[turtle]

Originally Posted by chucker I'm guessing turtle means "authoritarianism" for socialism and "libertarianism" for capitalism.

Yeah, this is a super generalization of it.

You all do realize, I'm not here debating if it is murder to abort a baby right? While I do believe it is, this case wasn't about if it is right or not. It was if the Constitution protected it as a right. It does not. RvW was a flawed handling, later the Casey case. This ruling corrected that and clearly delineated it in the opinion.

I'm not debating with you if it is a baby at what stage nor if it is right or not. While I've stated my personal opinion before, that isn't the heart of the case.

We all have our particular opinions on when abortion is ok. Some it is never, some it is whenever and some in-between. The point of this case (and my joy in the verdict) isn't about the right or wrong of it, but rather that the Constitution doesn't protect it, there is no Federal law that grants it as a right, therefore it shouldn't be a federally mandated thing and the power should go to the states where they make the laws that govern their people.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by chucker I look at it as a false choice. Marx's brand of socialism hasn't really been tried, and I'm not sure it ever will be. Pure capitalism also isn't really a thing, because that wouldn't work. That's why we have agencies such as antitrust.

Agreed. A somewhat hybrid model is the best we can do at this point, at least with the currently line of thinking that the majority of people have.

[Elysium]

Originally Posted by turtle The point of this case (and my joy in the verdict) isn't about the right or wrong of it, but rather that the Constitution doesn't protect it, there is no Federal law that grants it as a right, therefore it shouldn't be a federally mandated thing and the power should go to the states where they make the laws that govern their people.

This logic is correct in a vacuum. Now let’s step into 21st century America.

As has been pointed out several times the “this let’s the states set the rules” justification falls apart as the majority of state legislatures are willfully acting against the majority of their constituents to appease the minority that funds the family business (political office).

Yes electing the right people matters, but when the right people never make it out of the primary screening process and enough gerrymandering and disenfranchisement of the opposition occurs…. Well status quo it is.

It may seem right when it agrees with your worldview, but when it doesn’t…. aw hell no!

[drewprops]

Is it a correct metaphor to say that RvW was a "patch" because the OS didn't cover the instance?


...

[turtle]

Originally Posted by Elysium This logic is correct in a vacuum. Now let’s step into 21st century America. As has been pointed out several times the “this let’s the states set the rules” justification falls apart as the majority of state legislatures are willfully acting against the majority of their constituents to appease the minority that funds the family business (political office). Yes electing the right people matters, but when the right people never make it out of the primary screening process and enough gerrymandering and disenfranchisement of the opposition occurs…. Well status quo it is. It may seem right when it agrees with your worldview, but when it doesn’t…. aw hell no!

I will agree that politics is a funny thing. I watched Virginia (and my specific district in Va Beach) fall blue due to gerrymandering and my vote go to the wayside. I know exactly what you are saying. So, understand, it is true of both sides. We all suffer in the political game.

However, this doesn't change the fact that it should be done right and the states should be the one legislating the rules within its boundaries. The Federal Government should stick to its job and let the states do their job. Vote appropriately and hope it turns out to your liking. If where you are doesn't fit your liking, move or help push to change things to the way you like it.

Originally Posted by drewprops Is it a correct metaphor to say that RvW was a "patch" because the OS didn't cover the instance?

Given it was a judicial overstep to side for Roe and Casey to begin with, it really was a hack and not a patch. Enacting Federal Laws would be the patch. Updating/changing the Constitution would be a new OS (sub)version.

[Quagmire]

Sorry when GOP at the federal level are gunning for abortion still, the it's about states right argument goes out the window. Same way no matter what the south tries to teach about it, the civil war was never about states rights either.

Just like Stop the Steal was never about election integrity. It was all about Trump losing. All the "reform" GOP states have done since isn't about "election integrity".

You may buy that BS, but it is still marketing political BS that is fed to you in order to keep those idiots in power. None of them genuinely believe the crap they spew ( and this goes for the democrats too).

[drewprops]

Nobody (NObody) who is celebrating Friday's ruling has articulated a reason why this patch/hack/fix affects THEM.


...

[Anonymous Coward]

Originally Posted by Brad Outlawing abortion does not stop abortions; it only makes the action more deadly to both the mother and child and it restricts access to the wealthy who have the means to travel and avoid local laws.

This is the only part of this that I really agree with.

The rest of this is not really "pro-life", formerly "anti-abortion", but two party politics. The parties are bad enough with dogma, that is, following the party line to the letter. About ten years ago, I was called by a Republican voter representative, since I am registered Republican, and had the nerve to question whether or not the chosen party leadership were really the best candidates, and got yelled at (they have not called back, as far as I know). To the parties, everything is black and white. If you are not with us, you are against us, and the opposition is evil.

I believe people would find it interesting to find out what "Christian" views really are. I am not here to educate anyone on values, but I believe people should view the graph in this BBC article which shows that the beliefs on abortion are not as uniform or as you might expect among different sects. (For those who don't care to look at the article, most Protestants and Catholics polled believe abortion should be legal in most cases, except for evangelical Protestants, who overwhelmingly believe otherwise.)

I drive through Santa Cruz County often and see posters on overpasses about personal freedoms and the dangers of vaccinations. Santa Cruz County is overwhelmingly liberal and Democratic.

I have voted for Democratic candidates if they present themselves as the most reasonable candidates available, but usually vote Republican because I am opposed to many California policies, which in many cases are found to be short sighted although well intentioned with harmful unintended consequences, and in the San Francisco Bay Area, there is no chance for a Republican candidate or measure to pass.

Views expressed here are not giving individuals, whether "Republican" or "Democrat" the benefit of doubt about being reasonable and rational.

[Quagmire]

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-ne...c2c11cde1c615f

Says Science says life begins at conception… ( no sir, it does not. It’s a personal belief).

But doesn’t understand the science when a woman is able to tell they are pregnant…..

[drewprops]

A former anti-abortion activist has come forward to reveal the methods he used to help influential donors gain exclusive access to justices. He also implies that Alito shared news of pending rulings with donors ahead of their actual release.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/19/u...-roe-wade.html

...

[Matsu]

Well. It’s been 200 years since a Supreme Court justice was impeached.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by Matsu Well. It’s been 200 years since a Supreme Court justice was impeached.

I suspect all the members of the Supreme court are on tap with someone, they are politicians after all. To do that one, they'd have to throw out the lot of them, only to be replaced by another wave of paid off figure heads. I'm not jaded, really, I'm not.