Here you be:
Thank you. I have a better idea how what happened now.
This is true. We’re going to have to keep fighting these battles at least until/unless we manage to evolve into a better species. Which may never happen.
I didn’t mean that the Democrats were right in thinking this particular bit of the fight had been won indefinitely. But it’s a battle with a whole lot of fronts; and they expected this one to hold longer than it did.
And I still say that claiming this mess is the fault of the Democrats, rather than of the people on the other end of the rope, is a dangerous error.
A few do. Only 14% of Americans want to ban all abortion. only 9% want to ban contraceptives. However, the GOP is lining up to kiss the asses of some tiny minorities.
Just what the kremlin has been pushing- “Both parties are just as bad”. Trying to get voters to stay home.
Yes. It is a dynamic system and however lovely poetic metaphors about bending arcs may be, it can move backwards as well as forward. There needs to be a forward vector exerting force at all time, so forces pulling backward are not unhindered.
Right – I can believe that there were people out there expecting some sort of case directly challenging Roe in a stupidly obvious head-on fashion.
Instead what we have had for a long time has been a series of probing attacks striking at weak points until the time was ripe for a breakthrough. That left many people kind of lost – “wait, are we litigating what they did in Texas? In Arkansas? In Mississippi? didn’t we go through that two years ago? What is different now?” At any given time there have been cases moving through the system chipping away or opening a door for a willing majority to walk through, this time there finally was bith a willing majority and the kind of door they felt they could walk through confidently.
(Heck, I just heard a program on the radio where one of the interviewees commented that Planned Parenthood v. Casey, by including in its ruling that you could impose regulations on the access as long as they were not “undue burdens”, actually helped lead to the swarm of ever-more restrictive probe-the-envelope statutes and cases.)
I love this and it’s fantastic. I plan to present this argument to anyone who starts in with the “what difference does it make?” argument going forward.
Thanks for sharing it, @Ann_Hedonia.
In fact he says it is constitutional to expend law enforcement resources on arresting people for sodomy.
~Max
Or it could be funded with child support garnished from the parents wages, plus federal funds already set aside for foster care.
Which will your typical Republican state choose? Raising taxes, or not raising taxes?
~Max
The typical Republican state will choose “none of the above.” Once the babies are born, fuck 'em, they’re on their own.
In other words, force women to have unwanted babies, and then force them to pay for them.
Perhaps every male should be required to submit a DNA sample to a National Parental Database. This sample could be used to prove paternity in every case where a woman is required by the State to give birth to an unwanted child.
The father would then be required to pay for all child expenses, for 18 years, including compensating the mother for any time off work or other medical expenses for the birth or subsequent health issues arising from the birth.
Should the father be unable to pay for any of these expenses, because he is chronically unemployed, or incarcerated, or just bone lazy, then the State will need to step in to cover ALL child rearing expenses, as they are the ones responsible in law for mandating the birth.
Pro-life folks should applaud this, as it gives primary responsibility to the father, who participated in creating the child, and secondary responsibility to the State, who forced the child to exist. And as they are “pro-life”, they should be in favor of life from 0 - 18 years of age.
Except that it’s the woman’s responsibility. ‘She should have kept her legs closed.’ (And yes, I remember the comment saying I lacked imagination, but the phrase is actually a well-used one by the anti-choice crowd.)
Oh, and another thing. Everyone – especially politicians – who are pro-choice should stop using the term ‘pro-life’. They should say ‘anti-choice’. In addition, in their campaign ads they need to emphasise that their anti-choice are taking away peoples’ FREEDOM®. They should ask why Republicans hate America and want to put the American People under their thumbs. ‘Oh, but we can’t stoop to their level!’ Yes, we bloody can.
Anybody enjoy Trae Crowder - a/k/a “Liberal Redneck ?”
About three minutes. NSFW - LANGUAGE, and … if you don’t like the rapid-fire delivery of somebody who may/may not have had too many Red Bulls … he may not be your guy.
I love that guy. Always brilliant.
Or this tweet:
@AmoneyResists
(https://twitter.com/AmoneyResists)Republican legislator: “I do trust women. I trust women to control when they allow a man to ejaculate inside of them and to control that intake of semen.”
It’s all her responsibility all the time. 
Who else didn’t know the cervix was sentient?
If anything ever merited the “everyone in this room is dumber for having thad to listen to that” line…
(But of course that’s the thing, to them it’s all Magical Thinking and a Magical World… it’s not just a biological process involving gametes that just proceeds naturally, it’s something scripted and coreographed by a Higher Power, and the Good Women’s bodies will be enabled by the Power of Jesus to reject the impregnation if that is what is righteous.)
Maybe she could stop the sperm with a cervical collar.
So good! He can be President. Or sit on the Supreme Court. He’d seriously get my vote.
Ah, so women can control when men ejaculate? Some men cant even do that!
Magic mind power