To agree with the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v Wade?

[thereareotherways]

Obviously I can predict the voting already! Ha.

TL;DR (at the top!): I support abortion but think Roe v Wade (and later cases) are not legally sound, and there are better ways to secure women's rights that would have more public support.

I'm personally not opposed to abortion in most real-life circumstances. I think after viability I would prefer other options to be explored, but I think most women having later-term abortions are doing it for serious medical reasons and I don't think that should be prosecuted. That said, I also am okay in principle with regulating abortion and I'm not an absolutist re: women's control: I think the fetus/baby does have some rights (which I weight proportionally more as the baby grows).

As I understand it, Roe v Wade and Casey rely on a right to "liberty" in the US constitution (primarily the 14th amendment), which otherwise doesn't mention abortion. I'm not a lawyer at all, I find this tenuous at best. Liberty has always had implied limits based on what's acceptable in society, and abortion was illegal until fairly recently. I don't think there's any justification for claiming that there's an implied consent of the people that abortion is morally acceptable - and the polarisation of the US on this issue reflects that.

I think the decision in Roe/Casey to impose abortion via activist judges was a poor decision both legally and politically. This is a clear case where elected representatives need to pass legislation that reflects their constituents' positions. If that legislation differs from state-to-state, well, that's the whole point of a federal system. Pro-choice candidates need to get elected in red states and then they will have the actual consent of the people, not tenuous implied consent.

The decision in Dobbs is here and good reading: www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf

I also have a faint hope that now that this has been overturned, both Republicans and Democrats might now return their focus to legislation instead of Supreme Court nominees. The power of the Supreme Court is too dominating in US politics: we should be pleased to see them ceding some power back to the legislature, i.e., the people's representatives!

I don’t think there’s a significant gender gap on abortion rights.

Sorry, haven't read whole thread but just wanted to explain the whole purpose of constitutional rights.

Constitutional rights protect people against majoritarian laws.

If you think that abortion is a question of 'rights' even competing rights, then it's a constitutional issue, not a legislative one.

That's what so disgusting about the SCOTUS ruling, at it's core it's saying that there is no 'right' to abortion (at any stage) in the US and - as we will see - no right to autonomy over your own body. It's not just about provision of abortion services it's about death /criminalisation of those women who will end up having unsafe / do-it-yourself abortions as a result. If you don't believe that will happen just look at the global statistics.

Yep. They don't care that atm there's a formula shortage. They don't care that children are being killed in schools with their relaxed gun laws.

The members of the US Supreme Court are scrutinised and appointed by elected representatives so to present what they do as somehow unconnected to representative democracy is inaccurate.

If we pretend that you genuinely do want to see a more stable legal framework for abortion, there's absolutely no reason that couldn't be done while Roe remained applicable. In this indefinite gap between overturning Roe and the successful passing of new legislation - if that ever happens, in our lifetimes - many many women will die. If you ask me that's a bit much for a point of principle.

But I know that's not actually your principle: you've come here to provide a figleaf of respectability to hold over the naked misogyny of the anti-choice movement, in the hope that we will join in the pretence that they are honourable people who happen to disagree with us rather than just straight up woman haters. To be clear, they hate us, they hate the idea that we should be allowed to put our own needs first, and they are very happy for us to die so that they can enforce their beliefs about how other people should live their lives.

What's so outrageous to me as well is that they care more about the rights of the foetus than the actual child when it is born. Otherwise, they would have affordable health care and gun control so children would not risk being killed just for going to school.

I'm going to reiterate what many have said, womens bodies, women's choice. You don't have to look to the shores of America for intolerance on this matter. The snp were thinking of buffer zones near clinics as staff and potential patients were facing harrassment from pro life groups. This should obviously never be, harassing women that are having to make traumatic decisions. Catholic Church still holds too much sway in Scotland particularly in the west of Scotland.

How anyone be it male or female can think this ruling is okay is beyond me. My DH is horrified that this has happened as am I. I say that as a woman who has had a termination in my younger days because I wanted to as I wasn't ready for a baby as well as a tfmr. Under the new ruling I probably wouldn't of been allowed the tfmr and my baby would of died anyway. This has set America back so so much its frightening

If we pretend that you genuinely do want to see a more stable legal framework for abortion, there's absolutely no reason that couldn't be done while Roe remained applicable.

I agree. Why didn't anyone do this in the last 50 years? It's not as if overturning RvW was exactly a secret, pro-life Republicans literally stated this as an explicit goal for decades.

Well they are saying birth control and same sex marriage will be next. What a shitshow

Its just abhorrent. Not only making it illegal in the first place, but also illegal in cases of rape and incest in many states. It’s genuinely terrifying and heartbreaking.

It’s hard to appreciate ‘nuance’ when it means that women across the US are going to be denied abortions or are going to have to travel for hours, and risk prosecution, to get a safe abortion, @thereareotherways .

Frankly, I care less about having a nuanced debate than I care about women having their right to control their own reproduction removed. The Handmaid’s Tale is supposed to be fiction, fgs.

The land of the free, hey?

Shocking

All the practices in The Handmaid's Tale had happened in reality in the world at some point.

You are absolutely right, @ReneBumsWombats - maybe I should have said “The Handmaid’s Tale” is not supposed to be a blueprint for a modern, 21st century country.

WHY DO YOU HATE FREEDOM

I’m not sure why you are shouting at me, @ReneBumsWombats - I do not ‘hate’ freedom - au contraire - I want US women and girls to have the freedom to decide what happens to their own bodies!

I'm very sorry, it was supposed to be a joke (black humour). I was trying to make fun of the idea that America is some sort of land of the free when it does shit like this, and of the kind of person who would indeed shout hysterically that you must hate freedom if you oppose this.

I'll see myself out 😳

In the UK we have an Act of Parliament by elected representatives to change laws.
It was unconstitutional. It was for the States to decide.

It's for women to decide what to do with their bodies.

Ohhhh bugger - I am so dim, @ReneBumsWombats - I am so sorry! I am a numpty.

It's very disheartening to see posts along the lines of " well, it's up to the states to decide for themselves" and "why didn't they pass laws positively affirming the right to abortion?".

The answer is oppression. Conservatives have a lock on much of the political machinery in the US. They are determined to maintain control over women's bodies. This is not a philosophical argument about the sanctity of life. This is about physical control over women period, with all violence at the state and personal level included.

Idk how to post a link but please see the DM's article about the police officer in Rhode Island , who is running for state office, punching a Black women in the face. Twice. After she finished speaking at a rally last night. This is what they want to do to us. No holds barred.

And, for the record, Rhode Island is a state that has passed a right to abortion law. But you can see in this police officer's action what they intend to do to women , even when our rights have been codified.

Not at all, if a joke doesn't work then it's not the audience's fault!

twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1540548799709564928?s=21&t=29QcZbY74sAhYtyhuYTe4g

I played this to my Irish catholic husband. He's renounced btw and lives in the 21st century.

He said turn that twat off, I've heard enough. I can't listen to that.

Trouble is, American women are living this. Religion has far, far too much interference in US politics and on top of that, and I'm going to cap this A WOMANS BODY IS NOT POLITICAL, NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR RELIGION EITHER AND ITS NOT FOR ANY FUCKER TO VOTE ON, SEPARATE STATES OR NOT. rant over

addendum: man in video, give him a straight jacket....

Does the US still have a problem with baby formula supply?

If states really cared about children they'd do things like ban assault rifles and get a grip on the price of life saving medication like insulin before looking at abortion.

OP don't you think that this is the tip of an avalanche of changes ? People are expecting gay marriage to be the next issue looked at