BREAKING: Roe v. Wade might be overruled or severely weakened by SCOTUS

[I’m not Stu]

Yep. It's finally happening. Start writing your eulogies for Roe v. Wade now.

The big question now is what will be the right's next long-term goal after this happens? I almost don't want to know, it's sure to be terrifying.

Fetal personhood. I think there might be five votes for it already.

[BabyAlligator]

I think the majority of the judges of the SCOTUS have neither the will nor the bravery to oveturn Roe vs Wade.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I think the majority of the judges of the SCOTUS have neither the will nor the bravery to oveturn Roe vs Wade.

I wish I could share in your optimism. This has been what the Federalist Society has been training judges for over the past few decades, and there are now six of them on the nation's highest court.

[EastwoodS]

Yep. It's finally happening. Start writing your eulogies for Roe v. Wade now.

The big question now is what will be the right's next long-term goal after this happens? I almost don't want to know, it's sure to be terrifying.

Mwhahaha. Seriously tho, chill out

[_.]

I think the majority of the judges of the SCOTUS have neither the will nor the bravery to oveturn Roe vs Wade.

I would argue that this specific point of your sentence is incorrect. Since the Supreme Court Judges are appointed for life, they have nothing to fear by voting their consciences. They're very immune to public opinion (if they weren't Roe v. Wade would never have passed in the first place).

I think the majority of the judges of the SCOTUS have neither the will nor the bravery to oveturn Roe vs Wade.

You make an interesting argument, and we'll see about that, but there is currently a Conservative majority on the Supreme Court going 6 - 3. I think it is likely that everyone to the right of John Roberts at least will be voting for the Mississippian side. Maybe they can even get Roberts to join them if they're lucky.

[Xeuma]

does anyone here think that certain sects of christianity might have to be outlawed for america to survive? Basically AOG, Pentecostals, nondenom, SSPX/Latin catholicism might all need to be banned. The sad thing is that there are a lot of conservative christians who are otherwise nice people. But like where do we draw the line. I kind of think Tushnet is right.

Because the right to kill your child is more important than the right to believe what you think is right.

Your rights end where others' rights begin.

Absolutely right. Now end abortion.

I’m glad to see red avatars are, in their fond phrase, “saying the quiet part out loud.”

[MT Treasurer]

Imagine actually believing that Roe v. Wade will ever be overturned (by this or any future Supreme Court).

[Person Man]

I think the majority of the judges of the SCOTUS have neither the will nor the bravery to oveturn Roe vs Wade.

I wish I could share in your optimism. This has been what the Federalist Society has been training judges for over the past few decades, and there are now six of them on the nation's highest court.

Well, they don’t need courage, but they are more or less putting abortion on the ballot in 2022.

What do you think overruling Roe will take the trajectory of? The cycle after Vermont legalizes Gay Marriage or the cycle once people start opening up to it?

[Inmate Trump]

Getting rid of abortion is literally the reason Republicans gave up on democracy in favor of authoritarianism.

[SnowLabrador]

If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016, this is on you.

[Oregon Eagle Politics]

If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016, this is on you.

If HRC won in 2016, Rs might have a Filibuster Proof Senate Majority.

[7,052,770]

If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016, this is on you.

If HRC won in 2016, Rs might have a Filibuster Proof Senate Majority.

Anything "might" be true, but we can be pretty sure that Republicans wouldn't hold a 6-3 majority.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

This will energize female voters but they are already energized because Rs aren't offering anything new that Trump didn't offer when he left office 100 days ago

Birth rates have dropped and more people are taking on adoptions as many people don't want to deal with newborns but a kid that is already ready made

Even athletes are adopting

If a female don't have an abortion they can give it up for adoption and a relative can take them on which alot of females are doing

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016, this is on you.

If HRC won in 2016, Rs might have a Filibuster Proof Senate Majority.

Anything "might" be true, but we can be pretty sure that Republicans wouldn't hold a 6-3 majority.

They were talking about holding Scalia's seat open another 4 years if Hillary won, so there's a good chance a Republican would be filling Scalia and RBG's seats now and Kennedy would be retiring soon.

[Inmate Trump]

If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016, this is on you.

If HRC won in 2016, Rs might have a Filibuster Proof Senate Majority.

Anything "might" be true, but we can be pretty sure that Republicans wouldn't hold a 6-3 majority.

They were talking about holding Scalia's seat open another 4 years if Hillary won, so there's a good chance a Republican would be filling Scalia and RBG's seats now and Kennedy would be retiring soon.

And this is why Democrats lose elections.

Our voters get butthurt when their preferred candidate loses a primary and stays home while Republican voters get out the vote regardless.

[7,052,770]

If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016, this is on you.

If HRC won in 2016, Rs might have a Filibuster Proof Senate Majority.

Anything "might" be true, but we can be pretty sure that Republicans wouldn't hold a 6-3 majority.

They were talking about holding Scalia's seat open another 4 years if Hillary won, so there's a good chance a Republican would be filling Scalia and RBG's seats now and Kennedy would be retiring soon.

Like I said, anything "might" be true.

[pbrower2a]

I think the majority of the judges of the SCOTUS have neither the will nor the bravery to oveturn Roe vs Wade.

I wish I could share in your optimism. This has been what the Federalist Society has been training judges for over the past few decades, and there are now six of them on the nation's highest court.

The gift that keeps giving -- the Trump Presidency and his stooges on the US Supreme Court.

Will they reject stare decisis? Radicals of all kinds reject any tradition that they dislike as counter-revolutionary.  (In essence, legal precedents remain intact because anything else invites anarchy in later decisions of a judiciary).  

[Not Me, Us]

does anyone here think that certain sects of christianity might have to be outlawed for america to survive? Basically AOG, Pentecostals, nondenom, SSPX/Latin catholicism might all need to be banned. The sad thing is that there are a lot of conservative christians who are otherwise nice people. But like where do we draw the line. I kind of think Tushnet is right.

Because the right to kill your child is more important than the right to believe what you think is right.

Your rights end where others' rights begin.

Absolutely right. Now end abortion.

I’m glad to see red avatars are, in their fond phrase, “saying the quiet part out loud.”

Women who need access to safe and legal abortions should be allowed to get safe and legal abortions. I really fail to see why we should be trampling on women's rights to force the birth of a child which will end up being abused in the foster care system or raised by somebody without the means to raise the child effectively, especially when religious fundamentalist nuts like you also want to end sex education and ban contraception. Furthermore, banning abortion will do nothing to stop abortions, it just means they'll be done unsafely, which makes death or injury to the mother more likely. So literally nothing good comes from banning abortion, but I'm sure you don't care as long as you can force your backwards religion on people and exert more control over women.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

A wild "banning abortion will do nothing to stop abortions" appears!

https://rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2018/10/04/stop-saying-that-making-abortion-illegal-doesnt-stop-them/

[Brittain33]

If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016, this is on you.

Mark Udall, 2014

[Xeuma]

does anyone here think that certain sects of christianity might have to be outlawed for america to survive? Basically AOG, Pentecostals, nondenom, SSPX/Latin catholicism might all need to be banned. The sad thing is that there are a lot of conservative christians who are otherwise nice people. But like where do we draw the line. I kind of think Tushnet is right.

Because the right to kill your child is more important than the right to believe what you think is right.

Your rights end where others' rights begin.

Absolutely right. Now end abortion.

I’m glad to see red avatars are, in their fond phrase, “saying the quiet part out loud.”

Women who need access to safe and legal abortions should be allowed to get safe and legal abortions. I really fail to see why we should be trampling on women's rights to force the birth of a child which will end up being abused in the foster care system or raised by somebody without the means to raise the child effectively, especially when religious fundamentalist nuts like you also want to end sex education and ban contraception. Furthermore, banning abortion will do nothing to stop abortions, it just means they'll be done unsafely, which makes death or injury to the mother more likely. So literally nothing good comes from banning abortion, but I'm sure you don't care as long as you can force your backwards religion on people and exert more control over women.

Sex education is okay, theoretically. Contraception and abortion are the same thing, except one is far more violent. Banning things actually does cause the rate to decrease. The value of life is not predicated on what will unfold. The good that comes from banning abortion is the end to murdering children. I'm not sure how this is "controlling women," that talking point has never made sense to me even when I was sympathetic to your view.

[7,052,770]

A wild "banning abortion will do nothing to stop abortions" appears!

https://rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2018/10/04/stop-saying-that-making-abortion-illegal-doesnt-stop-them/

Did you even read the article? It says abortion bans reduce abortions by half to 2/3, depending on the country and study.

No, it doesn't stop them completely, but no one has ever said they'll "do nothing"

[Xeuma]

A wild "banning abortion will do nothing to stop abortions" appears!

https://rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2018/10/04/stop-saying-that-making-abortion-illegal-doesnt-stop-them/

Did you even read the article? It says abortion bans reduce abortions by half to 2/3, depending on the country and study.

No, it doesn't stop them completely, but no one has ever said they'll "do nothing"

The exact words of KhanOfKans are "banning abortion will do nothing to stop abortions, it just means they'll be done unsafely, which makes death or injury to the mother more likely."

[Not Me, Us]

does anyone here think that certain sects of christianity might have to be outlawed for america to survive? Basically AOG, Pentecostals, nondenom, SSPX/Latin catholicism might all need to be banned. The sad thing is that there are a lot of conservative christians who are otherwise nice people. But like where do we draw the line. I kind of think Tushnet is right.

Because the right to kill your child is more important than the right to believe what you think is right.

Your rights end where others' rights begin.

Absolutely right. Now end abortion.

I’m glad to see red avatars are, in their fond phrase, “saying the quiet part out loud.”

Women who need access to safe and legal abortions should be allowed to get safe and legal abortions. I really fail to see why we should be trampling on women's rights to force the birth of a child which will end up being abused in the foster care system or raised by somebody without the means to raise the child effectively, especially when religious fundamentalist nuts like you also want to end sex education and ban contraception. Furthermore, banning abortion will do nothing to stop abortions, it just means they'll be done unsafely, which makes death or injury to the mother more likely. So literally nothing good comes from banning abortion, but I'm sure you don't care as long as you can force your backwards religion on people and exert more control over women.

Sex education is okay, theoretically. Contraception and abortion are the same thing, except one is far more violent. Banning things actually does cause the rate to decrease. The value of life is not predicated on what will unfold. The good that comes from banning abortion is the end to murdering children. I'm not sure how this is "controlling women," that talking point has never made sense to me even when I was sympathetic to your view.

Taking away a woman's right to do something = controlling women. Not really that hard to understand. It eliminates their autonomy to decide whether they willing or able to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, instead putting that personal medical decision in the hands of the state. It's strange to me how "small government conservatives" are just fine with a big government as long as it's restricting the rights of people they don't like.

[7,052,770]

A wild "banning abortion will do nothing to stop abortions" appears!

https://rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2018/10/04/stop-saying-that-making-abortion-illegal-doesnt-stop-them/

Did you even read the article? It says abortion bans reduce abortions by half to 2/3, depending on the country and study.

No, it doesn't stop them completely, but no one has ever said they'll "do nothing"

The exact words of KhanOfKans are "banning abortion will do nothing to stop abortions, it just means they'll be done unsafely, which makes death or injury to the mother more likely."

Well I guess I expected people to realize I wasn't meaning to literally cover all of human history when I said "no one has ever said..."

Obviously, as evidenced by the very article he linked, abortion rates will go down some, just not to 0. I don't think any relevant figures on the pro-choice side (not just talking about message board anonymos) are alleging the rate will stay the same