SCOTUS overturns Roe megathread (pg 53 - confirmed)

[Hermit For Peace]

Goodbye Roe! This should have happened decades ago!

Why? Are you a female? Do you want the government telling you how to manage your body? Truly?

Or, if you are not a female, how come you think you have a right to tell women how to manage their bodies? Would you like the government to tell you how to manage yours? Truly?

[Hermit For Peace]

Frankly I never thought I'd see the day that we'd be going backwards in our evolution, but then, when it comes to women and women's bodies, our country (and most of the world) wants to rule over our womenfolk and that's that. Maybe it's part of the "protection" mentality, maybe it's part of the "fear of God" mentality, maybe governments believe that they have the right to tell women how to act, what to think, how to treat their bodies, basically how to live.

Oh well, I think it's just the pendulum swinging the other way, for now. There are too many problems associated with the abortion debate. Too many people have too many differing opinions, and until we all sit down and get clear on what we want to stand for as a country, we will continue to have this confusion, not only about abortion but also about what freedom means.

Because that is what is truly at stake here: personal freedom vs government oppression.

[Hermit For Peace]

Goodbye Roe! This should have happened decades ago!

Why? Are you a female? Do you want the government telling you how to manage your body? Truly?

Or, if you are not a female, how come you think you have a right to tell women how to manage their bodies? Would you like the government to tell you how to manage yours? Truly?

Abortion is legalized murder. Why are you pro-murder?

Who says it's murder? You?

[Hermit For Peace]

Goodbye Roe! This should have happened decades ago!

Why? Are you a female? Do you want the government telling you how to manage your body? Truly?

Or, if you are not a female, how come you think you have a right to tell women how to manage their bodies? Would you like the government to tell you how to manage yours? Truly?

Abortion is legalized murder. Why are you pro-murder?

Who says it's murder? You?

You're taking a human being and ending its life prematurely. That's murder.

Who says it is a human being at that point? You? Science? The Church? The Government? Is the fetus viable outside of the womb? What are you "murdering", specifically?

[Hermit For Peace]

Goodbye Roe! This should have happened decades ago!

Why? Are you a female? Do you want the government telling you how to manage your body? Truly?

Or, if you are not a female, how come you think you have a right to tell women how to manage their bodies? Would you like the government to tell you how to manage yours? Truly?

Men can have babies today

Good for them, if that's what they want.

[Hermit For Peace]

Goodbye Roe! This should have happened decades ago!

Why? Are you a female? Do you want the government telling you how to manage your body? Truly?

Or, if you are not a female, how come you think you have a right to tell women how to manage their bodies? Would you like the government to tell you how to manage yours? Truly?

Abortion is legalized murder. Why are you pro-murder?

Murder is based sometimes. Without it, we'd still have John Lennon.

The world isn’t a just place, sadly. Yoko is still at large, making eardrums bleed.

Lol!

[Hermit For Peace]

What I would honestly like to see with respect to abortion policy is this:

Assemble a distinguished panel of obstetricians, neuroscientists, and philosophers studying philosophy of mind and phenomology and task them with assembling a report with their consensus opinion on when human life/consciousness begins. 

We should agree in advance that whatever their decision is will be binding national abortion policy, with abortion always permitted before this point, and prohibited beyond this point with narrow excpetions.

You have to have something in there for the emotional people. You can't use logic on emotional people, and there are plenty of them in this abortion debate. They need to hear from a representative of God, somehow. Also, you need a psychologist on the panel to help people understand the dynamics of power and why men feel the need to dominate women.

Also, I would disagree that we must accept their opinions in advance. Nope. Let's reason over everything and make the best decision possible from all the information we've gathered.

But I'm dreaming. I live in a dream world and I admit it. This will never happen in my lifetime. Period.

[Hermit For Peace]

Should Government be involved in abortion?  This issue is never going to be "won", and the moral debate over it will last forever - and it's a particularly religious issue.  

You can't talk about the history of the abortion debate in the United States without talking about religion.

The issues of abortion, contraceptives, and a new issue- hormones for trans kids - are all linked - it's about whether people have the right to be imposing their religious beliefs on other people... and controlling what those people and those families decide is best for them.  It's about CONTROL.

I say no.  A person deserves complete autonomy over their own body, and if that right's not going to be respected, then we might as well forget about every other right because it doesn't matter anymore.  

You cannot say you live in a free country when you do not have rights over what is yours - and no one else's.

Well said. I agree with all you said here. Great post. I guess it all boils down to the fact that we are a Puritan nation. We came from Puritans and how are we going to possibly shake those kinds of roots? We are probably never going to be able to shake them until some enlightened era of time in the far distant future.

But that is not to say that we shouldn't keep fighting for equality and clarity in the here and now.

[Hermit For Peace]

Goodbye Roe! This should have happened decades ago!

Why? Are you a female? Do you want the government telling you how to manage your body? Truly?

Or, if you are not a female, how come you think you have a right to tell women how to manage their bodies? Would you like the government to tell you how to manage yours? Truly?

Abortion is legalized murder. Why are you pro-murder?

Who says it's murder? You?

You're taking a human being and ending its life prematurely. That's murder.

Who says it is a human being at that point? You? Science? The Church? The Government? Is the fetus viable outside of the womb? What are you "murdering", specifically?

Science, actually. Viability outside of the womb has nothing to do with whether or not the person in the womb is a human being.

All Science can see is that there is something growing in there. But Science cannot tell us exactly when life begins. Nobody can. An argument someone else made is that since we can't know exactly when life begins, then we have to treat it as though life begins at conception.

That is one perspective. But it is not THE perspective because nobody has all the answers. We're all just fumbling along, trying to make decisions that are pretty much impossible to make. And with our Puritan background, people are strongly swayed by the God conversation. Which we make up anyway.

Seems to me that the best way to go is for those women and girls who want and need an abortion to be able to go get one safely. (And no, the government doesn't have to provide for it. That could be part of the deal.) And then anyone who is against having an abortion, just don't get one. You are only in control of your own body, not the bodies of ALL women.
 

[Hermit For Peace]

Goodbye Roe! This should have happened decades ago!

Why? Are you a female? Do you want the government telling you how to manage your body? Truly?

Or, if you are not a female, how come you think you have a right to tell women how to manage their bodies? Would you like the government to tell you how to manage yours? Truly?

Good thing saying you can't kill your offspring you consented to help creating isn't the government telling you how to manage your body.

I mean, even if you consider abortion to be killing your offspring, abortion bans are still the government telling you how to manage your body. Criminal law is by definition the government telling you what you can and cannot do.

You have the choice in managing your body by choosing whether or not to engage in acts that naturally lead to pregnancy.

This is our Puritan background in action. You may want to live like a priest or a nun, but most people don't. While your argument may be true on one level, it's not a realistic one in modern times.

You are also discounting the fact that many women and girls are raped. Even by their own family members. They are raped in the military. They are raped at school. They are raped everywhere. Not everything is fun sex in bed.

[Hermit For Peace]

Should Government be involved in abortion?  This issue is never going to be "won", and the moral debate over it will last forever - and it's a particularly religious issue. 

You can't talk about the history of the abortion debate in the United States without talking about religion.

The issues of abortion, contraceptives, and a new issue- hormones for trans kids - are all linked - it's about whether people have the right to be imposing their religious beliefs on other people... and controlling what those people and those families decide is best for them.  It's about CONTROL.

I say no.  A person deserves complete autonomy over their own body, and if that right's not going to be respected, then we might as well forget about every other right because it doesn't matter anymore. 

You cannot say you live in a free country when you do not have rights over what is yours - and no one else's.

Well said. I agree with all you said here. Great post. I guess it all boils down to the fact that we are a Puritan nation. We came from Puritans and how are we going to possibly shake those kinds of roots? We are probably never going to be able to shake them until some enlightened era of time in the far distant future.

But that is not to say that we shouldn't keep fighting for equality and clarity in the here and now.

So I assume that each of you are opposed to COVID-19 vaccine mandates.  After all, that requires people to take medicine they don't want in order to keep their job, etc. 

If we're going to have this debate as to "My Body, My Choice!" then let's go all the way with it. 

Hello Fuzzy. The conversation is not about Covid. A pandemic is different from a pregnancy.

[Hermit For Peace]

Goodbye Roe! This should have happened decades ago!

Why? Are you a female? Do you want the government telling you how to manage your body? Truly?

Or, if you are not a female, how come you think you have a right to tell women how to manage their bodies? Would you like the government to tell you how to manage yours? Truly?

Good thing saying you can't kill your offspring you consented to help creating isn't the government telling you how to manage your body.

I mean, even if you consider abortion to be killing your offspring, abortion bans are still the government telling you how to manage your body. Criminal law is by definition the government telling you what you can and cannot do.

You have the choice in managing your body by choosing whether or not to engage in acts that naturally lead to pregnancy.

This is our Puritan background in action. You may want to live like a priest or a nun, but most people don't. While your argument may be true on one level, it's not a realistic one in modern times.

You are also discounting the fact that many women and girls are raped. Even by their own family members. They are raped in the military. They are raped at school. They are raped everywhere. Not everything is fun sex in bed.

You're pretending the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies are the results of rape, when it clearly isn't even a significant percentage of unwanted pregnancies leading to abortion.

You put words into my mouth that I didn't say. I said that you were discounting the fact that many women get raped, and that is true.

Regardless, I find your argument very narrow and one-sided. I can't agree with the direction of your conversation. Been there done that.

[Hermit For Peace]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/roe-v-wade-overturn-opinion-poll-2022-05-08/

Not exactly a promising poll for the GOP.

That was interesting. Thanks for posting that.

[Hermit For Peace]

Just gonna drop this right here.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/06/26/325806464/states-cant-mandate-buffer-zones-around-abortion-clinics-high-court-says

Chip chip chipping away....

[Hermit For Peace]

And there you have it. We'll see how this turns out, but at least there are states that people can go to for abortion services, and there is also medical abortion if women choose to go that route.

Make no mistake, women will find a way to have an abortion if she deems it necessary. That's a fact.

[Hermit For Peace]

A great day for America. The ideal of a government that protects life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness has been further realized.

This, of course, does not apply to living, breathing schoolchildren

Isn't that so sad?

[Hermit For Peace]

Great, so now that this is done will the pro lifers go push for universal healthcare?

They won't.

Because they don't actually care about Pro Life.

Once your child is born; then they will probably have no quality of life at all, and it would be like being dead anyway.

Have we seen America's infant mortality rate ?

Well, it sounds good on paper to be pro life.

[Hermit For Peace]

To keep babies safe, we should adopt other pro-life policies, such as stricter gun controls measures.

Right guys?

"No. Once they pop out of the womb it's not my problem any more."

Maybe it's time they DO care about all the kids when they are real kids and not some idea in a womb.

[Hermit For Peace]

This is the first thing good that has happened politically in a very long time. Cheers for the SC for correcting their previous error and not being a slave to "precedent".

In your opinion, why do you think this is a good thing? Just asking. Many women and the men who impregnated them probably don't agree with you.

[Hermit For Peace]

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1540368313041272834

Susan Collins lives life totally with rose colored glasses on. Frankly she seems like such a flake so often....

[Hermit For Peace]

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

I hope this holds true.

[Hermit For Peace]

The Lord is all-seeing, all-knowing. It is perfectly possible He has arranged for this to happen. I can't say anything certain either way of course.

So why do you say God is a He? You don't know that. He could be a She or an It, or in Its own category.

[Hermit For Peace]

Kind of awkward to celebrate "Land of the free" and fourth of July next week in a country where you in fact, cannot make your own decisions.

"Freedom" has never been anything more than an empty slogan to Republicans

Except freedom from taxes for the wealthy and freedom to own an assault rifle at age 18 they will vociferously defend.

[Hermit For Peace]

snip

I don't know why you think this was a valid response. When I asked you for evidence that a fetus is a baby (read: sentient and autonomous in its own right), you responded with a handful of definitions from a handful of medical dictionaries.

How does your response address the implicit question of sentience and autonomy?

I provided you with a definition for baby from a medical dictionary.  You don't get to move the goalposts with your own unsupported definition.

Editing to also add that playing along with your unsupported definition, sentience begins while the baby is still in the womb, and a newborn baby isn't completely autonomous, so you might want to decide which definition you value more.

Moving goalposts is what they do best.

Even a cursory online search would demonstrate that farlex medical dictionary is an online user based resource. It's damn near the equivalent of Wikipedia for medical dictionaries. But then that would kind of defeat the argument of the religious zealots here, wouldn't it?

I'm sorry to hear you lacked the ability to read past the first example, because I provided more than one. Which is significantly more than our friend who provided none despite claiming on numerous posts his side was more supported.

Those are certainly words. None of which just proved my point, which unfortunately demonstrates that you are basically citing the medical dictionary equivalent of WebMD as a definitive medical resource to support your own religious views as some sort of incontrovertible scientific truth.

Says the guy who also makes no effort to back his claims.

Says the gal too lazy to do them modicum of online research. Or should I say to fanatical?

As usual, your posts demonstrate intellectual laziness.

And somehow you still haven't disproved anything I said.

Better luck next time, honey Badger.

YOU are the one sighting this thing is some sort of medical treatise worthy of belief. The burden of proof is on

I invite anyone reading this discourse to do their own 90-second online search to demonstrate that, per usual, f t g h n is talking out of her ass.

I have provided multiple sources to back my argument. You're the one who only read one line, decided that was the only one you'd focus on, and provide not a single source to disprove anything I said, including the one line you are focusing on.

You have cited sources but haven't proven anything. You are talking out of your private part.

[Hermit For Peace]

snip

I don't know why you think this was a valid response. When I asked you for evidence that a fetus is a baby (read: sentient and autonomous in its own right), you responded with a handful of definitions from a handful of medical dictionaries.

How does your response address the implicit question of sentience and autonomy?

I provided you with a definition for baby from a medical dictionary.  You don't get to move the goalposts with your own unsupported definition.

Editing to also add that playing along with your unsupported definition, sentience begins while the baby is still in the womb, and a newborn baby isn't completely autonomous, so you might want to decide which definition you value more.

Moving goalposts is what they do best.

Even a cursory online search would demonstrate that farlex medical dictionary is an online user based resource. It's damn near the equivalent of Wikipedia for medical dictionaries. But then that would kind of defeat the argument of the religious zealots here, wouldn't it?

I'm sorry to hear you lacked the ability to read past the first example, because I provided more than one. Which is significantly more than our friend who provided none despite claiming on numerous posts his side was more supported.

Those are certainly words. None of which just proved my point, which unfortunately demonstrates that you are basically citing the medical dictionary equivalent of WebMD as a definitive medical resource to support your own religious views as some sort of incontrovertible scientific truth.

Says the guy who also makes no effort to back his claims.

Says the gal too lazy to do them modicum of online research. Or should I say to fanatical?

As usual, your posts demonstrate intellectual laziness.

And somehow you still haven't disproved anything I said.

Better luck next time, honey Badger.

YOU are the one sighting this thing is some sort of medical treatise worthy of belief. The burden of proof is on

I invite anyone reading this discourse to do their own 90-second online search to demonstrate that, per usual, f t g h n is talking out of her ass.

I have provided multiple sources to back my argument. You're the one who only read one line, decided that was the only one you'd focus on, and provide not a single source to disprove anything I said, including the one line you are focusing on.

You have sited sources but haven't proven anything. You are talking out of your private part.

Interesting, there seems to be nothing there disproving anything I said. Please, enlighten me.

I have tangled with you before. I have learned first hand that you are beyond enlightening, and I say that respectfully.