Roe v. Wade on the verge of being overturned?

[bmw]

What restrictions are you talking about? As it stands right now, everyone still has the right to an abortion. Roe has not yet been overturned.

And even if it is, tell me which states where it will then be illegal to have an abortion in the instances of non-consensual intercourse?

Moreover, between now and then, Congress could nuke the filabuster and pass into federal law the same protections currently contained in Roe. If they choose not to do so, it would be only because they think this is a political winner for them come November.

[Lester The Nightfly]

What restrictions are you talking about? As it stands right now, everyone still has the right to an abortion. Roe has not yet been overturned.

And even if it is, tell me which states where it will then be illegal to have an abortion in the instances of non-consensual intercourse?

Moreover, between now and then, Congress could nuke the filabuster and pass into federal law the same protections currently contained in Roe. If they choose not to do so, it would be only because they think this is a political winner for them come November.

So it really comes down to politics. So much for all that fire and brimstone rightlessness about the fetus, all you guys care about is sticking it to the libs. Nice legacy.

[bmw]

I'm just stating the realities of what may or may not happen. I didn't state an opinion on any of it.

For what it's worth, it is my belief that restrictions on abortions should be set exclusively at the federal level. The weighing of a woman's right to choose against whatever rights a fetus may have should be decided federally and applied uniform across all 50 states. I am pro-life, but I also recognize that criminalizing abortions is not necessarily the solution. All that said, I do find the pro-choice position, insofar as it is rooted in the belief that the government has no business what goes on inside your body, to be highly hypocritical for those who have no qualms with government-mandated vaccinations.

[Matt]

What restrictions are you talking about? As it stands right now, everyone still has the right to an abortion. Roe has not yet been overturned.

And even if it is, tell me which states where it will then be illegal to have an abortion in the instances of non-consensual intercourse?

Moreover, between now and then, Congress could nuke the filabuster and pass into federal law the same protections currently contained in Roe. If they choose not to do so, it would be only because they think this is a political winner for them come November.

So it really comes down to politics. So much for all that fire and brimstone rightlessness about the fetus, all you guys care about is sticking it to the libs. Nice legacy.

The release of the draft was absolutely political. I can't imagine this will be released until later in June, when big decisions come down.

[Lester The Nightfly]

I'm just stating the realities of what may or may not happen. I didn't state an opinion on any of it.

For what it's worth, it is my belief that restrictions on abortions should be set exclusively at the federal level. The weighing of a woman's right to choose against whatever rights a fetus may have should be decided federally and applied uniform across all 50 states. I am pro-life, but I also recognize that criminalizing abortions is not necessarily the solution. All that said, I do find the pro-choice position, insofar as it is rooted in the belief that the government has no business what goes on inside your body, to be highly hypocritical for those who have no qualms with government-mandated vaccinations.

There were no federal mandated vaccinations. This from the CDC:

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Emergency Temporary Standard applies to all employers with 100+ employees and requires all employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 or be tested on a weekly basis and to have a negative test before coming to work.

So if you have an issue with that perhaps take it up with entities that were mandating it such as state, local and business interests, but I'll play your game, how is it you reconcile being against "invasive" vaccination and the invasiveness of government having a say in reproductive rights. The hypocritical cuts both ways.

Also, if you want to equate taking a jab with being compelled to raise a child to the age of emancipation it's certainly within your rights. Speaking of rights, what of all the chatter about state's rights when you seem to find it acceptable to make this issue the exception? Disingenuous at best.

[bmw]

There were no federal mandated vaccinations. This from the CDC:

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Emergency Temporary Standard applies to all employers with 100+ employees and requires all employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 or be tested on a weekly basis and to have a negative test before coming to work.

There absolutely were (and still are) federal vaccine mandates. For healthcare works. For federal employees. For military members.

That aside, my point was that those who are vehemently opposed to abortion regulations SUPPORT IN PRINCIPLE government-mandated vaccines for everyone. Numerous polls show this. Hell, a poll last year showed that the majority of Democrats favored CRIMINALIZING the act of simply publicly questioning vaccine efficacy.

...how is it you reconcile being against "invasive" vaccination and the invasiveness of government having a say in reproductive rights. The hypocritical cuts both ways.

You must have missed the part where I said "consensual." Pregnancy doesn't happen by magic. In the instance where you consensually engage in the very behavior that leads to you getting pregnant, you take on the responsibility that comes from any consequences of your actions.

Also, if you want to equate taking a jab with being compelled to raise a child to the age of emancipation

That's a bullshit claim. Nothing requires a parent to raise his/her child once born. They're called "safe haven laws." Look them up.

Speaking of rights, what of all the chatter about state's rights when you seem to find it acceptable to make this issue the exception? Disingenuous at best.

I view abortion not as an issue of choice, but as an issue of life. Either an unborn child has rights or it doesn't. And if it does, that is a Constitutional, and thus federal issue.

[km1125]

Keep up with the news, blanket restrictions are already in place. If you want to find some moral equivalency in not wearing a mask verses the distinct possibility that at Thanksgiving dinner you'll be sharing a meal with the man who raped your daughter (who also, by the way, could be Uncle Frank), go right ahead. I wouldn't expect any different from you.

Just curious how any law allowing or preventing abortion impacts that bolded statement?

[Lester The Nightfly]

Keep up with the news, blanket restrictions are already in place. If you want to find some moral equivalency in not wearing a mask verses the distinct possibility that at Thanksgiving dinner you'll be sharing a meal with the man who raped your daughter (who also, by the way, could be Uncle Frank), go right ahead. I wouldn't expect any different from you.

Just curious how any law allowing or preventing abortion impacts that bolded statement?

Parental rights. Even if "dad" is a rapist or an incestuous relative (who well could be the woman's own father) they still have parental rights and are entitled to all that goes with those rights. Those rights may be suspended but that would mean going to court, one more opportunity to traumatize the victim, but isn't that the idea, shame the victim because she probably was asking for it anyway? If that was a concern, why wouldn't lawmakers offer exceptions?

Nope it's pass the mashed potatoes, you're part of the family now...

[Honeyman]

Such bullshit....safe haven laws...an issue of life, not choice.....

Easy for men to say that shit and make laws accordingly. Of course they don't have to carry the kid for 9 months or go thru childbirth.

[TC Talks]

Repealing R v W would only trigger this... Why don't the Catholics and Evangelicals just move to one of the ignorant states?

[bmw]

Such bullshit....safe haven laws...an issue of life, not choice.....

Easy for men to say that shit and make laws accordingly. Of course they don't have to carry the kid for 9 months or go thru childbirth.

Are you suggesting that fathers don't have an interest equal to that of the mother in the birth of their child?

[Lester The Nightfly]

What restrictions are you talking about? As it stands right now, everyone still has the right to an abortion. Roe has not yet been overturned.

And even if it is, tell me which states where it will then be illegal to have an abortion in the instances of non-consensual intercourse?

Moreover, between now and then, Congress could nuke the filabuster and pass into federal law the same protections currently contained in Roe. If they choose not to do so, it would be only because they think this is a political winner for them come November.

So it really comes down to politics. So much for all that fire and brimstone rightlessness about the fetus, all you guys care about is sticking it to the libs. Nice legacy.

The release of the draft was absolutely political. I can't imagine this will be released until later in June, when big decisions come down.

Why shouldn't it be political? Seems to me waiting until the elections are over to then spring this on voters is just as politically dishonest, and besides, if the GOP seems to believe this is a winning issue for them they should be welcoming the information being released prior to an election. If they win a bunch of elections because of this, swell, the people's choice will have been made. If they lose a bunch of elections because of this the people's choice will still have been made. To the best of my understanding that's how a democracy works...

[Honeyman]

Such bullshit....safe haven laws...an issue of life, not choice.....

Easy for men to say that shit and make laws accordingly. Of course they don't have to carry the kid for 9 months or go thru childbirth.

Are you suggesting that fathers don't have an interest equal to that of the mother in the birth of their child?

Yes.

[TC Talks]

What restrictions are you talking about? As it stands right now, everyone still has the right to an abortion. Roe has not yet been overturned.

And even if it is, tell me which states where it will then be illegal to have an abortion in the instances of non-consensual intercourse?

Moreover, between now and then, Congress could nuke the filabuster and pass into federal law the same protections currently contained in Roe. If they choose not to do so, it would be only because they think this is a political winner for them come November.

So it really comes down to politics. So much for all that fire and brimstone rightlessness about the fetus, all you guys care about is sticking it to the libs. Nice legacy.

The release of the draft was absolutely political. I can't imagine this will be released until later in June, when big decisions come down.

Why shouldn't it be political? Seems to me waiting until the elections are over to then spring this on voters is just as politically dishonest, and besides, if the GOP seems to believe this is a winning issue for them they should be welcoming the information being released prior to an election. If they win a bunch of elections because of this, swell, the people's choice will have been made. If they lose a bunch of elections because of this the people's choice will still have been made. To the best of my understanding that's how a democracy works...

The 1973 Roe v. Wade decision also was leaked to the press.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/ ... -roe-wade/

[Lester The Nightfly]

Such bullshit....safe haven laws...an issue of life, not choice.....

Easy for men to say that shit and make laws accordingly. Of course they don't have to carry the kid for 9 months or go thru childbirth.

Are you suggesting that fathers don't have an interest equal to that of the mother in the birth of their child?

Yes.

Hate to break it to you Chief, but the courts generally feel otherwise...