USSC strikes down Roe v Wade

[Uncharted]

Regardless of what your personal feelings are on it, this ruling may wind up being the best thing that ever happened.

The Constitution did not address the topic of abortion, and trying to use it to justify it as a right was not doing the job, because the same Constitutional arguments were being used to argue for the Child's right to exist.

I don't personally believe in Abortion as a form of Birth Control, but I believe in Democracy even more.
Now that this ruling has been made that the Constitution, as it stands right now, does not address this topic, it will likely be made an election issue. As it should.
And if the Dems manage to win a mandate to make a specific amendment to the Constitution allowing Abortion, or visa versa, then the people have spoken, and this debate is over once and for all.

The problem is, no one is willing to put it to a Democratic vote when they are already getting their way, because they are afraid they might not win. That is disingenuous and antithetical to Democracy. Let the people decide this once and for all.

 

[mandrill]

Regardless of what your personal feelings are on it, this ruling may wind up being the best thing that ever happened.
The Constitution did not address the topic of abortion, and trying to use it to justify it as a right was not doing the job, because the same Constitutional arguments were being used to argue for the Child's right to exist.
I don't personally believe in Abortion as a form of Birth Control, but I believe in Democracy even more.
Now that this ruling has been made that the Constitution, as it stands right now, does not address this topic, it will likely be made an election issue. As it should.
And if the Dems manage to win a mandate to make a specific amendment to the Constitution allowing Abortion, or visa versa, then the people have spoken, and this debate is over once and for all.
The problem is, no one is willing to put it to a Democratic vote when they are already getting their way, because they are afraid they might not win. That is disingenuous and antithetical to Democracy. Let the people decide this once and for all.

You're all over the place, but I'll just comment on the last paragraph.

Many state governments are very willing to deal with this issue legislatively. The Red states have / will soon have enacted total or close to total bans with heavy criminal penalties. The blue states will enact protections for abortion. The country will split - the very thing that Roe v Wade had prevented happening.

 

[Valcazar]

Roberts does not always vote along party lines.

I never said he did.
He votes strategically to preserve his goals and conserve the power of the USSC to further those goals.

Example, Obama Care. The GOP tried to use the Supreme Court to kill the Affordable Health Care Act and it was Roberts who was the deciding vote in favour of Obama Care.

Yup, he kept fucking with it, but in the end didn't kill it outright because just "rip it all up" isn't his style.

And now we see Roberts voting to keep Roe.

Because he wanted to kill it softly, without the backlash and the hit to the Court's reputation.

That makes him a bit of maverick in my eyes and not someone who votes down party lines, at least not on

It is a sad commentary that not voting for every batshit partisan culture war flex has made him a "maverick" and a "moderate".
He has been one of the most effective forces for GOP power in years, slowly gutting the Voting Rights Act, repealing the Reconstruction amendments, and increasing corporate power.
But because he is subtle, and doesn't think red meat culture war bullshit helps his goals, he has become "a maverick". The real question is whether or not he has decided cultivating that is important to give him some bipartisan cred and everyone is in on it or whether he really is being reviled now by his side because "we have the power, just fucking go nuts" is what they want and he is stuck in his old ways.

As to the Democrats and the White vote, it was not "the White Vote" that propelled Biden to the White House in 2020. "The White Vote" is not a homogeneous group. Never has been.

It isn't. But it has been consistently pro-Republican for 50-60 years. The Democrats embraced Civil Rights and lost the majority of the white vote.
That is a simple fact.

If you look at 2020, the vote was virtually IDENTICAL to 2016. Blacks in 2020 voted as they did in 2016. Same for hispanics, same for city folks, same for rual voters. All except for ONE GROUP of distinct voters who flipped.

The suburb vote.

In terms of aggregate votes in these large suburban counties, there was a shift from a 1.2 million vote advantage for Trump in 2016 to (at last count) a 613,000 vote advantage for Biden—a nearly 2 million vote flip. (Quote Link =https://www.brookings.edu/research/bidens-victory-came-from-the-suburbs/)

That vote flip was huge and propelled Biden to the White House. Why? I don't know. Maybe they just had had enough of a raving lunatic for president. One thing is for sure, they aren't married to one political party or another.

Only one identifiable group.

Without the burbs, Biden would have lost.

No disagreement.
That part of the coalition was a big shift and a lot of it was probably just "we are sick of having a lunatic for president".
That's a major reason someone like DeSantis has a real shot if he can get the nomination - he isn't being portrayed as a lunatic and he isn't nearly as vulgar and ridiculously corrupt on the surface as Trump is.

 

[Valcazar]

No fraud here. Only proof that you are the one that doesn't comprehend. The precedent I was talking about was not the age of earlier justices, it was the leftie frauds calling on someone of Ginsburg's age not to retire, and then subsequently doing so when it just so happens that it could be beneficial to them. Which you admit was stated in the next paragraph below.

Retiring strategically is the norm in Supreme Court Justices.
That precedent far predates Ginsburg as well.

There is no hypocrisy here - just your lack of comprehension.

I guess the frauds are desperate and trying to accuse those who prove them to be frauds as frauds.

Don't worry Valcazar...I will make an error at some point. But if proven factually wrong, I will admit it.

LOL.
No you won't.
I'm not even sure you would be capable of being made aware of it without your head exploding.

 

[Valcazar]

Who knows what her thought process was back in those days.

As I thought. Unable to admit you were wrong.

How about you give in exact detail what part of the comparison you consider valid.

Seeing as it is the fraudulent lefties that keep making the comparison. Until you do, it is unproven and in my opinion....fraudulent.

But lets see Valcazar put his credibility on the line. Remember though, I suspect most things you post will have a parallel from those on the left. That is the fraud, the complete hypocrisy. Start with the violence....seeing as you brought it up.

This is a mug's game and you know it.
You've already said this is about your opinion and as long as your opinion is what it is then it is fraudulent.
This is Ben Shaprio-level "debating".
Pretty pathetic.

But yes, the MAGA movement is a call for palingenetic ultranationalism tied strongly to racial themes and a normalization of violence as a political tool.

 

[Valcazar]

Here is an example:
Woman decides to abort because the fetus is the "wrong" gender.

And?
"She can choose except if I don't like her choice" is supposed to prove what, exactly?

Section 12 can be improved to reduce the 12 weeks to 8 or less.

So you would like to reduce it to 8 weeks with a woman going to prison for 14 years otherwise and you think that's a "good compromise"?

 

[VIPhunter]

I always laugh at this argument.

If men were truly in charge the would be strip clubs and brothels on every street corner, and women with tits of an angel would provide BJs and FS for 5 bucks and no guilt.

 

[VIPhunter]

American women are ALLOWED to come to CANADA for abortions.god bless America.

Unless they're not vaccinated, of course.

 

[Czar]

As I thought. Unable to admit you were wrong.

There you go folks, Valcazar knew what was in Ginsberg's mind when it came to retirement back about 8 years ago. What a fraud.

But yes, the MAGA movement is a call for palingenetic ultranationalism tied strongly to racial themes and a normalization of violence as a political tool.

Of course the frauds make up their lies and ignore when their own leaders are rebuked by the chief of the supreme court for their blatant threats fo violence(which is now happening such as attempted murder). Not to mention tying racial themes for entrance evaluation for universities.

Chief Justice John Roberts denounces "threatening" Schumer comments in rare rebuke - CBS News

Frauds again.

 

[WyattEarp]

All except for ONE GROUP of distinct voters who flipped.

The suburb vote.

In terms of aggregate votes in these large suburban counties, there was a shift from a 1.2 million vote advantage for Trump in 2016 to (at last count) a 613,000 vote advantage for Biden—a nearly 2 million vote flip. (Quote Link =https://www.brookings.edu/research/bidens-victory-came-from-the-suburbs/)

That vote flip was huge and propelled Biden to the White House. Why? I don't know. Maybe they just had had enough of a raving lunatic for president. One thing is for sure, they aren't married to one political party or another.

Only one identifiable group.

Without the burbs, Biden would have lost.

As long as you brought it up, this was very clear looking at the results. This anti-Trump shift in the suburbs was starting to be evident in 2018.

If you are a partisan Democrat, this should be a concern. Can the Democrats hold the suburbs with Trump off the ballot? That is why the liberal media will be covering Trump like he's on the 2022 Republican ticket.

The U.S. suburbs are not really galvanized around most of the Democrat's policies. If Trump's not running, I don't think they really care if they're called racists, reactionaries or whatever.

 

[Leimonis]

 

[jcpro]

Popular vote is irrelevant. That is not how their election system works.

It is like saying that Trudeau got less votes than the conservatives in Canada. It is irrelevant.

As long as you brought it up, this was very clear looking at the results. This anti-Trump shift in the suburbs was starting to be evident in 2018.

If you are a partisan Democrat, this should be a concern. Can the Democrats hold the suburbs with Trump off the ballot? That is why the liberal media will be covering Trump like he's on the 2022 Republican ticket.

The U.S. suburbs are not really galvanized around most of the Democrat's policies. If Trump's not running, I don't think they really care if they're called racists, reactionaries or whatever.

Nolte: 11 Ways Democrats Helped Overturn Roe v. Wade

No one did more to ensure that the moral and legal atrocity called Roe v. Wade was overturned than Democrats.

www.breitbart.com

 

[WyattEarp]

Nolte: 11 Ways Democrats Helped Overturn Roe v. Wade

No one did more to ensure that the moral and legal atrocity called Roe v. Wade was overturned than Democrats.

www.breitbart.com

Not exactly a fair article. The American public supports access to abortion. So maybe points 1 and 11 have some merit. Everything in between is anti-abortion rhetoric.

To follow-up on my suburban voting comment, the next round of abortion battles will occur in the suburbs of Dallas, Houston, Atlanta and Charlotte. While Valcazar and others put voters in politically convenient boxes, suburban American voters are very pragmatic and adept at sorting out issues. They will support many conservative issues and then support liberal issues when they feel the need arises.

 

[jcpro]

Not exactly a fair article. The American public supports access to abortion. So maybe points 1 and 11 have some merit. Everything in between is anti-abortion rhetoric.

Of course it's not fair, like the whole abortion debate, but it does hit the main points, especially Harry Reid's role. And he was warned at the time and it should be a good lesson for the future, but will the partisans listen?

 

[Darts]

"While international human rights instruments lack a universal inclusion of the fetus as a person for the purposes of human rights, the fetus is granted various rights in the constitutions and civil codes of several countries.[5]"
Fetal rights - Wikipedia

 

[WyattEarp]

Of course it's not fair, like the whole abortion debate, but it does hit the main points, especially Harry Reid's role. And he was warned at the time and it should be a good lesson for the future, but will the partisans listen?

Lena Dunham? She's kind of been forcibly painted as an influencer by the media. She doesn't have the standing to repel let alone influence.

 

[jcpro]

Lena Dunham? She's kind of been forcibly painted as an influencer by the media. She doesn't have the standing to repel let alone influence.

The culture wars in America are a lot like this here forum- plenty irrational, hyperbole, etc. And it goes for both sides.

 

[WyattEarp]

The culture wars in America are a lot like this here forum- plenty irrational, hyperbole, etc. And it goes for both sides.

Oops, Valcazar says the Republicans are making up the culture wars.

 

[WyattEarp]

But yes, the MAGA movement is a call for palingenetic ultranationalism tied strongly to racial themes and a normalization of violence as a political tool.

Valcazar, I think you inadvertently made the point about "wokeism".

 

[jalimon]

The culture wars in America are a lot like this here forum- plenty irrational, hyperbole, etc. And it goes for both sides.

In the US it's a bit worst because they only have 2 side. It has become to the point you are either a left libtard or a dump racist republican.

Not much in between.

In canada we do not have such extreme polarization.