SCOTUS overturns Roe megathread (pg 53 - confirmed)

[7,052,770]

They could, however, investigate any miscarriage under suspicion that it was an abortion pill, subpoena internet and credit card records to see if a woman bought one.

Pretty nightmarish stuff, but at the same time you can't really oppose that kind if thing if you really and sincerely think abortion is murder.

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

They could, however, investigate any miscarriage under suspicion that it was an abortion pill, subpoena internet and credit card records to see if a woman bought one.

Pretty nightmarish stuff, but at the same time you can't really oppose that kind if thing if you really and sincerely think abortion is murder.

As has been pointed out before, under an abortion ban every miscarriage becomes a potential crime scene.

[Person Man]

They could, however, investigate any miscarriage under suspicion that it was an abortion pill, subpoena internet and credit card records to see if a woman bought one.

Pretty nightmarish stuff, but at the same time you can't really oppose that kind if thing if you really and sincerely think abortion is murder.

They will eventually suspect some sort of attempted abortion even if there is a difficult pregnancy at this rate. That’s what I am worried about as an expecting dad.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I've seen a lot recently about how "please just f***ing vote" is being seen as the Democratic equivalency to "thoughts and prayers," and people are getting sick of it. I get it. But proactively voting as often as possible for candidates that they believed reflected their goals is what granted the right this victory, even if it took fifty years.

If Democrats wanted people to vote, why did they shut down OFA as soon as Obama became President (and Obama’s Chief of Staff called those who wanted to revive it “***ing retards”)? Why did they call people voted in the 2020 Democratic primaries “Brownshirts”? Why did they blame the very people who elected Biden for Senate and House defeats in 2020?

Everyone who is pissed off has to pull their weight. Politicians need to be less concerned about donors. Voters need to be less concerned about ideological purity.

Indeed. There is a lot of blame to go around for our current situation, but we can't go back in time or to another universe no matter how much we may want to. We have to do all we can to at least not let things get worse from here on out. The bare minimum of that is never considering voting Republican and in turn electing Democrats instead, no matter what. I don't know how many more lessons can be harshly learned by everything going wrong and that in turn being a motivating factor. That's not how it should be. I don't know how many more ways I can say this.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

They could, however, investigate any miscarriage under suspicion that it was an abortion pill, subpoena internet and credit card records to see if a woman bought one.

Pretty nightmarish stuff, but at the same time you can't really oppose that kind if thing if you really and sincerely think abortion is murder.

They will eventually suspect some sort of attempted abortion even if there is a difficult pregnancy at this rate. That’s what I am worried about as an expecting dad.

We're not that far from a point where Republicans will want white women to produce medical certification of documented infertility, or they'll be charged with felony failure to reproduce.

[HillGoose]

bro do the republicans not realize they've basically gone commie? for them there's no longer a "my body" it's "our body"

[longtimelurker]

bro do the republicans not realize they've basically gone commie? for them there's no longer a "my body" it's "our body"

In case anyone thought that above comment is facetious or hyperbolic:

https://www.deseret.com/1990/1/1/18839164/ceausescu-terrorized-romanian-women-br-abortions-contraceptives-were-outlawed

Nicolae Ceasescu is looking up at SCOTUS and signals his approval.  Communism comes to America, brandishing a cross.

[lfromnj]

AG Garland: States can't ban FDA-approved abortion pills on safety grounds

If a state bans abortion…. They can ban the pills too

But they can't stop the Postal Service from delivering the pills. State law only takes effect once the box is opened and then the recipient will be at home.

FYI , The Comstock Acts ban the Postal Service from delivering the pills. Its one thing for the Federal government to ignore a law like say states legalizing weed but its a whole another thing to take part in a crime.

[OSR stands with Israel]

bro do the republicans not realize they've basically gone commie? for them there's no longer a "my body" it's "our body"

If you believe a fetus is a life then you have to support banning abortion pretty much though.

[Middle-aged Europe]

bro do the republicans not realize they've basically gone commie? for them there's no longer a "my body" it's "our body"

If you believe a fetus is a life then you have to support banning abortion pretty much though.

Possible death penalty slippery slope detected.

[HillGoose]

bro do the republicans not realize they've basically gone commie? for them there's no longer a "my body" it's "our body"

If you believe a fetus is a life then you have to support banning abortion pretty much though.

I get where you are coming from but the thing about it to me at least is that you can really only do what you can do which is what you think is right, so like my wife and I agree that we could never have an abortion unless it was medically necessary because we do not think that is a good thing to be doing. But it would be wrong of me to tell someone else that they couldn't have an abortion because then I'm enforcing my beliefs on them.

If you look at it in the reverse, it's basically the same as someone who would have an abortion telling people who don't want to that they have to, which I hear actually happens in places like North Korea which is an Axis of Evil communist state, there are forced abortions there, and so we do not want to be like North Korea just "in reverse" we have to actually aspire to better to live up to the values of liberty and democracy.

Another thing I don't get, if the govt wants to promote family values and what not, why aren't they doing anything to make fertility treatments more accessible? Or make it easier to adopt? Instead they focus on forcing ppl who don't want babies to have them, when there are lots of us out there who would love to have a baby but have a hard time doing so and they have to jump through so many hoops to make it happen.

[OSR stands with Israel]

bro do the republicans not realize they've basically gone commie? for them there's no longer a "my body" it's "our body"

If you believe a fetus is a life then you have to support banning abortion pretty much though.

I get where you are coming from but the thing about it to me at least is that you can really only do what you can do which is what you think is right, so like my wife and I agree that we could never have an abortion unless it was medically necessary because we do not think that is a good thing to be doing. But it would be wrong of me to tell someone else that they couldn't have an abortion because then I'm enforcing my beliefs on them.

Sure but that is why a federalist system works the best as you let the people in each state decide their abortion laws cause it is very hard to reconcile a position of thinking a fetus is a life and then supporting the pro choice position.

So the best compromise imo is letting the people in each state decide democratically what abortion laws they want .

[Badger]

bro do the republicans not realize they've basically gone commie? for them there's no longer a "my body" it's "our body"

If you believe a fetus is a life then you have to support banning abortion pretty much though.

I get where you are coming from but the thing about it to me at least is that you can really only do what you can do which is what you think is right, so like my wife and I agree that we could never have an abortion unless it was medically necessary because we do not think that is a good thing to be doing. But it would be wrong of me to tell someone else that they couldn't have an abortion because then I'm enforcing my beliefs on them.

Sure but that is why a federalist system works the best as you let the people in each state decide their abortion laws cause it is very hard to reconcile a position of thinking a fetus is a life and then supporting the pro choice position.

So the best compromise imo is letting the people in each state decide democratically what abortion laws they want .

Just like interracial marriage? You know, let each state sort it out for themselves depending on their view on the issue? And the views rights of individuals affected be damned?

[OSR stands with Israel]

bro do the republicans not realize they've basically gone commie? for them there's no longer a "my body" it's "our body"

If you believe a fetus is a life then you have to support banning abortion pretty much though.

I get where you are coming from but the thing about it to me at least is that you can really only do what you can do which is what you think is right, so like my wife and I agree that we could never have an abortion unless it was medically necessary because we do not think that is a good thing to be doing. But it would be wrong of me to tell someone else that they couldn't have an abortion because then I'm enforcing my beliefs on them.

Sure but that is why a federalist system works the best as you let the people in each state decide their abortion laws cause it is very hard to reconcile a position of thinking a fetus is a life and then supporting the pro choice position.

So the best compromise imo is letting the people in each state decide democratically what abortion laws they want .

Just like interracial marriage? You know, let each state sort it out for themselves depending on their view on the issue? And the views rights of individuals affected be damned?

Completely false comparison given that Roe has nothing to do with the equal protection Clause and it would be laughable to claim it should .

[Badger]

bro do the republicans not realize they've basically gone commie? for them there's no longer a "my body" it's "our body"

If you believe a fetus is a life then you have to support banning abortion pretty much though.

I get where you are coming from but the thing about it to me at least is that you can really only do what you can do which is what you think is right, so like my wife and I agree that we could never have an abortion unless it was medically necessary because we do not think that is a good thing to be doing. But it would be wrong of me to tell someone else that they couldn't have an abortion because then I'm enforcing my beliefs on them.

Sure but that is why a federalist system works the best as you let the people in each state decide their abortion laws cause it is very hard to reconcile a position of thinking a fetus is a life and then supporting the pro choice position.

So the best compromise imo is letting the people in each state decide democratically what abortion laws they want .

Just like interracial marriage? You know, let each state sort it out for themselves depending on their view on the issue? And the views rights of individuals affected be damned?

Completely false comparison given that Roe has nothing to do with the equal protection Clause and it would be laughable to claim it should .

I'm not going to even attempt engaging in a rational debate with you about how the right to interracial marriage in the right to terminate pregnancy at least in the first trimester or intricately both related

The only real difference here is now conservatives have been forced to accept interracial marriage as opposed to abortion.

[Person Man]

bro do the republicans not realize they've basically gone commie? for them there's no longer a "my body" it's "our body"

If you believe a fetus is a life then you have to support banning abortion pretty much though.

I get where you are coming from but the thing about it to me at least is that you can really only do what you can do which is what you think is right, so like my wife and I agree that we could never have an abortion unless it was medically necessary because we do not think that is a good thing to be doing. But it would be wrong of me to tell someone else that they couldn't have an abortion because then I'm enforcing my beliefs on them.

Sure but that is why a federalist system works the best as you let the people in each state decide their abortion laws cause it is very hard to reconcile a position of thinking a fetus is a life and then supporting the pro choice position.

So the best compromise imo is letting the people in each state decide democratically what abortion laws they want .

Just like interracial marriage? You know, let each state sort it out for themselves depending on their view on the issue? And the views rights of individuals affected be damned?

Completely false comparison given that Roe has nothing to do with the equal protection Clause and it would be laughable to claim it should .

I'm not going to even attempt engaging in a rational debate with you about how the right to interracial marriage in the right to terminate pregnancy at least in the first trimester or intricately both related

The only real difference here is now conservatives have been forced to accept interracial marriage as opposed to abortion.

But now the proverbial slope has been nicely lubricated by the fluids of those who think they are better than us, so who knows.

[Bismarck]

bro do the republicans not realize they've basically gone commie? for them there's no longer a "my body" it's "our body"

If you believe a fetus is a life then you have to support banning abortion pretty much though.

I get where you are coming from but the thing about it to me at least is that you can really only do what you can do which is what you think is right, so like my wife and I agree that we could never have an abortion unless it was medically necessary because we do not think that is a good thing to be doing. But it would be wrong of me to tell someone else that they couldn't have an abortion because then I'm enforcing my beliefs on them.

Sure but that is why a federalist system works the best as you let the people in each state decide their abortion laws cause it is very hard to reconcile a position of thinking a fetus is a life and then supporting the pro choice position.

So the best compromise imo is letting the people in each state decide democratically what abortion laws they want .

Just like interracial marriage? You know, let each state sort it out for themselves depending on their view on the issue? And the views rights of individuals affected be damned?

Completely false comparison given that Roe has nothing to do with the equal protection Clause and it would be laughable to claim it should .

I'm not going to even attempt engaging in a rational debate with you about how the right to interracial marriage in the right to terminate pregnancy at least in the first trimester or intricately both related

The only real difference here is now conservatives have been forced to accept interracial marriage as opposed to abortion.

He’s right though. The problem with Roe (and why some on the left have a point with Obergafell although I don’t see it happening) is that it’s based on nothing in the constitution whereas the equal protection clause is not something anyone would challenge. Not to mention nobody opposes interracial marriage nowadays except crackpots whereas with abortion you have a large minority who views it as murder and a majority who view it at the very least as something to not be done lightly.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

https://twitter.com/WhiteBoyUsul/status/1541870239930978304

Racist libtard is racist.

[Virginiá]

https://twitter.com/acrowandthedead/status/1541602157492948994

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

States cannot stop abortion pills from being mailed to someone. Granted, abortion pills do not work after X amount of time, but states cannot regulate interstate commerce. Only the federal government can. The only possibility of restricting abortion pills would be a nationwide ban on them passed by Congress, which, again, the Republicans could attempt to do if they regain control of the federal government.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

States cannot stop abortion pills from being mailed to someone. Granted, abortion pills do not work after X amount of time, but states cannot regulate interstate commerce. Only the federal government can. The only possibility of restricting abortion pills would be a nationwide ban on them passed by Congress, which, again, the Republicans could attempt to do if they regain control of the federal government.

Welcome home, Dukey!

[politicallefty]

He’s right though. The problem with Roe (and why some on the left have a point with Obergafell although I don’t see it happening) is that it’s based on nothing in the constitution whereas the equal protection clause is not something anyone would challenge. Not to mention nobody opposes interracial marriage nowadays except crackpots whereas with abortion you have a large minority who views it as murder and a majority who view it at the very least as something to not be done lightly.

The issue is that, just like in Obergefell, Loving was based on a hybridization of the rights under the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause. It's probably the biggest issue I have with Justice Kennedy's opinion in Obergefell. I agree with it, but it was left vulnerable to an attack on substantive due process grounds. Both Loving and Obergefell are based on the fundamental right to marry that has been repeatedly upheld by the Supreme Court through the Due Process Clause (i.e. substantive due process).

The right to marry someone of another race, as a right under the United States Constitution, predates Roe by less than six years and was far more unpopular. The framework this Court has established in recent cases relies on "historical practices" and rights "deeply rooted in the Nation's history". Same-sex marriage obviously does not meet either of those definitions. However, the right to interracial marriage flunks those tests as well. The Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1868. A unanimous Court ruled in 1883 (Pace v. Alabama) that anti-miscegenation statutes were constitutional and could criminally prosecuted. It took another 84 years, 99 years after the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, for interracial marriage bans to fall. With this Court's reasoning, abortion should indeed be a right until the point of quickening. Of course, this Court writes its own version of history and the rights of all are at its mercy.

[Ferguson97]

Sure but that is why a federalist system works the best as you let the people in each state decide their abortion laws cause it is very hard to reconcile a position of thinking a fetus is a life and then supporting the pro choice position.

So the best compromise imo is letting the people in each state decide democratically what abortion laws they want .

"Yes I think that abortion is infanticide, but also it should be a states' rights issue."

Why would a genuinely pro-life person accept anything less than a national abortion ban?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Sure but that is why a federalist system works the best as you let the people in each state decide their abortion laws cause it is very hard to reconcile a position of thinking a fetus is a life and then supporting the pro choice position.

So the best compromise imo is letting the people in each state decide democratically what abortion laws they want .

"Yes I think that abortion is infanticide, but also it should be a states' rights issue."

Why would a genuinely pro-life person accept anything less than a national abortion ban?

States rights is the compromise between people who think that and the people who think it should be completely legal

[Ferguson97]

Sure but that is why a federalist system works the best as you let the people in each state decide their abortion laws cause it is very hard to reconcile a position of thinking a fetus is a life and then supporting the pro choice position.

So the best compromise imo is letting the people in each state decide democratically what abortion laws they want .

"Yes I think that abortion is infanticide, but also it should be a states' rights issue."

Why would a genuinely pro-life person accept anything less than a national abortion ban?

States rights is the compromise between people who think that and the people who think it should be completely legal

Yes I understand how that meets the definition of a compromise, but my question is why would either side accept those conditions?

Group A thinks that Group B wants to kill babies, and Group B thinks that Group A wants to restrict bodily autonomy. We're not talking about a tax bill here, both groups believe that the other side is evil.

Why would you compromise with people that you think are killing babies? If you really believe that abortion kills a baby, then you should be treating us as Nazi-levels of evil. We'd be some of the worst people to ever exist.

Why compromise with us?