If we needed more proof that the GOP just uses unborn babies as political grandstanding, look no more than their record of helping kids out once they're born. Like the joke says, they go all out to help the unborn babies, but once they're born, fuck off you ain't getting MY money!
I like how they'll cry that it's not misogyny, racism or bigotry but then every thing they do basically creates more power for white males.
With Roe Under Threat, Sale of Location Data on Abortion Clinic Patients Raises Alarm "Companies that traffic in personal, geolocation, advertising, or other data could become digital crime scenes for eager prosecutors armed with subpoenas," said one expert on technology and gender. https://www.commondreams.org/news/2...on-data-abortion-clinic-patients-raises-alarm
Yep, all online traffic should be encrypted end to end. Not even your ISP should know what you're doing.
Texas GOP Governor Considers Challenging 1982 Ruling Requiring Free Public Education The leaked opinion showing the Supreme Court's right-wing majority is prepared to overturn Roe v. Wade "is an invitation to all manner of challenges to deeply rooted precedents," said one critic. https://www.commondreams.org/news/2...g-1982-ruling-requiring-free-public-education
Louisiana GOP Advances Bill to Make Abortion a Homicide by Patient and Provider "When abortion is outlawed, every uterus becomes a potential crime scene." https://www.commondreams.org/news/2...l-make-abortion-homicide-patient-and-provider
I get all of the anger at Republican hypocrisy on this issue, but at some point the question needs to turn to the real issue underlying the leaked SCOTUS draft. Ultimately, this is a states' rights issue in that, unless there are legitimate rights to be found in the US constitution, states have the ability to adopt laws limiting access to abortion. Ruth Bader Ginsburg opposed Roe v Wade as a means to guaranteeing abortion access, not because she opposed such rights, but because she knew that its reliance on a strained interpretation to right to privacy meant that it could be overturned by a future conservative court. It's ironic that she ultimately helped bring that prediction to fact by refusing to step down so that Obama could nominate a liberal to replace her. She advocated that access to abortion could be more reliably protected by using an argument that denying such rights ultimately denied women equal protection in that men have an inherent advantage in their careers if women can't control if and when they want to bear children. It seems to me that it's inevitable that a future abortion rights case will take this tact, but it will probably have to wait until the Court isn't so skewed to a conservative viewpoint. In the meantime, there are undoubtedly things that can be done at a state level to try to promote more liberal candidates and laws in states that aren't deeply Republican. Democrats will no doubt use this issue to garner greater voter turnout among their supporters. It could well be that this issue comes to haunt Republicans in future elections.
Sine the country is so diverse and split on all issues, just seems more practical to allow States to be more de-centralized and representative of what politics and citizens preference are. The idea that the fed can and should established the one shoe fits all will never fly on all issues. People can live where it lines up with their beliefs, that way they can have more impact on State and local politics/government.
I have never in my life seen a pregnant state. Since people have strong views what makes sense, the only thing that makes sense, is for each person to decide her own pregnancy, based in her own views and circumstances. Tell me, you men who want states to decide, which if your personal health care choices are you ready to have made a crime?
The Satanic Temple: There are Seven FUNDAMENTAL TENETS I One should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all creatures in accordance with reason. II The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions. III One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone. IV The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own. V Beliefs should conform to one's best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one's beliefs. VI People are fallible. If one makes a mistake, one should do one's best to rectify it and resolve any harm that might have been caused. VII Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word. www.thesatanictemple.com
I'm not sure if this is in response to what I wrote above. If so, you misunderstood the point I was making, which was legal in nature. Under our system of government, as imperfect and screwed up as it may be, all powers and rights not specifically listed in the Constitution as being under federal jurisdiction remain with the states. Only when a state law conflicts with rights protected by the Constitution can federal courts rule it invalid. Roe v Wade tried to stretch privacy protections to cover abortion. The current conservative majority of the SCOTUS appears to disagree with that interpretation. It doesn't matter how we as citizens, whether we have ovaries or testicles, may feel about that interpretation. Unless someone can bring a case that convinces the court that abortion is protected on other grounds, the power to regulate abortion will go back to the discretion of individual states. As it happens, I would prefer that a future SCOTUS make a ruling based on equal protection, as RBG proposed. In practicality, nobody gives a shit what I think.
