|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On May 03 2022 11:01 Doc.Rivers wrote:It's about what the law is, not what policy should be. The latter is up to the legislature, not the Supreme Court. A woman's right to choose is not part of the constitution (and it is premised on a concept, substantive due process, that is itself not part of the constitution), which means that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided.
To be in favor of restricting a woman's or girl's bodily autonomy is not going to look great as time marches on. There are hundreds of things not in the actual constitution that we hold as important rights or laws. GOP has doomed themselves these midterms. Anti vaccines leads to more deaths in republican states. Election was stolen so it doesn't matter anyways will lead to less voters. And even entertaining the idea of overturning Roe v Wade will lead to a Democratic surge.
Might as well be in the reverse position and throw out the second amendment. I'm sure Republicans wouldn't show up at the ballot* with 50% plus the usual turnout
|
It's almost too good to be true, it's too hard believe they are actually going to do it. Meanwhile of course whoever leaked this needs to be outed and disbarred. This will be another time where the "norms" crowd show their hypocrisy. This is 100% a to put pressure on wobblers.
I don't see this having as much of an impact on the midterms as people think. Energy will immediately shift the to the states, as it should. Some states will have sane laws and some like CA will have monstrous laws. Meanwhile, Democrats are already maxed out with some demographics, like white women with degrees. There are fewer votes for this to shift. Dems still going to easily lose the House and likely the Senate.
|
What the fuck is even happening? I cannot wait to get out of this country for good
|
On May 03 2022 11:23 Introvert wrote:
It's almost too good to be true, it's too hard believe they are actually going to do it. Meanwhile of course whoever leaked this needs to be outed and disbarred. This will be another time where the "norms" crowd show their hypocrisy. This is 100% a to put pressure on wobblers.
I don't see this having as much of an impact on the midterms as people think. Energy will immediately shift the to the states, as it should. Some states will have sane laws and some like CA will have monstrous laws. Meanwhile, Democrats are already maxed out with some demographics, like white women with degrees. There are fewer votes for this to shift. Dems still going to easily lose the House and likely the Senate.
Yeah that is a good point that whoever leaked this should be disbarred ASAP.
|
this person is completely misrepresenting the argument and deliberately taking things out of context.
the section he described as criticising Lawrence v Texas does not criticise the case at all.
It’s just saying that it is going too far to apply the logic in those cases to abortion.
|
Ok conservatives. You may win this round but youll lose the war. Theres a special place in hell for the psycopaths running your party.
If you really gave a fuck about abortion youd provide free access to contraceptives and reduce unwanted pregnancies but of course you are against those too.
Lets just hope you get your wish and have these conservative bastions of freedom. See how many of the educated non-psycopaths choose to live in your hellholes. I hope you enjoy the handmaids tale.
|
United States42871 Posts
There is a pretty strong precedent for not letting state legislatures decide what rights people have. They’re historically speaking not very good at it. The US needs a central authority protecting rights. Acting like it can be left to individual states ignores a long history of abuse by those states.
|
I didn't honestly think that they would go for roe v wade first. Useing white nationalist justifications and signaling that they're going to go for other decisions to pull the nation back decades.
At least the dems don't have to worry about finding a message for the midterms anymore. Nail down any republican on human rights issues and rally the base around wanting to live in the 2000's and not the 1900's.
On May 03 2022 11:23 Introvert wrote:
It's almost too good to be true, it's too hard believe they are actually going to do it. Meanwhile of course whoever leaked this needs to be outed and disbarred. This will be another time where the "norms" crowd show their hypocrisy. This is 100% a to put pressure on wobblers.
I don't see this having as much of an impact on the midterms as people think. Energy will immediately shift the to the states, as it should. Some states will have sane laws and some like CA will have monstrous laws. Meanwhile, Democrats are already maxed out with some demographics, like white women with degrees. There are fewer votes for this to shift. Dems still going to easily lose the House and likely the Senate.
The swing in that case is white women without degrees. Being fundamentally against their rights as humans and bringing the country decades in reverse isn't going to be popular with them.
|
On May 03 2022 12:07 Sermokala wrote:
I didn't honestly think that they would go for roe v wade first. Useing white nationalist justifications and signaling that they're going to go for other decisions to pull the nation back decades.
At least the dems don't have to worry about finding a message for the midterms anymore. Nail down any republican on human rights issues and rally the base around wanting to live in the 2000's and not the 1900's.
I have negative faith in the Democratic party to do that. Roe v. Wade's been on the books for five decades and not once did any Democratic majority or supermajority in the federal government protect it, nor any other major social progress since what, the civil rights act? I literally have zero idea why anyone should vote Democrat when the result of losing our rights is the same. I voted blue in every general election and my rights are still being stripped. What's the point?
|
On May 03 2022 12:11 plasmidghost wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2022 12:07 Sermokala wrote:
I didn't honestly think that they would go for roe v wade first. Useing white nationalist justifications and signaling that they're going to go for other decisions to pull the nation back decades.
At least the dems don't have to worry about finding a message for the midterms anymore. Nail down any republican on human rights issues and rally the base around wanting to live in the 2000's and not the 1900's. I have negative faith in the Democratic party to do that. Roe v. Wade's been on the books for five decades and not once did any Democratic majority or supermajority in the federal government protect it, nor any other major social progress since what, the civil rights act? I literally have zero idea why anyone should vote Democrat when the result of losing our rights is the same. I voted blue in every general election and my rights are still being stripped. What's the point?
Because if you vote Red you effectively sign yourself up for the gas chamber if you aren't a part of the in group (isn't this something you can picture Tucker saying? How sick is it that they have destroyed political discourse in our country with their bullshit)
At least if you vote blue you can effectively cancel some assholes vote out. Just think of it as taking away the voice from a bigot.
|
I half think this was Alito or someone under his direction leaking it because his office wants his draft out there before the language gets neutered while keeping the impact identical.
|
Interesting development. I don't support restricting abortion, personally, and am rather surprised that this is being targeted at our highest court. It's one of only two issues I actually give a shit about, but can at least understand where conservatives are coming from. Really does suck for those who live in red states who will be looking for safe abortions, though. It's unfortunate to see any civil liberties being chipped away, from my perspective. Curious to see whether this officially happens or not, what the public backlash may be, and how different states will react.
I genuinely did not think I'd see the day where Roe would be brought to the federal chopping block. Quite intense.
On May 03 2022 11:23 Introvert wrote:
It's almost too good to be true, it's too hard believe they are actually going to do it. Meanwhile of course whoever leaked this needs to be outed and disbarred. This will be another time where the "norms" crowd show their hypocrisy. This is 100% a to put pressure on wobblers.
I don't see this having as much of an impact on the midterms as people think. Energy will immediately shift the to the states, as it should. Some states will have sane laws and some like CA will have monstrous laws. Meanwhile, Democrats are already maxed out with some demographics, like white women with degrees. There are fewer votes for this to shift. Dems still going to easily lose the House and likely the Senate.
Just wondering, since you are one of the only true conservatives that hasn't been banned still posts here, which part of the question around abortion do you stand for? Is it an issue of states rights, fetal rights, both, or perhaps something I am overlooking?
|
On May 03 2022 12:02 KwarK wrote:
There is a pretty strong precedent for not letting state legislatures decide what rights people have. They’re historically speaking not very good at it. The US needs a central authority protecting rights. Acting like it can be left to individual states ignores a long history of abuse by those states.
There are a few historical issues that make this a very complicated topic.
First is the history of constitutional rights in the US. The Bill of Rights, comprising the first ten amendments to the US Constitution, described certain rights that were inviolable by the government. Within it was the Ninth amendment, which states that the other 9 amendments in the Bill of Rights do not exclude other constitutional rights, so called unenumerated rights, from existing.
In practice this has allowed courts to declare other rights as unenumerated rights. Unfortunately, the courts don't always represent public opinion on what is a right, and the courts have been disastrously wrong in the past as well. Times also change and what was not considered a right may now be regarded as one.
The 'proper' way would have been to introduce amendments to the constitution to enumerate those existing rights as they become general consensus. Unfortunately, changing the Constitution is almost impossible, so we are left with three real solutions for determining what 'rights' exist.
1. Executive decision - This seems like an awful idea for good reason and can be discarded.
2. Legislative decision - Laws may be passed to recognize certain rights. Since the legislature represents the people, it in theory means the people decide what rights they recognize.
3. Judicial decision - this is what we have mostly, and in my opinion is unworkable, because judges are not representative of the people, and what rights a society offers its citizens is an inherently political issue.
|
On May 03 2022 12:11 plasmidghost wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2022 12:07 Sermokala wrote:
I didn't honestly think that they would go for roe v wade first. Useing white nationalist justifications and signaling that they're going to go for other decisions to pull the nation back decades.
At least the dems don't have to worry about finding a message for the midterms anymore. Nail down any republican on human rights issues and rally the base around wanting to live in the 2000's and not the 1900's. I have negative faith in the Democratic party to do that. Roe v. Wade's been on the books for five decades and not once did any Democratic majority or supermajority in the federal government protect it, nor any other major social progress since what, the civil rights act? I literally have zero idea why anyone should vote Democrat when the result of losing our rights is the same. I voted blue in every general election and my rights are still being stripped. What's the point?
I am pretty sure that any federal legislative law or action enumerating any part of Roe v Wade (right to privacy, right to abortion, whatever) would be struck down by any court that would strike down Roe. Short of a constitutional amendment, of course, but a world where an amendment supporting Roe v Wade would pass is one where no court would ever overturn it. Can't imagine the arguments offhand but they could certainly find them.
Will be interesting/incredibly depressing to see if SCOTUS also supports reinstating sodomy laws.
|
On May 03 2022 12:11 plasmidghost wrote:
I literally have zero idea why anyone should vote Democrat when the result of losing our rights is the same. I voted blue in every general election and my rights are still being stripped. What's the point?
You'd stop voting for a party because bad stuff happens when they lose?
You vote for Party A.
Party A loses.
Party B does something you hate, which Party A would not have done.
"I hate that. See if I ever vote for Party A again."
It doesn't make sense.
Your rights are being stripped not because you voted blue, but because Trump won in 2016 and nominated three Supreme Court Justices. If you don't like this outcome, you had better carry on voting blue.
|
I gotta say, i find the gleeful reaction by our resident "conservatives" to taking away womens rights kind of scary. Also, the immediate jump to the need for punishing whistleblowers.
|
Well, if Democrats had any hope for the midterms this was probably one of the reasons why. They should be jumping for joy at having such a clear rallying cry during a midterm year.
|
Really goes to show that the GOP strategy of subverting democracy so they can win at all costs pays off. Steal a SCOUTS appointment then a moron who lost the popular vote gets to throw two more cronies onto the court and this is the result. Sprinkle in a bunch of crap propaganda to convince ignorant Christians that abortion is an issue they should care about (its not, it was manufactured) and boom its all coming together folks. The ring wing in this country played the long game with identity politics and it has bore fruit. Though lets not forget its really not about Roe v Wade its about keeping the corrupt in power and manufacturing social issues like abortion was a means to an end.
|
Turns out when you’re ready to do whatever it takes to win you’re more successful. Wish Democrats had the balls to play the game so aggressively and successfully.
|
12 red states have passed so called "trigger laws" which will immediately ban or restrict abortion as soon as Rowe v Wade is overturned. You do kind of have to marvel at the organization and long thinking of the GOP in the narrow realm of how to grasp for power and control. It's a shame that they have no morality except selections of the Old Testament.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
