🌎 Roe vs Wade and all that comes with this story. This guy. I am at a loss for words.

[planomateo]

That's not compromise. That's a sweeping Federal grab at removing all restrictions on abortion.

This.

Earlier it was the Rs were misrepresenting the proposed bill. Now they're not compromising.

Logic fails.

 

[footballer]

Earlier, I recapped that most States either have a viability restriction or a 20 week restriction (with exceptions for the woman's health). I would consider all of those a compromise. In the current bill, the Democrats are proposing to wipe away all of those restrictions which currently coexist with the Roe ruling. That's not compromise. That's a sweeping Federal grab at removing all restrictions on abortion.

I believe the Senate, the GOP and with the vote of D Joe Manchin, voted that democrat bill down, yesterday.

 

[XXL TideFan]

At a minimum every single American should celebrate anytime some prior right is returned to the individual States. That is how it is supposed to be. Maybe Jan 6 protesters/rioters haven’t been charged with sedition for the same reason no one in the confederacy was charged with treason.

 

[rocknthefreeworld]

I believe the Senate, the GOP and with the vote of D Joe Manchin, voted that democrat bill down, yesterday.

They did, Manchin was the deciding vote because it was 51-49. A tie would have went to the VP to decide and she would have voted for it.

 

[It Takes Eleven]

They did, Manchin was the deciding vote because it was 51-49. A tie would have went to the VP to decide and she would have voted for it.

That was just the cloture vote. It would have taken 60 to approve the bill. It never had a chance.

 

[Rolltide24]

I have 4 friends/former friends that between them have had 7 abortions (one had 3 but the time she was 19). All had them by the 5th month. None had health issues or were raped. They just didn’t want to deal with protections. Laziness. I wish we’d put more emphasis and resources on teaching personal responsibility and sex education. Many folks just can’t be bothered with responsibility nowadays.

 

[ElephantStomp]

Earlier, I recapped that most States either have a viability restriction or a 20 week restriction (with exceptions for the woman's health). I would consider all of those a compromise. In the current bill, the Democrats are proposing to wipe away all of those restrictions which currently coexist with the Roe ruling. That's not compromise. That's a sweeping Federal grab at removing all restrictions on abortion.

That bill wouldn’t have seen the time of day had the “independent” SCOTUS left Roe v Wade alone.

There are trigger bills that almost completely eliminate abortion protections that will go into effect the moment Roe v Wade is overturned, the state I live in is one of said states. That’s not compromise

 

[ElephantStomp]

This.

Earlier it was the Rs were misrepresenting the proposed bill. Now they're not compromising.

Logic fails.

Let’s not pretend Rs know what compromise is. 99% of republicans believe life begins at conception as a clump of cells, that’s not compromise, that’s religious ignorance.

They did misrepresent it, it was about body autonomy just like Rs wanted when it came to the vaccine

 

[rocknthefreeworld]

That was just the cloture vote. It would have taken 60 to approve the bill. It never had a chance.

But at this point the Dems can't even use this vote against the Republicans. They can't even get their own party to support allowing a vote on it even knowing it won't pass.

 

[planomateo]

They didn't put this bill forward with the understanding it would pass. They merely got everyone on record for where they stand for mid terms.

 

[rocknthefreeworld]

They didn't put this bill forward with the understanding it would pass. They merely got everyone on record for where they stand for mid terms.

The reality is that this should remind people that when the Democrats could have made Roe v Wade an actual law they didn't. They only care about using it to scare people into voting for them.

 

[ElephantStomp]

The reality is that this should remind people that when the Democrats could have made Roe v Wade an actual law they didn't. They only care about using it to scare people into voting for them.

Agreed. They should’ve known at first chance Repubs would overturn Roe v Wade, that’s been their plan for decades

 

[XXL TideFan]

Agreed. They should’ve known at first chance Repubs would overturn Roe v Wade, that’s been their plan for decades

States rights are numerous while the federal authority narrowly defined was original intent. Beyond time to send more and more usurped rights back to the people, regardless of your purely personal desires.

 

[rocknthefreeworld]

States rights are numerous while the federal authority narrowly defined was original intent. Beyond time to send more and more usurped rights back to the people, regardless of your purely personal desires.

Too bad interstate commerce rulings now mean anything commerce related is the feds to rule.

 

[rocknthefreeworld]

Just so everyone in aware, women are just as likely as men to believe abortion should never be legal. Men are slightly more likely to consider themselves pro life though. That means men are more likely to not let their personal feelings determine the legality.

Abortion Trends by Gender

This page outlines Gallup's long-term trends on Americans' views about abortion by gender.

news.gallup.com

 

[TerryP]

I don’t think it’s any of those things. I think it’s simply people protesting a ruling and/or opinion that didn’t need to be made. Now if these people were doing something to the Justice’s property then my opinion would change.

That's an interesting response, "it's simply people protesting a ruling and/or opinion that didn’t need to be made." That's the whole issue. It was a ruling made by SCOTUS that never should have been made. That's the point being made; "it's not our decision to make; never was."

(A greater point is found here. It was unconstitutional from day one. They made a mistake, they're trying to correct the mistake.)

It's quite ironic jurists have criticized R v W because of how it was presented to the Supreme Court originally—it is privacy rights—and that's the very thing some have no problems doing: allowing the judiciary privacy to make a decision.

My opinion, a male or female's opinion, and your opinion, mean nothing here because this is written law. People may disagree with the law, and people may choose to ignore the law. If they act on the latter they should face the consequences.
"It's against the law. I don't like the law. I'm going to break the law." Does that not boil this whole thing down to a few words? (Ironically, including the original SCOTUS decision?)

---

Another can of worms here ... if we jump into why jurists feel the R v W decision was wrong in the first place.

 

[TerryP]

I only brought up Jan 6th because the same people whining about justice’s safety and screaming about the leak are the right which a majority of the right in DC & on Fox News don’t think people should’ve been charged in relation to Jan 6th or they like to now downplay those events

The same people who want the SCOTUS to leave R v W alone are pointing to how this is wrong. Friday night Bill Maher** was talking about Psaki stating "the US Government doesn't have a position" on the protests. He responded stating "But we do. It's intimidation. It's against the law." Just as Maher doesn't represent every voice of those supporting Roe vs Wade, "the right in DC & on Fox News" don't support this notion they shouldn't be charged. Your accusations here are an over reach, ULTRA over reach.

Seriously. Find me one person from Fox News that's said that. Please. Or, rather, find something you can point to—other than hyperbolic opinions—where these "right in DC" have said that.

I mentioned this earlier in the thread specifically pointing to the group you're talking about here. It's a small group who were questioning a specific charge; conspiracy.

That moron Ted Cruz said the other day on Hannity that the Roe v Wade protests are worse than Jan 6th and said “On Jan 6th, 2021 you had peaceful people protesting & yet the corporate media and democrats slander them with the made up term insurrectionists”……how does anybody with any semblance of an IQ come up with that? Even more confusing is Cruz graduated from Princeton and Harvard, so he’s intelligent (educationally at least).

I touched on this earlier as well. And, Cruz has a point and it's from an educational point of view.

How can you call a group of people insurrectionist when they've not been charged with insurrection?

---

As a side note.

I've had several conversations with people about January 6th. Anyone, no, everyone following this should have their personal "red flags" flying at full mast. With little reason to trust what we hear from our legislature how can that event be judged correctly with that legislature refusing to release videos from that day? They say "it's not a matter of public record" but talk about it all the fucking time. We have people wanting to see this evidence, they're being refused access to the evidence, but they're not supposed to question the judiciary process here? (Insert image: can of worms.)

So, when I see January 6th being brought into conversation that are unrelated it's easy to catch the "whatcha doin' here" syndrome.

---

---

**Bill Maher.

I listen to variety of podcasts, often. (IE: I need to finish the support for my pole beams today (in two beds) and want to work on a table I'm building on the patio side of the house. I'm planning on finishing the Rogan episode with Gad Saad. @It Takes Eleven I've got The Parasitic Mind four or five down in my reading stack. It's been highly recommended. There's two dozen pages I've previewed.)

I'd encourage all you guys to take a bit and listen to Rogan and Maher. I've watched him for quite a while and found their episode together to be a pretty good insight into his mindset.

 

[TerryP]

Isn't it ironic everyone in the DC area feels safer at home than the Supreme Court Justices? :