Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade (No longer a draft as of 06-24-2022.)

Politics & Elections
1181

I presume that you’re now setting aside some funds to pay for the fostering of, say, unwanted children born to rape victims in states that have “decided” to outlaw abortion entirely?

If you are applauding the removal of a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy that she doesn’t want, then it’s up to you, ethically speaking, to help deal with the consequences of that pregnancy being forced on her. At the very least, in cases when it’s unambiguously clear that she was in no way responsible for causing the pregnancy.

1182

I think women’s rights should be on the World Level not on the level of a state. I hate, hate, hate Religious exceptions. Practice your religion as you wish, but don’t enforce your tenets on anyone else.

1183

OTOH, religious exceptions is what some doctors are pushing to allow abortions in anti-choice states.

Not that I expect that to actually make it very far.

1184

Don’t you know? Women should take care of their ‘gifts from God’ like any good Christian.

1185

My comment was not pro- or anti-abortion. I was simply saying that any and all laws pertaining to abortion should be at the state level.

The problem with federal laws and regulations is that you have virtually no power to change them. Don’t like a federal law? Tough - you have no choice. The beauty of federalism is that you can choose which government works for you. There are fifty to choose from. If you don’t like your current government, you have the freedom to fire it and hire a different government. Can’t do that with the federal government.

The laws and regulations of each state are determined by the will of the people within that state. If I believe the will of the people conflicts with my values & beliefs, I am going to divorce myself from them and reside in a state that shares my values. It’s a nice system.

1186

Does that include abolishing the Hyde Amendment and the Mexico City Policy?

1187

A good many things about our ‘system’ are nice … for those of means (or who are not – by birth – members of minority/marginalized groups).

The question is how much interest each of us has in protecting the less fortunate (“Am I my brother’s keeper ?” “As you do to the least of my brethren, you shall do to me.”).

People are stuck in housing, in neighborhoods, in cities, and in states where nothing is working to their advantage – often institutionally so (ie, it’s not a bug; it’s a feature). So many people have absolutely zero opportunity to change their circumstances or get up and move elsewhere.

What of them ?

Voting to change the system is a disingenuous assertion, when we all know that one party is working harder than ever to have total and illegitimate control over that very system. If that part of the ‘system’ is something you value, stand up against these traitors at every opportunity, even when they do some things with which you agree.

1188

DJT has just won the 2024 election.

Unless Dems turn out in numbers that overwhelm Republicans’ tricks to make sure their votes don’t count.

And BTW:

And when DJT gets reelected, these conditions will STILL be in place and will STILL be Biden’s fault for the duration of trump’s next two terms, amirite?

:rage:

*I think this should have been “can’t.”

1189

No, I can see it, unfortunately.

And you’re right, the sinkhole this country becomes – except for the annointed few – under permanent Republican rule will somehow be the Democrat’s fault unto the seventh generation.

1190

I am.

If the state mandates a woman must have a baby, then it is incumbent on the state to provide food, shelter, medical care, education, etc. until the child’s 18th birthday. This would be easily funded by taxes. Sure, people would have to pay higher taxes; but they have the benefit of there being another child who would not otherwise exist.

Of course I think women have (not ‘should have’; ‘have’) the right to choose. But if their rights are taken away, then simply having the state pay for the care and upbringing of the child is a simple, fair compromise solution.

1191

This sentiment means absolutely nothing to those who put the rules of their god above the rules of mere mortals, especially if one of their god’s rules is to force those rules on others.

1192

Well, you see, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down, so she’s always responsible one way or the other.

1193

That makes sense. Howver, thats not a selling point for them.

1194

Yes, but that interpretation would have essentially permitted US Congress to place itself as a sort of an Appeal forum against State actions.
You are right of course as to the historical record. I do recall when Trump was talking about pardoning himself reading a couple of articles saying that he could this argument to pardon against State crimes. I did think that was a stretch.

1195

Work to change the system: contact your state representative. Contact your local reps. Get involved with state & local organizations. But you shouldn’t look to the federal government.

1196

Democrats are gerrymandering themselves, thus making the Electoral College and Senate skewed even more against themselves. When in fact they should be moving even more en masse into red states to purple-blue them.

1197

I already explained why “the system” can be unresponsive – or (not so) subtly hostile – to certain people and their interests.

Also – like voting – some people have serious economic pressures, no private transportation, work multiple jobs, have kids to feed, relatives to care for, no money, no time, etc.

What of them ?

What you suggest is, again, a luxury that many simply cannot afford.

But that’s just a tautology. It’s proof by assertion.

I might be okay (solely because I have the ability to do this) deciding that I will move from my state and to another state because I have some rather inexplicable, ideological obsession with speed limits.

But speed limits are a trifle relative to the notion of elementary and fundamental rights – the kind that we’re talking about: things like consenting adults being allowed to marry (or participate in virtually any kind of intimate activities they choose in the privacy of their own homes), what kind of health care I have access to, etc.

We have OSHA. We have Labor Laws. We have safe drinking water laws, food and drug laws, environmental laws, minimum wage laws, and on and on and on.

And they’re Federal.

We have these so that Connecticut doesn’t have to compete with Alabama in a race to the bottom – the latter allowing open toxic waste dumping, forced child labor, sweat shops, and “third world” sanitation standards.

We also have Civil Rights laws to allow minorities to have the franchise of voting, to keep businesses from denying them seating at the lunch counter or open seating on a bus.

I mean … the tautologies are extremely tiresome at this point. They are impediments to solving problems, and problems exist.

[now: broadly, and not meaning to single you out]

For the ideologues who incessantly trumpet their abiding love for this country, whatever is great about this country is great in spite of their ideology and patriotism, not because of it. For the most part, they stand in the way of doing the very kinds of things they trumpet as the best features of the USA.

1198

Ah, I see. My bad. Sorry.

Hmmm… that smells a lot like SOCIALISM. No God-fearing Christian can support stinkin’ baloney like that. Not the gummint’s problem, federal or local.

1199

The idea of moving to somewhere you don’t want to live in order to move the election by a tiny fraction of a percent isn’t as conducive as one may think.

And the idea of moving out of a hellhole, and moving to somewhere that is more pleasant to live, while giving up a tiny fraction of a percent of electoral power in your previous location is pretty reasonable.

1200

Not at all. It’s Capitalism. The People want more babies. Capitalism demands that people pay for what they want.