Breaking: claims that the American Supreme Court will strike down Roe v. Wade

Oh don't worry, ChardonnaysBeastlyCat, the people passing laws like the Texas Heartbeat Act have no difficulty telling what a woman is.

And this what happens when we cannot even call a woman a woman anymore.

MalagaNights, why aren't Republicans protecting abortion rights?

Wow that was a very detailed, nuanced and informative read. I cannot believe how Obama threw abortion rights under the bus. I did do a brief google to see if what's written is true and from what I've read it seems it is.

And what the fuck about the morning after pill? Surely that should be something everyone could get behind as it actually prevents conception in the first place? But, of course, not if your goal is to control and dominate women and nothing really to do with babies.

Of course Obama's wife and daughters aren't ever going to be in the position of not being able to access abortion if needed. Shame he didn't do anything for the rest of the population of black women and indeed the rest of the 51% of the population that this will harm. Shameful.

Seems pretty clear that rich Dem men are relying on their wealth to protect 'their' women whilst throwing women's rights under the bus for all other women.

From 4W

4w.pub/how-a-decade-of-democratic-delusions-failed-women-on-abortion/

The problem for the Dems on making this a rally the vote issue, is that most people don't buy their lgbtqIa+ line anyway, so trying to conflate this with abortion & 'The Baddies' to scare people won't work.

Most people don't buy their America is full of white supremacists waiting to legislate racism line either.

Most people don't buy into their (and here's) view that people who morally object to any abortion do it because they hate women.

Most people don't buy into their rhetoric that pro choice has no limits and there is no other moral issue in abortion.

So they're trying to protect abortion rights which most people probably do agree with to varying degrees, whilst at the same time insisting you buy a whole lot of other crap you don't want.

Where's the rational party in the US that says:

It's a very tough balance on abortion and we need to agree where we draw a line?
Women are adult human females.
Children are not Trans.

They've all lost their minds.

Yeah too late, Stonewall and the righteous have already come for the LGB, homosexuality is now a shameful thing and not to be tolerated. Particularly not at Pride.

I've done some further reading and this is where they are coming from on the 'the same people will come after LGBT people next". IANAL but this person is.

Alito's draft declares that, inter alia, the right to marry a person of a different race, the right to contraception, and the right not to be forcibly sterilized, all lack "any claim to being deeply rooted in history" – which is the same reason he overrules the right to abortion.

After casting some drive-by shade on the existence of these other fundamental rights, Alito then says: don't worry, all of these other rights are different, they don't involve the "critical moral question" like abortion does, so just relax about the others, they're fine.

twitter.com/TheViewFromLL2/status/1521307417434374145?s=20&t=N2EAzKKB35SnWj3AtOqIXQ

twitter.com/TheViewFromLL2/status/1521307417434374145?s=20&t=N2EAzKKB35SnWj3AtOqIXQ

Sorry if this has already been linked to but here's Hadley Freeman on the subject: unherd.com/2022/05/american-feminism-has-turned-its-back-on-abortion/

This is so annoying. The two issues are completely separate of course. We need far more nuance in these discussions to be able.to resolve them ffs.

Apparently Biden is conflating allowing states to decide abortion law and segregating LGBTQ children in schools, which is what the Evil People will do next.

twitter.com/guypbenson/status/1521873391950569472?t=ApgRY78Us8HYB_zo8Uu8-A&s=19

It is interesting that the USA is uniquely expected to have abortion written into its constitution, as it is apparently such a corrupt democracy that elected officials couldn't decide the law, as in other democracies?

Presumably this logic extends to all election results and undermines all lawmaking in the USA? Or just the ones people on here don't agree with?

Abortion law is a legal issue and will now be decided by whoever gets elected in individual states. If the majority of the population is pro choice, and nearly all women support this, as is assumed on here, there will be a huge landside towards the democrats based on this issue alone.

In reality most people are some where between the pro lifers and pro choicers calling each other evil, and do not want abortion banned but do think there should be some limits, and so most states will reflect something along these lines, with a few being at either more extreme no compromise end.

This will proably lead to an increasing division between states with people moving to wherever they feel reflects thier own values and states becming more strongly red or blue and less purple.

Quite. I've seen "forced birthers" used as an alternative.

Jane Clare Jones said yesterday on Twitter: "One of the things I hate so much about the phrase 'pro-life' is that these people have nothing but contempt for the life of the mother or for the life of a child brought into the world against its mother's desire, intention and love."

Well let's sink to a TRA's level for just a moment: anyone who has associated with Tara Hewitt (anti-abortion and influential TRA) or the TRA twit who decided that the tweet announcing this leak was the perfect time to 'ratio' SCOTUSblog is anti abortion themselves.

Ugh, I feel that I lost several IQ points and levels of maturity just typing this.

If its considered acceptable that Grave Lavery can compare his flaccid penis to a miscarriage then nothing else really surprises me.

Absolutely. And it rather puts paid to the "we're concerned about the babies".

'If you are going to argue that "conception" is the start of life, then you basically disagree completely with reproductive technology -- as you cannot then, logically, support the creation of embryos that maybe be perpetually stored or even destroyed.'

I imagine they do think destroying or not using fertilised embryos destroys life. There's not a lot someone can do it they think life starts at conception - they just do. That's not dependent on what other people then choose to do in terms of technology, is it?

Restricting abortion is wrong for any reason, the one I particularly cannot understand is the ectopic pregnancy. It's a medical emergency, it's barbaric to deny medical care to women who have it.

Not that the rest isn't barbaric.

I also wonder just how many Republican lawmakers would change their minds about embryos and their "right to life" if it meant they would never be grandparents.

Vocal anti choice Republicans have been caught getting abortions for their daughters and mistresses so I can't imagine this would have an impact. Its the classic 'the only moral abortion is my abortion' position.

Unless she's actually promoting his anti-abortion views, I don't see what your point is.

What is with TRAs using this really serious issue to have a pop at GC women? It's not a good look, trust me.

Have you name changed or is it a bit more of a tag team deal?

What I never quite understand is why the pro-life movement never seems to consider the implications their "life begins at conception" position has upon assisted conception: aka IVF.

If you are going to argue that "conception" is the start of life, then you basically disagree completely with reproductive technology -- as you cannot then, logically, support the creation of embryos that maybe be perpetually stored or even destroyed.

I also don't understand why pro-choicers never seem to point this out. By holding a "life begins at conception" position and seeking to legislate to uphold that belief, you are basically condemning infertile couples who wish for a child to infertility, and those that do not want a child to parenthood.

I also wonder just how many Republican lawmakers would change their minds about embryos and their "right to life" if it meant they would never be grandparents.