood, and he delivered on that promise -

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1357/defund-planned-parenthood/

It wasn’t the only thing of course which forced something of a rethink in Planned Parenthood’s business model. At the same time, Cecile Richards, director of PP, could feel the chilly breeze of a change in the political winds, which forced her to throw the middle-class white women gathered in solidarity with each other, under the bus, by telling them they needed to “do better”, rather than leaving it all up to “women of colour” -

Richards credited women of color with many of these successes.

"These victories were led and made possible by women of color," Richards said.

She urged white women to join forces with women of color to change the nation.

"So, white women, listen up. We've got to do better. ... It is not up to women of color to save this country from itself. That's on all of us. That's on all of us," said Richards, who also heads the Planned Parenthood Action Fund.

"The good news is when we are in full on sisterhood, women are the most powerful, political force in America," she said.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/21/us/women-march-cecila-richards-trnd/index.html

A rabble-rousing speech that did more to divide the women present, than it did to extend an invitation to the women who weren’t. It was necessary though, because in spite of the fact that PP revenues for 2018/19 were $1.6 Bn ($600m of that coming from Government), they need to justify their continuing existence, somehow.

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/filer_public/2e/da/2eda3f50-82aa-4ddb-acce-c2854c4ea80b/2018-2019_annual_report.pdf

Cecile did a rather quick exit stage left after that performance.

Which brings us back to what do Black Americans really want from their elected representatives, because they sure as hell didn’t get it with Obama, and they weren’t going to get it with Hillary, which left them voting for a President they didn’t want; it came down to a choice between which party and which candidates best represent the issues that Black Americans actually care about, and they were faced with the same choice again in 2020:

https://youtu.be/3GLfyvOmxt0

Abortion just doesn’t normally register among the issues that Americans actually care about. A small minority of people will keep pushing it, but the vast majority of Americans care more about other issues which they feel are of greater importance than abortion for the tiny minority of middle class white women who want to keep pushing it by claiming abortion is an issue which affects all women. In reality what women care more about is being supported in being able to provide for themselves and their families, rather than feeling like they have to have an abortion because they feel they can’t afford to have a child, with that being portrayed by some people as “choice”. It’s not a choice when women are forced into having an abortion by necessity due to socioeconomic circumstances.

VinLieger · 06-05-2022 9:01am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021710#Comment_119021710

Are you aware of the difficulty in just obtaining a firearms license is in Ireland?

To receive one you need to get a Gardai background check, show evidence of a an adequate gun storage area with at least 2 secure doors, you are also legally restricted to a only own a small amount of ammo which if found to have more than this limit when your license is being renewed, which happens every 3 years, your license will then be revoked and you may very possibly be prosecuted and thats just a few of the restrictions.

In the US theres no limit on ammo, there's no recurring license renewal, theres no required proof of safe storage and absolutely none of the guns legally owned in Ireland are anything close to the likes of a fully automatic weapon you can walk into a shop, purchase and walk out again with, which you can do in many states in the US, in fact 177,000 of those owned in Ireland are just 2 shot sporting shotguns.

Igotadose · 06-05-2022 9:30am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021906#Comment_119021906

There's a fair amount of spinning in this post, but for now, let's just say that what we're discussing here, is the repeal of Roe V. Wade. Misinformation like 'funding abortion providers' (when in actuality, the Hyde amendment prevents the provider from using the funds for abortion -which is why Planned parenthood, for example, refuses to accept them.)

And, 600million for medical services that are provided by the USG, is peanuts compared to the enormous needs for child support in the US. We're talking tens of billions if not hundreds of billions that would need to be provided in the form of health care, schools, maternal and parental leave, etc.

Finally, changing subjects, Alito's reasoning could be used for the Feds to stop funding public schools. Republicans are champing at the bit at that one. They're not in the Constitution in fact.

https://www.salon.com/2022/05/05/life-after-roe-are-already-targeting-the-right-to-a-public-education/

Is there anything in the Constitution mandating a military?

hotmail.com · 06-05-2022 10:07am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021868#Comment_119021868

Quite the point.

Abortion services are terrible in Ireland with only 2 maternity hospitals in Ireland carrying out abortions and the vast majority of GPs not able or willing to provide abortion services despite them being legal.

Yet, many Irish want to engage in America's abortion debate.

You couldn't make it up.

Christy42 · 06-05-2022 10:40am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021906#Comment_119021906

Good to know we have someone here who can speak for the majority of women in the US.

But yeah Republicans have campaigned over this for years, the various supreme court judges lied about their opinions on this under oath because no one cares. It is weird, if no one cares then surely they aren't getting abortions and we can just agree to keep Roe vs Wade right? It is a weird thing with Republicans and social laws that they claim no one cares but they still want it the way they designed even though they seem not to care. We don't care but it absolutely has to be this way is a really weird sentence but seems to be what you think Republicans are.

As you say many black americans are left with difficult choices come election time as to which party will actually do something to help them (or not actively hurt them). It is an issue with first past the post in that you are more looking at who you want to avoid instead of who you want. Demographics of who votes Democrat and who votes Republican show that by a very large margin most African Americans believe Democrats to be the least worse option there. Plus as you also want to speak for Black women in the US, minorities make up the majority of abortions in spite of not being the majority. https://concernedwomen.org/abortion-demographics-who-has-an-abortion/. I can't speak for the majority of Black women obviously but what would say to those women about Republicans are looking after them?

Fine you want to reduce abortions through letting women actually afford the children? I am sure you will find many allies on the left. Lets start by ensuring that giving birth does not ever cost thousands as starting off in crazy debt just for giving birth to the child seems like a terrible idea. Lets increase sex education in schools so that teenagers are aware of birth control options. Lets ensure that jobs give adequate maternity/paternity leave so that people can take care of their newborns. Then once you have fixed all that and no women need an abortion for financial reasons we can talk Roe vs Wade. You see how removing access to abortions before ensuring those women don't need them is worse right?

Faugheen · 06-05-2022 2:25pm

https://youtu.be/lsK8cscdglY

Lawrence O'Donnell with an excellent monologue just summing up the fact that any Republican who is wholeheartedly against abortion is an absolute liar.

Also, anyone who watches this and takes some male victim complex away from it, don't bother.

ancapailldorcha · 06-05-2022 2:38pm

I just assume that conservatives lie by default and act in the worst possible faith these days. So far I feel vindicated.

Overheal · 06-05-2022 3:42pm

Yep now we are just chomping at the bit to overturn all manner of court decision now that Stare Decisis is dead and gone. Gov. Greg Abbott wants to relitigate Plyler v. Doe ... from 1982

https://www.mediaite.com/news/thats-ultra-maga-right-there-psaki-rips-texas-gov-greg-abbotts-plan-to-go-after-public-school-for-immigrants/

JRant · 06-05-2022 4:35pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119024259#Comment_119024259

Stare Decisis is not dead and gone. Talk about a complete overreaction. It was a draft opinion from one SC judge, draft being the key word.

JRant · 06-05-2022 4:45pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119023798#Comment_119023798

That's hilariously bad. He starts off with something that is completely untrue, almost misinformation if you will. This is not a SC decision. It's a leaked draft from one of the judges. He knows this, yet is willing to just bend the truth so he can have a lovely little tirade about creating a country of "rape dad's" whatever da fuq that means.

Overheal · 06-05-2022 4:53pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119024491#Comment_119024491

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119024544#Comment_119024544

True, (as I clearly caveated in the Original Post...) but given that the GOP is supporting a movement to keep the draft, in full, and that this is being decided upon by the same people they installed (corruptly, as I have argued exhaustively already) I (and the Governor of Texas, AND the state of Louisiana, etc. reportedly) are operating from the assumption that, in June, the court will uphold this draft (what most people see as the Worst Case, here, because what else worse could the Court decide at this point?).

So I disagree in full that it is somehow an overreaction to assume the worst when discussing this, given that state lawmakers are doing far more than discussing it, they are putting the draft decision effectively into action regardless. That, in my estimation, is the overreaction here.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/05/us/louisiana-abortion-bill-homicide.html

Overheal · 06-05-2022 4:53pm

Regarding #privacy...

https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7vzjb/location-data-abortion-clinics-safegraph-planned-parenthood

TomTomTim · 06-05-2022 5:01pm

Even RBG, a judge who was all but worshiped by the Democrats, disagreed with the initial ruling

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/05/06/ruth-bader-ginsburg-roe-wade/

If any of you really cared about the core of the issue you'd be talking about it in a legal sense, instead this thread is full of nonsense that has little to do with the legalities of it all. The outcome with be decided based on legal standards and not social standards, so all the shouting about "hating women" and "controlling women" is worthless.

Overheal · 06-05-2022 5:09pm

If any of you really cared about the core of the issue you'd be talking about it in a legal sense, instead this thread is full of nonsense that has little to do with the legalities of it all.

There's really no reason for a take like this; thanks for contributing it to the thread. That is interesting.

I've converted the link to free view for everyone, expires in June...

https://wapo.st/37sbWHK

The outcome with be decided based on legal standards and not social standards, so all the shouting about "hating women" and "controlling women" is worthless.

Worthless in an amicus brief, not useless at it regards the political conversation at the center of this issue.

monkeybutter · 06-05-2022 5:09pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119021710#Comment_119021710

that's versus at least 10 times as many guns per person in the US

you need a good reason to own the gun as being involved in hunting or a club etc

it took you 6 weeks to get said weapon with an actual proper background check

The people who have guns are more likely to have multiple, but less one offs because its not for home protection etc

So you can see the difference between here and schateside already, where you can buy much more than a shotgun in some places on the same day, in a walmart, **** all background checks

Christy42 · 06-05-2022 5:14pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119024612#Comment_119024612

The legalities that multiple people currently on the supreme court who were voted in by Republicans were fine with? The legalities are an excuse that none of the Republicans actually care about.

I mean if it is just the legal details that is the issue I am sure it can get codified in a better manner before this judgement comes out? I am presuming Republicans would be on board with this since it is just about the legal issues and nothing to do with the social manner. There is a vote next Wednesday I believe.

JRant · 06-05-2022 5:23pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119024581#Comment_119024581

You are of course entitled to your opinion. For me, it is an overreaction to a draft document, especially when the abandonment of Stare Decisis is brought into the discussion. Moreover, looking at the reasoning in the draft document it looks very very flimsy and that's being overly kind. I just can't see how that would have got past the other judges. Roe and Casey may very well have been a "bad" decision constitutionally but you don't replace bad law with more bad law.

New legislation is always being drafted and can often find itself in front of the SC, which is how this whole debacle started.

06-05-2022 6:07pm

The draft is very much so being viewed as close to the final version. So it's very much so being viewed as close to reality.

Goldengirl · 06-05-2022 6:48pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119024482#Comment_119024482

Yet our history of mass shootings is very very low ..must be some reason for that ?

Lack of a politicised gun culture glorifying " stopping power " as you put it .

Many people hunt for sport in Ireland whether you're for or against it .

Nobody ( unless organised crime) here encouraging people to carry guns to shoot other people .

JRant · 06-05-2022 7:47pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119024844#Comment_119024844

That's exactly my problem with this. It shouldn't be viewed as being close to the final version for a whole host of reasons.

Faugheen · 06-05-2022 8:41pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119025140#Comment_119025140

But the problem many have now is that a Justice can’t really change their mind now as that will look like they’re bowing to pressure from outside the court.

I can’t believe SC Justice writes a draft opinion where the person they quote as saying abortion is ‘murder’ was someone from the 17th century who believed in witches

US Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs Wade

Comments