Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Cactus Jack » Sat May 07, 2022 8:41 am

I'm surprised not to have seen a thread on this already

A draft supreme court opinion, apparently by the conservative justice Samuel Alito, was leaked to Politico for a story published late on Monday. It appears to show that the court is preparing to rule in favour of Mississippi in a case over whether the state can outlaw nearly all abortions at and after 15 weeks gestation – a direct challenge to the guarantee of abortion rights enshrined in Roe v Wade.

The 98-page document, which includes 118 footnotes and a 31-page appendix on historical state abortion laws, was published in full. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” it says. “Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences.”

It says Roe v Wade “must be overruled” and goes on: “It is time to heed the constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... roe-v-wade

If anything shows the weakness of the American system of government it is that such an important matter has been left up in the air and unaddressed by the Federal government for as long as this has.

States claimed the rights to segregate, states claimed the rights to keep Black people off TV current affairs, states claimed the right to do many things that fly in the face of the US founding principal.

In every other country laws have been written, they have been argued, negotiated and renogotiated and changed as the science changes and social attitudes evolve. It hasn't been an easy conversation but the experience of Ireland where there was a constitutional ban on abortion shows how bad things can get for women when their right to make their own health decisions was taken away. Republican cowardice meant they have literally subverted the constitution - breaking the separation of Church and state and supporting an armed insurrection against the lawfully elected government - to get their way while Democrat cowardice has meant they have never seen it as politically expedient to introduce laws Republicans would have to vote against or repeal in order to take away women's reproductive rights.

Roe v Wade was left as the lone bulwark against Churches taking over the government and women being made second class citizens in the US. The scandal isn't that the single line of defence is being breached, it's that it was the single line of defence.
User avatar
Cactus Jack
 
Posts: 21801
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:15 pm
Location: Round yer somewhere

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Stooo » Sat May 07, 2022 2:33 pm

I hear that Louisiana is considering banning IUD's for shits and giggles, wanking is probably next.
User avatar
Stooo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 118857
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:24 am
Location: Waiting for the great leap forward

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Cactus Jack » Sat May 07, 2022 4:10 pm

A number of states have laws on the books that seriously limit a woman's reproductive rights.

In Texas any doctor who terminates a pregnancy for any reason whatsoever, including to save the life of the mother, will be guilty of felony murder with a mandatory life sentence. As written said will law apply even if the doctor and whoever signs the forms to allow life saving surgery is completely unaware the woman is pregnant and no matter what stage of gestation.
User avatar
Cactus Jack
 
Posts: 21801
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:15 pm
Location: Round yer somewhere

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Holly » Mon May 09, 2022 10:50 am

Cactus Jack wrote:A number of states have laws on the books that seriously limit a woman's reproductive rights.

In Texas any doctor who terminates a pregnancy for any reason whatsoever, including to save the life of the mother, will be guilty of felony murder with a mandatory life sentence. As written said will law apply even if the doctor and whoever signs the forms to allow life saving surgery is completely unaware the woman is pregnant and no matter what stage of gestation.


At what stage of pregnancy would you think an abortion is still acceptable?
User avatar
Holly
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15849
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 3:25 pm

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Guest » Mon May 09, 2022 2:22 pm

Holly wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:A number of states have laws on the books that seriously limit a woman's reproductive rights.

In Texas any doctor who terminates a pregnancy for any reason whatsoever, including to save the life of the mother, will be guilty of felony murder with a mandatory life sentence. As written said will law apply even if the doctor and whoever signs the forms to allow life saving surgery is completely unaware the woman is pregnant and no matter what stage of gestation.


At what stage of pregnancy would you think an abortion is still acceptable?

He's a man - his opinion doesn't count.
User avatar
Guest
 

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Cactus Jack » Mon May 09, 2022 4:38 pm

Guest wrote:
Holly wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:A number of states have laws on the books that seriously limit a woman's reproductive rights.

In Texas any doctor who terminates a pregnancy for any reason whatsoever, including to save the life of the mother, will be guilty of felony murder with a mandatory life sentence. As written said will law apply even if the doctor and whoever signs the forms to allow life saving surgery is completely unaware the woman is pregnant and no matter what stage of gestation.


At what stage of pregnancy would you think an abortion is still acceptable?

He's a man - his opinion doesn't count.

I'll be fair that's a pretty reasonable position.

However let's flip the question and see where Holly stands.

A baby is born. It will not live long and for as long as it lives it will be in excruiating pain but it can be kept alive for any amount of time. There is no possiblility whatsoever its situation will improve, it will only ever be in excruiating pain but you can prolong this for as long as you want.

How long before you murder this baby?

That Baby should never have been born. Various tests in the first 16 weeks will show abnormalities. No need to wait till late pregnancy before the Mother decides she wants am abortion.
User avatar
Cactus Jack
 
Posts: 21801
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:15 pm
Location: Round yer somewhere

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Stooo » Mon May 09, 2022 7:47 pm

Holly wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:A number of states have laws on the books that seriously limit a woman's reproductive rights.

In Texas any doctor who terminates a pregnancy for any reason whatsoever, including to save the life of the mother, will be guilty of felony murder with a mandatory life sentence. As written said will law apply even if the doctor and whoever signs the forms to allow life saving surgery is completely unaware the woman is pregnant and no matter what stage of gestation.


At what stage of pregnancy would you think an abortion is still acceptable?


According to Genesis life begins at the first breath and the only mention of abortion from the book that championed killing first borns etc was in Numbers ( 5:11–31) where it is discussed as bitter water (similar to gin I guess :dunno: ) as a way to sort things out 'if she has strayed'. Ban viagra, HRT, glasses; it's all God's will after all and we should accept it, it's strange how the RW curves around to a religion that at it's extremes declares everything 'God's will'.

So that's the religion bit sorted :thumbsup:

Story time:

When my mum was in labour with me there were massive complications and she was on her last legs after nine hours, she was as skinny as me :yikes: My dad was asked the wife or child question because things were looking bad and he chose my mum instead of the unborn me, luckily (heh) I survived the C-section rather than being stillborn and being forcibly aborted (the same thing) rather than birthed, abortion was acceptable until I was born. Ectopic pregnancy? Life in prison for killing what is killing you.

For any sort of healthcare to be drawn into culture wars is pathetic and when it's taking away rights about your own body and what you do with it, what the heck...

You'd call that communism or socialism or woke or something like that, perhaps link it to the fascist RW "communist" Russian State perhaps :dunno: Russia isn't communist, China isn't communist, North Korea isn't communist, they are fascist and dictatorial autocracies that our RW leaders aspire our countries to be like aided by a client press of courtiers led by Murdoch, I have no idea why some people are like this.

TL;DR: This isn't about abortion, it's about control of your own body by the state and this is where they are starting it.

There you go, that's defined as woke. How much do you find it a threat to you?
User avatar
Stooo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 118857
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:24 am
Location: Waiting for the great leap forward

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Holly » Tue May 10, 2022 12:39 am

OMG guys, you've got me so damn wrong. I'm not some religious nutter, I'm not practicing any religion :ooer:

I'm absolutely not against abortion at all, I totally support "my body, my choice" I actually had one myself when I was 18, but I had it at 13 weeks.

I used to look after a little girl that was born with microcephaly ( under developed brain). Her Mother knew early on in her pregnancy that her child will be severely disabled and will never have any quality of life. She was offered an abortion, but due to her religious believes decided against it , even though I never saw or heard her going to church :roll:
That poor girl suffered so much in the few years she was alive. In and out of hospitals, numerous operations, couldn't talk, walk, hear, eat, plus so many more problems too many to mention. I was really angry with her Mother for having put her through so much pain when she had the opportunity to spare her.

However, I'm against late or end of pregnancy abortions unless there are health risks to the Mother. I just think that's morally wrong, nothing at all to do with religion.
I hope I cleared that up.
User avatar
Holly
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15849
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 3:25 pm

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Cactus Jack » Tue May 10, 2022 5:21 am

No it doesn't because you didn't answer my question.
User avatar
Cactus Jack
 
Posts: 21801
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:15 pm
Location: Round yer somewhere

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Holly » Tue May 10, 2022 5:51 am

Cactus Jack wrote:
Guest wrote:
Holly wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:A number of states have laws on the books that seriously limit a woman's reproductive rights.

In Texas any doctor who terminates a pregnancy for any reason whatsoever, including to save the life of the mother, will be guilty of felony murder with a mandatory life sentence. As written said will law apply even if the doctor and whoever signs the forms to allow life saving surgery is completely unaware the woman is pregnant and no matter what stage of gestation.


At what stage of pregnancy would you think an abortion is still acceptable?

He's a man - his opinion doesn't count.

I'll be fair that's a pretty reasonable position.

However let's flip the question and see where Holly stands.

A baby is born. It will not live long and for as long as it lives it will be in excruiating pain but it can be kept alive for any amount of time. There is no possiblility whatsoever its situation will improve, it will only ever be in excruiating pain but you can prolong this for as long as you want.

How long before you murder this baby?

That Baby should never have been born. Various tests in the first 16 weeks will show abnormalities. No need to wait till late pregnancy before the Mother decides she wants am abortion. I would never want to "murder" a life baby


I did answer your question, but I made a mistake quoting which I only just realised. I clicked the edit button instead of the quote one. I highlighted my answer in red.
User avatar
Holly
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15849
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 3:25 pm

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Cactus Jack » Tue May 10, 2022 8:30 pm

Holly wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:
Guest wrote:
Holly wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:A number of states have laws on the books that seriously limit a woman's reproductive rights.

In Texas any doctor who terminates a pregnancy for any reason whatsoever, including to save the life of the mother, will be guilty of felony murder with a mandatory life sentence. As written said will law apply even if the doctor and whoever signs the forms to allow life saving surgery is completely unaware the woman is pregnant and no matter what stage of gestation.


At what stage of pregnancy would you think an abortion is still acceptable?

He's a man - his opinion doesn't count.

I'll be fair that's a pretty reasonable position.

However let's flip the question and see where Holly stands.

A baby is born. It will not live long and for as long as it lives it will be in excruiating pain but it can be kept alive for any amount of time. There is no possiblility whatsoever its situation will improve, it will only ever be in excruiating pain but you can prolong this for as long as you want.

How long before you murder this baby?

That Baby should never have been born. Various tests in the first 16 weeks will show abnormalities. No need to wait till late pregnancy before the Mother decides she wants am abortion. I would never want to "murder" a life baby


I did answer your question, but I made a mistake quoting which I only just realised. I clicked the edit button instead of the quote one. I highlighted my answer in red.

Sadly those test could not detect diseases, accidents gestational dysfunctions that unfortunately sometimes just happen later in pregnancy. I know a woman who faced that choice, or the option to have a late termation so her child would never suffer a moment of pain.

A court in Texas in a few months would convict her of murder.
User avatar
Cactus Jack
 
Posts: 21801
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:15 pm
Location: Round yer somewhere

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Holly » Tue May 10, 2022 10:45 pm

Having seen how badly some of the children born with disabilities do suffer and have no quality of life what so ever, I'm absolutely in favour of late abortions, if the disability couldn't have been detected earlier.
But I do not support late abortions in perfectly healthy pregnancies.

ETA: To convict that Mother in Texas who made the choice not put her unborn through a lifetime of misery, is disgusting and outrages.
I'm not a RWN like you seem to believe, I do not support everything the right stands for, but I also do not agree with many things the left stands for, especially this new radical left.
User avatar
Holly
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15849
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 3:25 pm

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Cactus Jack » Wed May 11, 2022 5:50 am

Holly wrote:Having seen how badly some of the children born with disabilities do suffer and have no quality of life what so ever, I'm absolutely in favour of late abortions, if the disability couldn't have been detected earlier.
But I do not support late abortions in perfectly healthy pregnancies.

All I support is the right of a woman to make her own healthcare decisions, whatever stems from that is down to her personal beliefs and choices.

Apparently leaving things to individual choice is 'radical left'
User avatar
Cactus Jack
 
Posts: 21801
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:15 pm
Location: Round yer somewhere

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Holly » Wed May 11, 2022 6:35 am

Cactus Jack wrote:
Holly wrote:Having seen how badly some of the children born with disabilities do suffer and have no quality of life what so ever, I'm absolutely in favour of late abortions, if the disability couldn't have been detected earlier.
But I do not support late abortions in perfectly healthy pregnancies.

All I support is the right of a woman to make her own healthcare decisions, whatever stems from that is down to her personal beliefs and choices.

Apparently leaving things to individual choice is 'radical left'


Like I said, if Mum's life is at risk, absolutely, otherwise it's immoral to get an abortion at a late stage of pregnancy, when baby's are perfectly able to survive outside the womb . At that point a perfectly formed human baby's has a right to live. How can you even justify a late abortion because Mum has changed her mind and decided she doesn't want the baby after all? Do not forget, there are actually ways to prevent unwanted pregnancies. It's easier than having abortions.
A woman should know by the middle of her second trimester whether she wants to continue with her pregnancy or not.

ET: Has anyone in this debate actually taken the potential Fathers feelings into account?

Picture this...a couple is in love, they get pregnant, they're happy and are looking forward to the baby, bump is growing, they're oohing and aahing over the ultrasound images of the baby, buying toys, clothe, pram, crib etc...and then boom, things fall apart, couple separates, woman decides she doesn't want the kid anymore while in her second or even 3rd trimester. Is that OK?
User avatar
Holly
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15849
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 3:25 pm

Re: Roe v Wade SCOTUS Leak

Postby Raggamuffin » Wed May 11, 2022 7:45 am

What's going on over there? There seems to be a major movement towards really reducing abortions generally. Is it because too many women are abusing the system? I do think there should be strict regulations regarding abortion - the laws in the UK aren't really followed properly and we virtually have abortion on demand.
User avatar
Raggamuffin
 
Posts: 41373
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:51 am

Next

Return to US News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest