US Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs Wade

I'm very much lost to the point you are trying to make. I don't know of anyone suggesting that if you are too poor you need to abort your pregnancy, but that seems to be your insinuation here, that the Pro-Choice movement wants to encourage someone who wants a pregnancy, to abort, because of socioeconomic factors:

Nah, that’s more of a by-product, as it were. The problem with their argument is that it hasn’t been borne out by reality. Every year the same issues are identified as to why women are having abortions (previously listed in the thread), and socioeconomic deprivation is the main reason. To suggest that any woman who is experiencing socioeconomic deprivation should have “the choice” to have an abortion, is addressing the symptoms, not the underlying cause.

It's like you dismiss the possibility that perhaps millions of women are already providing and supporting for the amount of children they already chose to have, which is Zero.

It’s not like that at all though 😂

That’s the sort of logical conclusion I’d expect of someone arguing that people with no children should be entitled to parental leave.

(obviously not an issue in the US, because of FAML, but I think you get the point)

Well they are, even if they choose not to have kids. You act as though you've never heard of nor taken a smoke break as a non-smoker, a coffee/tea break as a non-drinker, etc. so you understand the straight logic there. I have FMLA rights even if I don't have a Family. Hence the 14th Amendment, Equal Protection, Privacy.

I’ve heard of them, I just don’t take their argument any more seriously than I take the argument that people who aren’t parents should be entitled to parental leave.

Sure you could lump all of that under "socioeconomics" etc but it doesn't really tell the narrative that politicos want to sell.

Won’t cite the whole paragraph as I’m thinking you may wish to delete it later for privacy reasons, but yes, you could lump any of those reasons under socioeconomic circumstances, and it wouldn’t tell the narrative that the politicos want to tell. They’ve got plenty of their own in any case, just as gut-wrenching. They’re the basis of social policies though, not the law. It’s one thing that people have the right to privacy, it’s something else entirely whether or not they have a right to avail of an abortion, and under what circumstances is an abortion permitted to be performed by qualified medical professionals.

(FWIW, I argued in favour of the “Childfree by Choice” forum on here. Not the name I’d have gone with, but in practice it amounts to the same idea, I wasn’t going to quibble over the details)

I do hope that Mississippi actually do get the finger out, and ensure that among generations to come that it isn’t necessary for women to be forced into making the decision to have an abortion because they aren’t in a position to support themselves and their families. Far more women in those circumstances are having abortions than the wedge issue of children being raped by their fathers being used to argue it’s a private matter.

Nobody has argued that, least of all in the thread. Nor did I suggest you take family leave if you aren't the parent or guardian.

I think I may have misinterpreted what you meant here then when I referred to parental leave, and then I remembered you’re in the US, where the equivalent of parental leave is FML -

It's like you dismiss the possibility that perhaps millions of women are already providing and supporting for the amount of children they already chose to have, which is Zero.

-

It’s not like that at all though 😂 

That’s the sort of logical conclusion I’d expect of someone arguing that people with no children should be entitled to parental leave.

(obviously not an issue in the US, because of FAML, but I think you get the point)

-

Well they are, even if they choose not to have kids. You act as though you've never heard of nor taken a smoke break as a non-smoker, a coffee/tea break as a non-drinker, etc. so you understand the straight logic there. I have FMLA rights even if I don't have a Family.

This sort of thing:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/05/technology/parents-time-off-backlash.html

If Mississippi were to introduce policies which address the issue of higher maternal and infant mortality rates among the black population, and white people started claiming discrimination because they weren’t being treated equally, I’d wonder were they a bit special tbh.

https://m.jacksonfreepress.com/news/2019/may/23/mississippi-debates-abortion-maternal-mortality-re/

The nuns found in 1950s and 60s Ireland that nobody wanted to buy adopt the babies that were a bit brown. Hopefully won't be an issue in Alito's racially tolerant and oh so caring American Utopia just around the corner...

Even worse is his invocation of Matthew Hale. Absolutely horrendous stuff.

This argument always baffles me.

Who is forcing you to create a child? Really? People participate in risky sexual behaviour that they know may result in a child being created all the time and when it happens aren't willing to accept their mistake and deal with the consequences.

And as for rape, about 1% of abortions are because of rape according to Guttmacher Institute (a left leaning pro-abortion institute).

1%. So unless you're willing to discuss outlawing abortion in 99% of cases which aren't rape and allowing it in the case of rape then I don't want to hear you justify widespread abortion by invoking rape victims.

First of all, who said anything about abandoning children born in poverty? Second of all, we're talking about abortion. The killing of unborn children. Are you saying it's better for a child to be aborted (killed in the womb) than be born into poverty. It's a disgusting argument. To pretend you're looking out for the welfare of a child to prevent it from being born into poverty by killing it before that happens.

As I said with regard to the rape argument. Are you telling me all that if there was to your satisfaction a comprehensive welfare state, then you'd be willing to restrict or ban abortion? Is that what you're telling me? That we'd be on the same side if only there was universal healthcare and free education?

Somehow I doubt that.

Oh no! Not stare decisis!

Just more of people acting like they care about the "norms" and "procedures" of law and government when it doesn't go their way.

First of all if Stare Decisis were absolute then Dredd Scott wouldn't have been overturned, the decision that said blacks couldn't not be treated as citizens.

As Alito explains well in the decision, Stare Decisis can absolutely be overruled if a decision is as wrongly reasoned as both Roe and Dredd Scott.

So? We'll never eliminate all robberies and murders either. What's your point? Even if abortion is substantially reduced, any pro-lifer would consider that a net-win overall.

Since I never forced her to get pregnant in the first place I feel this is more than a tad less awful than being ripped up with a curette and sucked into a sink like her unborn child could be.

Abortion rates have been steadily declining already in the US as crisis pregnancy centres replace abortion clinics in red states and other trends like people having less sex in general.

This is about as relevant as the fact that a large proportion of women in general are pro-life. 43% in fact. I'm more interested in the merits of the issue.

Define "supposed to". Where does it say in the constitution that every nominee is entitled to hearings?

Also why do people think it's just the Senate's job to just rubber stamp whoever the President nominates? "advice and consent". That's the role of the Senate in nominations. If they don't like the cut of a nominee's jib they don't have to give him the time of day.

1% >>>0%. I mean I support full freedom of choice but this will leave many US states without protection for rape victims so it is still important for me.

As for healthcare and education. Well it would reduce the number of abortions. Surely less abortions is what you want.

As for abandoning in poverty well it seems obvious it happens, especially in the US. Any society that is willing to f*** over children as soon as they are born is at best paying lip service to caring about the unborn.