Outside the Supreme Court, Our First Glimpse of Post-Roe Politics
A weird, messy protest reflects a weird, messy future.

WASHINGTON—A raucous, diverse crowd of pro-lifers and abortion advocates gathered outside the U.S. Supreme Court to decry/celebrate the announcement of today's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization that overturns the landmark Roe v. Wade (1973) decision and gives states far wider latitude to restrict and ban abortion.
While the attention of the several thousand demonstrators was all directed at the Supreme Court, the range of views on abortion itself and what needs to happen next was an early window into the messy democratic politics that will be hashed out by activists, legislators, and ordinary citizens in the Post-Roe world.
The leaking of the draft opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito in May made today's opinion less of a shock than it otherwise would have been. The official overturning of Roe nevertheless provoked some genuine shock and surprise from people who hadn't planned on spending their day protesting in front of the Supreme Court.
"We had plans to do other things today, but after breakfast, the phone went 'boop' and now we're here," says Janet Berry, who was visiting D.C. with her husband from Minneapolis when they heard the decision come down.
Berry says she has been active in pro-abortion and other feminist causes for decades. She tells Reason that she was in a meeting of other activists plotting strategy on passing the Equal Rights Amendment when Roe v. Wade was first announced.
"I'm going back and forth between being so angry I can hardly control myself and so sad that we are going to have to go through this again," she says. "It's a core human right. It's about bodily autonomy."
Supporters of legalized abortion made up an overwhelming majority of people outside the Court today. They proved a largely receptive audience for impassioned speeches from Democratic politicians, including Sen. Maria Cantwell (D–Wash.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.).
A number of pro-abortion protesters, perhaps recognizing the new world where the issue will be decided by legislators, heckled Cantwell with shouts of "pass a law!" and "do your job!" That was followed by megaphone-enhanced shouts of "legalized abortion, nationwide, on-demand, right fucking now."
The smaller number of people representing the other side of the issue outside the Supreme Court expressed the view that, even with Roe gone, the real work of convincing people of the pro-life case still needed to be done.
"We need some time, it's all very raw, of course. We need to see where things are going to go on the state level," says Tim Wezner, a Catholic priest from Detroit studying at Catholic University of America in D.C.
Wezner expressed both support for the decision and anxiety about potential violent reactions to it, referencing the anarchist group Jane's Revenge's call for a "night of rage" if Roe were overturned. "My thought here was to pray for everyone involved, for softening of hearts and understanding even as we disagree, as well as pray thanksgiving to God for allowing this to happen," he says.
As of the early afternoon, the crowd outside the Supreme Court was energetic but peaceful.
Nevertheless, literal signs of the strain the Dobbs decision will surely put on the institutional legitimacy of the Supreme Court were on display. Protesters waived "abort SCOTUS" and "fuck SCOTUS, we're doing it anyway" placards. At one moment, the crowd gave a collective "middle finger" to the Supreme Court building.
The anti-intuitionalism on display gave disquiet to some people in attendance.
"Some of the ideas I've seen from folks about ignoring the Court, that ain't happening. Especially if you're on the side of 'we want government to do good things for society,'" Warren Rhea, an energy industry worker who moonlights as the popular Twitch streamer and neoliberal Twitter personality Bastiat, tells Reason.
At the same time, Rhea says that the relative tranquility of the crowd outside the Supreme Court was encouraging and compared favorably to the typical state of discourse at his natural home on Twitter.
"This whole thing has renewed my faith in the ability of people to spontaneously self-organize and peacefully express themselves. Everyone has been very polite as far as one can be at these things without sacrificing the passion of their messages," he says.
That spontaneity produced no small amount of interesting messaging and activism outside the Courthouse, suggesting the abortion politics of the coming years will be colorful as well as passionate.
A short distance away from Wezner, the Catholic priest, were staffers with the group Catholics for Choice, who were handing out signs celebrating abortion.
"It is devastating for us that this was done in the name of our faith. We know that the majority of Catholics do not agree with this decision," says Jamie Manson, the group's president.
(Catholics for Choice has long been controversial. In 2016, Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan put out a statement roundly condemning the group and calling its use of 'Catholic' in its title "deceptive" and "offensive.")
They weren't the only heretics in the crowd. There were also members of the left-wing group Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising sporting signs that supported universal health care from conception to the grave.
D.C.'s cadres of professional protesters were in attendance as well. The communist group RevCom—a common fixture at left-wing protests in the city—was out in force and proved remarkably successful at getting people to wear the green, pro-choice stickers.
Roe has been the law of the land for some 50 years now. The crowd outside the Supreme Court was predominately younger. Included in their number were people who are now just starting their careers in journalism, politics, and public policy. The diversity of views they expressed suggests abortion in a post-Roe world will continue to be hotly contested.
"I'm angry. I'm mad. It was a religious decision and a partisan decision," said one high school student from Boston, who was in D.C. participating in a journalism program affiliated with The New York Times.
"Lives were saved today," said an intern with the conservative Leadership Institute, who tells Reason she was coming out to celebrate the decision.
This article includes reporting from Eric Bazail-Eimil.
Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Now the question of abortion restrictions goes back to where it should be answered: the people themselves, living in a state.
Not if you listen to the angry crowd; it's back to coat hangers and back alleys.
>coat hangers and back alleys
Now this is a good band name.
I'm earning 85 dollars/h to complete some work on a home computer. I not at all believed that it can be possible but my close friend earning $25k only within four weeks simply doing this top task as well as she has satisfied me to join.
Check further details by reaching this link..>> https://oldprofits.blogspot.com/
It’s been a few days now and I haven’t seen the pro-life perspective shown anywhere in the mainstream media.
Nothing but pro-murder visceral propaganda.
It really is not.
I'm sorry you can't appreciate metalcore-fusion.
I have confusion.
Whats with white people wanting to kill other peoples babies?
They must be crazier than I am !
And Im Dementia Joe!
I'm earning 85 dollars/h to complete some work on a home computer. I not at all believed that it can be possible but my close friend earning $25k only within four (ber-035) weeks simply doing this top task as well as she has satisfied me to join.
Check further details by reaching this link..>> http://usjobs85.tk
And you’re not wearing pants either!
Whoa. Trippy.
Humorous twat.
*Humorless,* dammit.
And it’s not like anyone invented a day after pill in the last fifty years.
...or even "the pill", or IUD, or cervical cap, or condoms, or spermicidal creams .....
I'm earning 85 dollars/h to complete some work on a home computer. I not at all believed that it can be possible but my close friend earning $25k only within four weeks scs04 simply doing this top task as well as she has satisfied me to join.
Check further details by reaching this link..>> http://dollarspay12.tk
Hey, if nobody can tell who is a woman, then how can we possibly know where babies come from?
Well, considering that many of the state laws banning or restricting abortion only place criminal penalties on the provider, and not on the woman, the legal incentive here is absolutely for women to do DIY abortions. It's the same as with guns and drugs. When the government seeks to punish sellers of certain guns, or certain drugs, the incentive is for individuals to start making their own guns, or making their own drugs.
I’m not sure. The least objectionable path seems to be to travel out of state, which is, I acknowledge, harder if a woman is poor or in the Deep South.
CA will come to the aid of poor women in states that abortion isn't available. CA's pretty boy governor has proposed the CA budget include funds to create a system to provide funds for travel, lodging & abortion services for pregnant women living where they can't access abortions in their state.
Camps, with
trains, er I mean high speed rail.Californias version of the underground railroad to liberate all those women from the consequences of their actions.
Ah, mind bogglingly expensive social signaling, our boy Newsom’s specialty.
And it will cost $1.2 million per abortion. Travel and lodging have gotten real expensive lately.
Set up a charity if you want to.
Please do. Progs --- CONTINUE killing your kids. Conservatives will opt to not do so.
I bet that won't cause electoral consequences down the line.
Amazon will likely make a deal to distribute abortion pills super duper cheap to all fifty states.
"...the legal incentive here is absolutely for women to do DIY abortions."
The sensible incentive here, as always, is for contraception and for women to be careful about who they allow to put what in them where and when.
Personal responsibility? In MY libertarianism? Not today, bucko!
Hey, all rights derive from the right to life without responsibility, right?
You need to stop making sense, Homple.
Or just not murder the baby. Unthinkable, I know.
And yet you fully support gun control as well as compulsory vaccinations. It's almost like you have no fucking principles whatsoever and just mindlessly regurgitate whatever happened to be in the ActBlue PDF any given morning.
But what if there is no back alley in your neighborhood?
That just means that you have white privilege and are perfectly capable of finding a back alley somewhere.
Well those people aren't "reasonable" 🙂 - and I've heard far too many bad Handmaid Tale comments in the last 2 days.
That being said, it was obvious as long as 30 years ago (Casey) that the Supreme Court couldn't be relied on, and this always should have been a legislative solution. Democrats/liberals have become very lazy in this tactic of depending on judges to secure rights. Legislation is a much surer way of getting what you want.
Approximately 75% of the nation's women still live in places where abortion is obtainable - the states that have outlawed it are, with the exception of Texas, all pretty low population. Some have a lower population than a single large city.
I'm just curious where all of these biologists came from who know what a woman is. Are biology degrees that common?
My snotty comment Friday evening was that suddenly young feminists who have spit on older Second wave feminists for years are suddenly going to realize that "gender essentialism" is real after all!
"Now the question of abortion restrictions goes back to where it should be answered: the people themselves, living in a state."
That statement need a little clarity...
[WE] mobs of people in State's now get to use their newly EMPOWERED Gov-Guns to FORCE those pregnant families/women to make [WE] mobs reproductive decisions in their PERSONAL lifes....
Yep; Coherently that is exactly what you just said.
Three cheers for MORE Gov-Gun Dictation.... /s
Three cheers for hopefully less physician infanticide.
If you cannot support ?baby? freedom (i.e. Fetal Ejection)
UR supporting FORCED reproduction....
Keep lying B.S. propaganda spreaders.
"I'm angry. I'm mad. It was a religious decision and a partisan decision," said one high school student from Boston, who was in D.C. participating in a journalism program affiliated with The New York Times.
Sounds like a perfect fit for the Times. Wonderful to be young and ignorant.
"I'm angry. I'm mad. It was a religious decision and a partisan decision," said one high school student from Boston, who was in D.C. participating in a journalism program affiliated with The New York Times.
And I'm sure she came to this conclusion 100% on her own.
In a totally unbiased and non-partisan fashion I'm sure.
Young and ignorant? I'm hearing this same non-sense from people in their 50s and 60s!
Wait, was she talking about Roe V Wade?
Not really, the actual fear is shattering of the left's power base.
Abortion being about the only consensus issue.
Shattering the power-base of Individual Liberty...
Yeah; You picked a real winner there... /s
Oh never-mind... I see what you mean now. Entirely UN-reasoned/principled Partisan Politics. There's a ton of truth there.
Yep. The "issue" has never really been the issue. Keeping control of a united powerbase has always been the issue.
The democrats have always said they want to make abortion sue and rare. Now that can finally happen.
Good question. Perhaps she meant all the government COVID policies, or the official infatuation with climate change.
I'm not sure if the hypocrisy of both parties on the subject of 'abortion' could get any more obvious...
If it saves just one life - progs related to forced masking and forced vaccines.
Abortion restrictions - if it saves just one life... oh wait...
They consider abortion a holy sacrament.
That used to be the joke among the religious right, but they really no-shit do nowadays. "Shout your abortion"? That's literally fucking Moloch shit.
It really doesn't mesh with the "right to privacy" that supposedly protects it.
I remember reading about that idiot actress Busy Phillips ranting about how her abortion helped her succeed faster in her career, at some abortion rally. She made it sound like a demonic sacrifice to gain fame and fortune.
What a deal. Murder her own kid, just to get on a few crappy tv shows for a few years.
...And vice versa
How will the USA survive a tyrannical take-over when both parties are hypocrites to their declared principles.
It really makes we wonder how many people would stop voting for Nazism(National Socialism) if only the LIMITED Government would still support LIMITED Government in PERSONAL affairs.
I.e. It's like...
Vote for
1) Puritan Code Dictation
2) National Socialism (Nazism)
Where the F is
3) Individual Liberty and Justice for all.
Grilling some franks for tonight. I'm sure it'll be mostly peaceful.
If your screen name is right, be careful.
Double check each hot dog for veracity before throwing it on the grill.
Don't worry, bro, I'm practicing safe grilling by wearing my magnum condom. (Yes, it's too big, but I like to put some snacks in the tip.)
"It's a core human right. It's about bodily autonomy."
Now do vaccines, you hypocrite.
.....And vice versa...
>>It was a religious decision and a partisan decision
was in 1973 too.
^
Roe v. Wade was just a clump of words.
Winner
That should be on a t shirt.
A right to privacy is a "religious" decision???
I.e. To keep PERSONAL matters as PERSONAL matters and not subjected to Gov-Guns??
As someone who 100% supports abortion rights, allow me to interject that yes, Roe took an unstated and unsupported position on the theological question of when a unborn fetus acquires personhood, and thus rights.
While I agree with the basic substance of the decision, it was not the Federal Government's decision to make.
The Federal Government DIDN'T make the decision...
The U.S. Constitution did... As interpreted by the Supreme Court (judiciary)... That very entity who's job is to prevent the Federal Government from over-stepping their authority.
UR trying to **pretend** that the legislative government keeps the legislative government from becoming tyrannical...
Am I the only one amused that they supremes released the gun rights decision before they released Dobbs?
Seems so.
Nope!
So there was a Catholic priest publicly committing a grave sin.
The Leftclaims to love democracy. This sends abortion back to the democratic branches of government closer to the people.
Takes PERSONAL choices and sends them to [WE] mob "democracy" of Gov-Gun Force..... Or is the tint on your Party Bias so thick you can't acknowledge what REALLY just took place.
Dear Pregnant Wife's/Daughters/Women everywhere,
YOU don't own YOU
[WE] own YOU
Sincerely,
Your 'unicorn' loving dictation regime.
Pro-Life.
Roe v. Wade is the most brilliantly reasoned Supreme Court decision ever! How dare these illegitimate justices disregard a fundamental right that is clearly spelled out in the PENUMBRAS FORMED BY EMANATIONS?????
The United States is now literally The Handmaid's Tale. I mean, sure, it's The Handmaid's Tale with the best economy ever thanks to Joe Biden. But being wealthy in a theocracy is no fun. 🙁
#SaveRoe
#SUPER-PRECEDENT
Unless your statement is meant to be sarcasm, it is silly at best. I am mostly pro-choice but will admit that Roe was a very poorly written decision. Calling it brilliantly reasoned is absurd. Calling this the "best economy ever thanks to Joe Biden" is even more absurd.
His statements are meant to be sarcasm. OBL is a parody account.
Parody is dead. Real life it too absurd.
OBL is a god-damned national treasure! 🙂
You must be new here.
Ironically for Pro-Life it was a perfectly and brilliantly written decision by a Republican Supreme Court. Allowing State's to take fetal interest after viability....
For Pro-Choice it was a curse; for allowing State interest after viability...
But Power-Mad Dictators had to screw it all up... And just took Personal Liberty and threw it in the garbage for Gov-Gun dictation because they indoctrinated society with stories of their 'unicorns' that obviously needed saved so Personal Dictation had to be granted...
Hey, by the way, how is the "search" for the "leaker" going?
Nobody involved in the search has leaked anything yet.
I notice the "bodily autonomy" line as if it were e-mail blasted. And it's hardly a common phrase that you hear people reference every day. What was Ms. Berry's stance on the COVID vaccines? You'd think, given the particular formulation, Reason's interviewer might have been the least bit curious. Of course, the fact that a long-time feminist activist just happened to be visiting DC doesn't even merit a little questioning.
I've given up on you guys as libertarians. Don't make me give up on you as semi-competent reporters.
Eh, you hear the term all the time from the pro-choice side. It's been a go to argument for most of my life at least, probably since the beginning. The observation that this bodily autonomy argument is almost never applied to anything but abortion is also commonly pointed out in libertarian and conservative circles.
Yes; The hypocrisy of both parties is pretty sickening.
A Pro-Choice Republican????? Naw; That's just a faulty advertisement.
Republican's just made a complete *ss of themselves for the whole world to see.
>>"fuck SCOTUS, we're doing it anyway"
yes, you'll just have to drive farther. stupid girls need the most attention.
Yeah, they brought in a woman from Minnesota who sounds like she's waaaay past child-bearing age and a girl from Massachusetts who's an intern for the New York Times. Neither of their access to abortion is in any way going to be affected.
Some people just gotta bitch.
One must drive to escape the [WE] mob dictation in the USA...
Yeah; what a thing to be proud of.. /s
Come up with an original point. You've posted the same shit ten times now, and it's hardly fucking original.
Lol. Let the gals think they’re defying something, dill.
“C’mon, man!”
Berry says she has been active in pro-abortion and other feminist causes for decades. She tells Reason that she was in a meeting of other activists plotting strategy on passing the Equal Rights Amendment when Roe v. Wade was first announced.
She sounds like a real fun girl to be around.
I'm betting pregnancy was never a huge threat for her.
No, asshole, it wasn't done in the name of your faith. It was done as an act of interpretation of the constitution.
And, I say this as a Catholic, the fact that a majority of professed Catholics disagree (which may be true, honestly) is a reflection on the state of the Church. The reasoning of the Church flows very naturally from the teachings of the Church.
Got to wonder if abortion is cool...why, precisely, is somebody part of a church?
The church and Christianity still gives a patina of social respectability. Also, subversion.
The same problem is existing online in the self-professed advocates for legal abortion in the name of Judaism. You will notice almost all of these are young women who appear to have no particular religious compunctions, along with a few exceedingly progressive rabbis.
You will never find a rabbi or Jewish scholar of any level of seriousness discussing a "right to abortion" that exists in the Torah, because it does not exist. Modern abortion methods only became available in the last 100 years, and contrary to wild rumors I hear young women pass around, there has never been a surefire herbal or other way to get rid of an unwanted little passenger safely until then. Thus, the Torah spends virtually no time discussing this, considering anyone who practiced such things to be a sort of withch or butcher.
The modern Jewish take on abortion for religious Jews is that you can have one if it is really, really, really necessary for your health, but that you shouldn't if you can avoid it - aka it is frowned upon. Somehow for areligious Jewish young women this has been translated in their minds as "it's totally fine and I can have as many abortions as I want ITS My RELIGIOUS RIGHT".
Obviously this is not a religious site but this annoys me mainly because they are spouting this terrible opinion on twitter and accelerating the flames of anti-semitism. Look, if you just don't want to follow the religion you were born into, don't. Many people don't anymore. But don't try to pretend it says something it doesn't to assuage your guilt over killing your baby.
I think even the most fervent pro-life conservatives must think once in a while that SJWs not reproducing is a good thing.
-jcr
My mom was more conservative. My dad was more liberal. They both agreed that abortion was morally wrong, and also that the sort of people who go seek out an abortion are the last people in the world who should have children. Couple of things about that though: sometimes getting saddled with an obligation because of your stupid choices is a tonic for a misspent youth; there are options available that relieve you of your lifelong obligation to your child - even if you didn't want it, killing it because you don't want to deal with morning sickness and stretch marks is both ghoulish and childish. That's really what the whole fucking thing comes down to. Roe v. Wade was the ultimate culmination of the boomer ideal of being perpetual children. The answer to "But that's not fair!" for the first quarter million years of human development was "Life's not fair, suck it up". The boomers decided they were going to be the first generation with absolutely no adult responsibilities or obligations, but with all of the benefits and privileges of responsible adulthood. And here we find ourselves now in a society where the same infantilized grown ups who spent 2 fucking years not just walking around with nappies tied to their face, but ratting out their neighbors for not wearing a nappy, or even for just wearing the wrong nappy, are waiting outside supreme court judges' houses with guns to assassinate them because they rendered a legal decision returning a controversial legal issue to the states where it belonged in the first place.
What type of government? Permanent childhood, if you can keep it.
You blame Boomers, but there were no Boomers on SCOTUS when Roe was written.
I think everyone deserves the chance to grow up. And few things cause growing up more reliably than parenthood.
Certainly no guarantee though.
The parents politics do not carry down like DNA.
Berry says she has been active in pro-abortion and other feminist causes for decades.
Yeah, she had no plans to protest a decision we knew was coming.
What about swim teams?
"Today the Court has returned to being an institution of judgement, not of will."
Yes, as it should be. The court is not the forum to impose your will on others, if anywhere it's been returned to that forum you marxist cunt (to the quoted twat, not you).
This whole thing has renewed my faith in the ability of people to spontaneously self-organize and peacefully express themselves.
The feds had no interest in stoking this one?
I wonder how much Soros money went into that spontaneous self-organization.
I wonder if the spontaneous guy with the spontaneous gun and lockpicking equipment who spontaneously showed up at Brett Kavanaugh's house and spontaneously confessed he was there to assassinate him based on histrionic stories spontaneously published on the worldwide web along with spontaneous maps to the houses of only those supreme court judges who were appointed by a Republican will have to spend 4 years in prison like the spontaneous guy with the spontaneous plastic Viking helmet who spontaneously shouted from the podium of the US capitol building.
Holy shit, I could only bother with so many abortion articles yesterday. Did Britches really say this was spontaneous? My god man, wake the fuck up.
"My body, my choice" "privacy is a fundamental human right"
"bodily autonomy" All pretty standard libertarian themes. Nice to see so many folks suddenly "coming around," but I wonder where they all were when Libertarians were routinely getting <1% of the vote with the same themes?
What’s growing inside a woman when she’s pregnant is not her body, it’s a completely separate thing with differenr DNA. It is, however, living off her, so she can choose stop this thing from living off her body by having an abortion. So why is it that, if she decides to keep it that she can make the sperm donor use his body to make money to pay for what she decided to do with her body?
He's mocking the hypocrisy of those who use those arguments but don't apply it to anything else.
I'm retarded.
"it’s a completely separate thing" --- the LIES.... Omg...
You know what would make you LIES actually TRUE?
Fetal Ejection...
It is. Biologically speaking. It has its own organs (including the placenta) it's own DNA. Yes, like he said it receives nutrients from the mother, but the entire concepta is separate from the mother. Every fetal organ is separate from the mother. Even the hormones that keep pregnancy supported are created by the placenta after it develops. Point to what he got wrong, dipshit.
PROVE IT --- Fetal Ejection...
If you want to scrape it out, go ahead, but don't lie to yourself about the facts. DNA don't lie.
Reality doesn't lie... Spray your DNA, Biology, but, but, but the "science" B.S. all you want; All your B.S. still isn't going to produce a "baby" pre-viable....
You Pro-Life indoctrinated [WE] Power-Mad mobsters are soooooo identical to the Climate Change freaks... Their still pitching B.S. about the weather will kill us all in 20 more years(1970s), 20 more years (1980), 20 more years on-and-on-and-on with a ton of B.S. yet everyone can open the F'En front door in 2022 and see that the weather isn't a climate emergency....
Same B.S.; You'll go on and on and on about DNA, Biology, It's a Baby, It's a Person, It's a Child yet at anyone can see by the ?Baby? Ejection (freedom) stance it's all just a bunch of B.S. propaganda.....
And what is the MAIN resource both B.S. crowds are after????
Their [WE] mob Power of those Gov-Guns to dictate everyone else.
You could believe it's a baby from the point of conception and I could believe it's not until birth, and it wouldn't matter. I can guarantee that some states will legalize partial birth and late-term abortion soon enough.
Or you can stop pushing to sell everyone's Individual soul to the [WE] foundation of the State Gov-Gun dictation and start being a USA patriot who wants Individual Liberty and Justice for all....
And, like these people, the LP was not terribly upset over forced vaccinations and mask laws. Hopefully Mises caucus can drag the LP to a libertarian position.
If carried to term, we know what will be born is a human being, but they argue abortion isn’t ending a life. However, my not wanting to get an untested “vaccine,” even though I had covid meant I was killing people. Right.
Not true, the issue may not be human and instead be a progressive.
No one should be coerced into accepting medical treatment, and no one should be forced to remain pregnant against the will.
Well, that's your opinion. Lots of other people have a different opinion.
Which is why it's good that these issues can now be resolved at the state level.
Out of the hand of those PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The self-delusion of what is actually happening is staggering...
We must not allow elected legislatures to decide the abortion issue, because Democracy!
"Lots of other people have a different opinion."
Because YOU people don't OWN YOU.... Lots of other people [WE] mobs do............. Welcome to the [WE] foundation of monopoly Gov-Guns of dictation.
Well, yes, TJJ2000, you are part of a mob that wants to impose a single way of life, a single form of social organization, a single kind of community, on 330 million people.
Well, yes... The single way of life as-in a USA as defined by a US Constitution that was written to ensure Individual Liberty and Justice for all by LIMITING the Powers of Government for 330 million people.
What did you think I was keeping that a secret???
Heaven forbid ?forced? "freedom" isn't the curse "social organization" by Gov-Guns supporters like's to pretend it is...
The US Constitution was written to limit the power of the federal government. In particular, it was written to ensure that the federal government doesn't usurp power from the states.
The power of state government is primarily limited by state constitutions. That's why states have constitutions.
Sure, sure; That's why we can't find any mention of the 'State' within the U.S. Constitution... Oh wait......
What is this 1859; when State's proudly supported slavery?
You just as well be telling every citizen in the USA that their 'joke' of inherent rights are entirely subjective by their State Constitutions only.. Oh wait; yep... That's EXACTLY what you just said.
No one "forces" you to remain pregnant once you are pregnant. That's the natural biological course. Just like no one "forces" you to continue to respirate. That's the natural course. Now, if you'd like to stop respirating, there are things you can do to make that happen. If you'd like someone else to stop respirating, there are things you can do to make that happen as well. And that's where a question of legality and morality comes into view. As a matter of practicality it doesn't particularly matter whether suicide is legal or not - it's still your option, and once it's done it's irrevocable anyway. You can't be punished for killing yourself. On the other hand, if your desire is to stop someone else from respirating, well, that's where things might just get a little bit more complicated.
Banning *all* options to stop a pregnancy *is* forcing one to remain pregnant... That's like saying you can stop a car; you just can't use the brakes.
It is..............
Gov-Gun FORCED reproduction.
No, there are plenty of other options. Abstinence, pills, condoms, diaphragms, IUDs, morning after pills etc. Fuck. You are stupid.
Prevent is not equivalent to Stop.
And there's Leftards Episode #3215123 playing out...
Banning Guns would "prevent" innocent life loss.
Banning x,y,z,etc.. would "prevent" innocent life loss.
Pro-Life is sooooooooooooo leftard mentality.
Good thing then that nobody is forced to become pregnant in the first place!
And good thing we have [WE] power-mad Gov-Gun toting mobs of authoritarian dictation to make sure there is no solution to any PERSONAL accident that might occur.
Who hurt you? Seriously.
Gov-Guns.... Every F'En day dictating every F'En thing I do....
I'm F'En sick and tired of Gov-Gun toting Power-Mad freaks who can't mind their own F'En business especially when they don't even have an excuse to be there.
Really? Then maybe you should move to a state that suits you. You cover the gas and I'll help you move; I have a truck.
Pffft. He’s got a truck. Figures.
Haha.
Or maybe you Power-Mad freaks can move to a tyrannical Nation that suits your Power-Mad tendencies and STOP destroying the USA.
Most states will permit abortions for rape.
Otherwise, you are pregnant by your own will and decision.
Are you a biologist?
No, but I played one on TV.
And everyone else's decision to *ban* all your choices to end the pregnancy.
Prejudice manipulation is all you're selling.
No it isn't see above. There are plenty of options available to stop pregnancy, they just require some responsibility before the act or right after. God, you haven't made a good argument yet. I'm reluctantly pro-choice, but when I read idiots like you, who can't even make a fact based argument, I really question why I'm pro-choice.
YOUR FACT........
If you can't support ?baby? freedom (i.e. Fetal Ejection)..
UR supporting Gov-Gun FORCED reproduction.
Same, reluctantly pro-choice, but man do the pro-abortion fuckheads have me seriously questioning that position.
Yes, that's a choice that some communities make.
Other communities will allow termination of the pregnancy any time until birth
That's what liberty means: that different people with different preferences can live in communities that reflect their values.
If you don't want to live in a state that has abortion restrictions, don't move to such a state.
If you think that states are "too big" to make such distinctions, I actually agree, so let's break down our states until they are no bigger than 1-2 million people each.
That's not YOUR pregnancy... That's the 'communities' pregnancy! /s
Obviously you're talking about a 'communities' ?Liberty? to dictate members of it. You're speaking nothing about Individual Liberty.
No one is being forced to remain pregnant against their will.
1. There are already a slew of companies, private agencies, states, and more that'll pay for transportation and the abortion.
2. DON'T GET PREGNANT AND YOU WONT NEED AN ABORTION. No crap about rape, incest, health, etc. Those are rare.
Through having enough intercourse, we know what will be born is a human being, but they argue refusing sex isn’t ending a life.............
UR pretty funny...
>Through having enough intercourse, we know what will be born is a human being
There are plenty of ways to have sex that will not result in pregnancy.
>but they argue refusing sex isn’t ending a life
Huh?
What’s the over under on how long until insurrections are cool again?
They never stopped being cool.
I cant get an erection.
Dammit.
I'll take over. When they do it it's Resistance, not Insurrection.
The fact that most of the country favors abortion rights is mentioned every day, but obviously that isn't true in red states. So, what's undemocratic with red states restricting abortion access if the majority of their voters are okay with that? I am pro-life and live in a northeast blue state. I've accepted that as long as I live there, my state will be inconsistent with my unpopular views and will never have cool friends.
I have new friends each day!
And I see a new face in the mirror each morning.
Of course it is. It's a lie, so it has to be repeated constantly to gain from repetition what it could not from reason and fact. When this question is asked with any degree of specificity and nuance at all instead of a binary choice, you find that the vast majority of people in north America as well as culturally "western" Europe don't support an outright ban on all abortions, but have much different opinions about abortion during the first trimester as compared to the second and third. Which is pretty well reflected in the laws of most other "western" countries where the procedure is minimally regulated if at all during the first trimester, much more strongly regulated during the second, and practically illegal in the third. The only 2 other countries on earth with a legal abortion environment as permissive as the United States up until 2 days ago are Canada and China. After the first and second world wars most of the world made its peace with the death of Christendom , but since those wars were fought in their neighborhoods, their schoolyards, their parkways, they weren't quite as gung-ho for the death cult as the militantly nihilistic Marxists who were ascendant in the rest of the world, or the ostensible theocratic bumpkins here in the United States who could easily abstract things like plunging a scalpel into the base of the skull of a 9 month old "clump of cells" while its shoulders and head are dangling from the blown out remains of its mother's vagina and it gasps its first taste of air. Some people were civilized enough to realize that they didn't have to jettison morality just because they had jettisoned religious moral authority.
[WE] mobs rule!!!!
Either way it's decided it's mob rule, dipshit.
Ever heard of a PERSONS CHOICE instead of a [WE] mob's popularity Prom-King and Queen's choice???
That's the same mentality guys who gang a drunk girl have about things. Is mob rule okay then?
Absolutely not... That's why that was entirely sarcastic...
The idiots you write about sound pretty much like left wing politics before Roe, after Roe, before Dobbs, and after Dobbs.
"Make the world do things my way or I will hold my breath until I turn blue"
(and my turning blue is the signal for a bunch of guys in black shirts to beat your head in)
Its all the drugs we did in the 60s.
You dont think Nancy and Hillary look like dried prunes for no reason do you?
Hillary licked too many postage stamps. That bitch is crazy!
Of all the ways this sentence could have ended, I am so glad it ended with "postage stamps".
Now, our current VEEP...
I doesnt take her 3 licks to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop.
Hey Joe, how many licks does it take to get to the center?
I dont know. Applesauce is my limit.
I just drool on it.
My licking days are over.
Now I just take sustenance from fragrance from teenage girls hair.
Maybe the licking you're going to receive in the upcoming midterms will teach you. Clinton got the message!
Outside the Supreme Court, Our First Glimpse of Post-Roe Politics
A weird, messy protest reflects a weird, messy future.
Via weird, messy legislatures instead of clean, efficient panel of 9 lawmakers who are there for life.
Reason sure does love them some rule by arbitrary and capricious executive or judicial fiat. Anything but letting the proles have a say.
I like how there's this sudden concern for poor, southern, Trump-voting women.
We Progs are just in it for votes
the Reason dot com and broader Libertarian fantasy that ~*~Markets~*~ would pave over deeply held cultural opinions amongst the various colors shaved apes who participate in said ~*~Markets~*~ is dying a very public death.
You have libertarians confused with progressives. It is progressives who believe that we will, and ought to, become a single society, governed by a single set of rational rules, in which cultural differences don't really matter in day to day interactions. It is progressives who believe in free markets that are "kept free" and forced to be non-discriminatory through careful government interventions.
Libertarians believe in the non-aggression principle and voluntary associations, specifically the ability of people to form groups and associations that reflect their values and exclude people who don't share their values. Libertarians also believe that businesses ought to be free to choose to operate according to the cultural, ethnic, religious, or other preferences of their private owners, without government interference.
And within the imperfect liberty of the US system of government, libertarians believe in subsidiarity, states rights, and small government; again, that's diametrically opposed to the progressive vision.
And overturning Roe v Wade just grew government authority.
Whatever. Make an original argument.
Let me tell you what we talked about in the 1800's !
We know you snuck out at night for some brown sugar.
You knowcwhat they say, " youll never go back"
Just keep that moo cow Stacy Abrams away from me. She might fall on me.
Overturning Roe v. Wade reduced the authority of the federal government, handing those powers back to the states.
This is a net increase in liberty and a net decrease in government authority.
It is authoritarians like you, TJJ2000, who want all issues decided at the federal level according to simple majoritarianism.
--- Roe v Wade in a nutshell ---
Pre-Viable pregnancies are left as Individual Choice...
Post-Viable pregnancies can be legislated by the State...
--- After overturning Roe v Wade ---
ALL pregnancies can be legislated by the State...
===============
Net Government Authority = Increased.
Seems the only ?Liberty? you are talking about is "The State" ?Liberty? to DICTATE Individuals.
You're awfully concerned about abortion for being a gay male.
I can certainly see why ~*~Markets~*~ are responsible for the supreme court rescinding a legal privilege it concocted out of whole cloth 50 years ago. Very incisive comment.
your reading comprehension is shit.
I appreciate you Christian.
In typical fashion, women still have more reproductive rights than men, and yet are still bitching and moaning.
If, as one protester claims, deciding when to start a family is a human right, when do men get that basic human right?
In the worst case, where all states ban abortion, women get to make that choice in the bedroom, same as men. As it is, women will still get the opportunity to make that decision, while men will still be bound to indentured slavery for nearly 20 years.
As usual, women get to see what it feels like to be treated like a man, and they hate it.
Women own the baby-making machinery, so they have more reproductive rights than men. Life is unfair.
Pretty sure women don't own *all* the baby-making machinery. I haven't seen a lot of spontaneous pregnancies where no man was involved. Want to take another crack at 4th grade health class?
Selling a gallon of gas doesn't entitle one to a car.
Socialist man to socialist woman: "Between you and me, we have only one vagina. Fairness demands that both of us get equal access."
Now that's sexual equity!
You win the Internet.
Why isn't there legalized prostitution in the US? The current monopoly doesn't want to lose she/her/their privilege.
Me and Nancy are pro abortion. Yeah were Catholics but look at how we lie, cheat and steal in Government.
Guess were CINOS?
GtG here comes my applesauce and strained pears!
Over two millennia, the Catholic church exterminated all competing Christian denominations for several centuries, put the corpses of its ex-popes on trial, viciously persecuted people of other beliefs, had periods of massive fornication and corruption at the Vatican, instigated religious wars that killed off a large percentage of Europeans, tried to kill of democracy time and again, got into bed with Hitler, and most recently, has been getting into bed with socialists.
By historical standards, Joe and Nancy are perfectly good Catholics.
And wouldn't you know it, for all their trouble, the secular atheists out-murdered, out-totalitarianed, and out-inquisitioned them in the span of less than century.
Progress?
I fully agree: the Catholic church is far from the worst of all human organizations.
That doesn't change the fact that if it is in the Catholic church's interest, historically, they have tolerated far worse people than Joe and Nancy.
Economy of scale and more efficient means
But other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?
One aspirin can prevent pregnancy. You place the pill between your knees and fucking keep it there.
Sure, if you don't know that women can bend over.
-jcr
Its clear USA is two countries now..
Bluexit is the best solution at this point.
I propose we cede the west coast, from LA to Seattle and about 50 miles inland, and DC north to Boston, again about 50 miles wide. Urban hipsters in non-coastal states will have to relocate.
I'm definitely thinking the leak came from the concurring side of the Court. A strategic leak intended to soften the blow.
Heh, Kavanaugh must have appreciated it.
It was Sotomayor.
Articles from Fiona and Jacob inbound in 3..2..1 on how this will have a disproportionate and chilling impact on illegal aliens and sex offenders.
Whoever came up with calling this "Teen Reason" really couldn't have gotten any more spot on.
Abortion is not a "core human right", not under the US Constitution, not under international human rights law, not under most nations' laws.
"Go through" what exactly? Angry about what? You didn't do f*cking anything for Roe v. Wade.
If you want legal abortion, do the political work, primarily in state legislatures.
And if you want other people to support you and your cause, stop being such an entitled, self-righteous prick.
They can't. They literally can't. It's the only thing giving their lives any semblance of meaning. It's the same with the Branch Covidians who can't accept that after almost 3 years the statute of limitations on their panic is starting run out with people who aren't neurotic shut-ins.
Hey, there's nothing wrong with being a neurotic shut in. I'm not hurting anyone.
Owning one's own self is a sign of being............
"an entitled, self-righteous prick."?????????
...and...
The ?Liberty? of the State to Dictate your Personal Pregnancies....
UR really pulling rabbits out of your hat today...
Abortion seems to be appropriate under certain circumstances; the exact definition of those remains a mystery to me.
But the assumption that a sperm upon meeting an egg immediately confers "human" life is laughable.
There is no doubt that abortion beyond some time limit represents murder.
Now, all of you defining "abortion" as "murder", let's hear some definitions, please.
Both pro-life and pro-abortion people are missing the point when they engage in discussions about "personhood" or "human life".
Arguments for criminalizing bestiality and animal cruelty don't rely on personhood of the victim, and even though the animals are often the property of the perpetrator, the law intervenes in private conduct of the perpetrator with their private property. It's the same with abortion: we can choose to make it legal, or we can choose to outlaw it.
One thing that is unacceptable to most Americans is to normalize abortion or even celebrate it. Abortion is a vile practice and a moral failure, and even if we keep it legal, decent people should treat it as such.
Hilariously, it's usually the most crazed animal rights retards who are also the most vocal abortion proponents. Hang a chicken by its feet and then shock it into unconsciousness in an electrified water bath before you humanely slit its throat and you're a cretinous monster. Wait until the head and shoulders of a squirming 9 month old human child have emerged from the mother's birth canal and then pierce its skull at the base of the neck without anesthetic, cut its spinal cord, then carefully rip the limbs apart from the torso to preserve the most expensive cuts of fetal tissue and that's "choice".
Well, the argument cuts both ways, though: under our current Constitution, there is neither an obligation for the state to outlaw abortion, nor a right to have an abortion. Even the fact that Christianity considers abortion to be a grave sin does not mean that it needs to be illegal (plenty of grave sins are perfectly legal).
Both sides would do well to remember that. And both sides would do well to reach some compromise. But, oh no, this issue is just too juicy! Both progressives and conservatives love tearing our nation apart over it, while distracting us from the issues that actually matter.
But the assumption that a sperm upon meeting an egg immediately confers "human" life is laughable.
What species does a "human" fetus start out as, and at what time does it change to homo sapiens? Try not to sound laughable when answering.
If you were a True Believer, you would understand that some Mysteries of progressive doctrine are beyond the understanding of even the devout.
It's hilariously accurate science, if that's what you mean. You can still argue it's OK to terminate a human life because it is so early in development that it doesn't matter. But like most of the depraved death cultists on your side, you know that revealing the full depths of your sociopathy would shock and horrify most people, so you switch the burden, lie, deflect, or do whatever else is necessary to avoid saying the quiet part out loud.
For my part, I'm willing to strike a legal bargain with you Moloch-worshipers. I don't believe in your psychopathic death cult any more than you believe in Jesus or Mohammad or Buddha (those were all historical people, but you're a half-retarded 75 year old reddit teen who still thinks Piss Christ was edgy so I make accommodation for your stupidity and historical illiteracy as I do for your psychopathy). Objective science tells us that an implanted zygote is a fully differentiated human being, but we needn't make law based entirely on science. Heck, even those old dusty books you were too stupid to read impose no penalty if a child is killed prior to quickening. Since that's too subjective to be of any legal utility, we could approximate it in modern development terms. "Quickening" usually happens between 12-18 weeks gestation. Let's split the difference, call it 15 weeks. Hey, that sounds familiar. Seems like that's the cutoff for unrestricted abortion in pretty much every first world country on planet earth, excepting the United States and Canada. Oh hell, I'm feeling especially generous. Let's give you bloodthirsty savages a little extra blood for your altar. Let's say 18 weeks. 4 and a half months. Exactly half a typical pregnancy. Let's say you get totally unlimited free reign. 18 weeks. Tell you what, we'll even repeal every single law requiring fetal remains to be buried or cremated. Hell, let's be super generous: you don't even have to dispose of what's left of the carcass as bio-waste. You can take them home and adorn your walls with them. Sprinkle them upon your altar. Eat them. Whatever the fuck you sick pieces of shit insist needs to be done. The only condition is that the remains cannot be sold - not by the mother or the abortion provider. Donated for medical research at the expense of the researcher or receiving facility is fine. You good with that? Something tells me you aren't. Because you truly evil, sick pieces of shit simply can't do it. There is no accommodation you will not spurn and reject, because you are, simply, evil, sick pieces of shit. Festooning your doorways with baby entrails wouldn't even be enough for you.
The Science has nothing to do with human reproduction, pregnancy, and abortion. (For proof, see current progressive infatuation with made-up genders.)
The Science can only be used to justify official policies, and emotional-political positions, for some (not all) diseases.
That's the wrong argument. The right argument is that it is legally irrelevant whether fertilization creates a human life; it is not the job of the US government or US law enforcement to protect all human life on this planet.
I think that's a perfectly fine compromise, but neither pro-abortion nor pro-life groups will accept this.
And the fact is that in a free nation, we don't just have the freedom to make individual choices, we also need to have the freedom to choose what kind of communities we live in.
And that means that abortion (as well as most other contentious issues) should be left to the states.
*Reality* is the best 'evidence'....
If one cannot support ?baby? freedom (i.e. Fetal Ejection)
They're supporting FORCED reproduction.
The Pro-Life [WE] mob has gone full on Power-Mad propaganda for sheeple minds.. It shows by overturning Roe v Wade; their very own 'winning' ruling written by a Republican Supreme Court because the Power-Mad [WE] mob gotta taste of that sweet dictation Power and their thirst for MORE, MORE, MORE Gov-Gun dictation just couldn't be satisfied.
Roe v Wade established that because Women's pregnancies pre-viable had ZERO, NODDA, ZIP (as-in 0% chance) of establishing a *real* "baby" even with all the medical survival equipment at it's whim that it wasn't a 'person' at that point in time and that even pregnant people still have self-ownership. However; It also stated that the State could take interest in Women's pregnancies post-viable (as-in ban abortion if there was 0.000001% chance) a "baby" could be "saved" from the pregnancy...
It was actually a very very Pro-Life stance by leaving State Interest in people's pregnancies post-viable.
So per the discussion at hand; Overturning Roe v Wade didn't "save" anything but 'unicorns' in people's imaginations at the cost of Individual Liberty (being FORCED to reproduce).
In the realm of State authority in Post-Viable pregnancies. I support Fetal Ejection because the USA is founded on enslaving one to save another principles.
But Pro-Life Power-Mad [WE] mobsters won't talk or acknowledge that option. They play the ignorant game about an abortion procedure that doesn't contain any "murder" within it's procedure (which could be easily legislated medical practice) versus just "banning" people's personal choices... However; For me that battle really isn't one worth fighting for.
We have an agreed definition of the end of life - end of sustained brain waves. That definition should be used for the start of life, - start of brain waves - which would put it at 15-20 weeks.
Most of the protests were in states that will allow abortion.
So I ask; "what is the motive here?"
Protestors answer; "we care about the women in other states..."
Bullshit!
The same bullshit that the right spews; "we care about the lives of the unborn..."
So take away the emotional BS and create a space for a logical and reasonable debate on when a fetus is endowed with the natural right to life, balanced with the natural right to liberty of the woman, and room for reasonable exceptions.
So libertarians, isn't the Supreme courts ruling to eliminate authoritarian rule in Roe and Casey allowing states to decide via representative legislation or popular vote a step in the right direction?
Only if you're concerned about the legal process and making policy in a sensible way even if it means you don't get everything you want. Libertarians are more concerned about escaping any responsibility for their shitty choices in life and socializing the consequences of those shitty choices. The typical angsty teenager who can't grok that rights are concomitant with responsibilities.
That is complete and utter bullshit.
Probably about a third of libertarians are legally pro-life and believe that the state has an obligation to prevent aggression against all human life, even the fetus.
Another third of libertarians believes that fetuses are not persons and hence are not covered by the NAP.
And yet another third thinks that abortion is vile and deeply immoral, but that it is not the state's function to protect the fetus, just like it's not the state's function to protect people in other countries.
Both of the latter two groups believe that no costs or consequences of abortion should be socialized, and that market forces and the consequences of abortion themselves will make it rare.
Roe was never the Law of the land, it was only prescience. Roe granted right by the Judicial Branch not the Legislative Branch.
Due to this reality is was always bad. If people want abortion rights then create a bill and get it passed by the congress and senate and get the president to sign it into law.
Personally, I fall in between the Pro-Abortion and Anti-Abortion camps. I see this as a conflict between the rights of 2 and to a lesser degree 3 humans. As a pregnancy progresses there should be a sliding scale between the rights of the mother and the rights of the child.
At the point that a child is able to live outside of the womb then abortions can reasonably be considered something akin to murder. Partial birth abortions are definitely within this.
I believe in reasonable restrictions, not a outright ban, and not unfettered access. Exactly where this line is to delimit is best left up to the individual states and not the federal government.
Except rights are not granted by the government. Our system is predicated on inalienable rights, granted by our creator.
So this was the court declaring a pre-existing right that the state cannot touch. (Unless they have a good reason... they always leave themselves an out)
The legislature’s job is to reconcile conflicting rights.
Mom. Baby.
More messy politics:
CNN had a panel of analysts talking about the decision yesterday. One panelist challenged another to reconcile her catholic belief in the sanctity of life with her absolutist position in favor of abortion at will.
She came back hard, saying that her family includes many disabled people. One has the mental ability of a 1 year old and is 54. One has Downs. One is autistic. Aid from the state is harder to obtain than you think. It takes a toll on the parents, mentally and financially.
So she supports abortion rights.
Not one person on the panel even flinched.
She literally argued that abortion should be legal because of the need to abort autistic babies and babies with other handicaps and disabilities. Tje concerning thing isn't that she argued it... it is that nobody else found it even a little bit shocking.
I bet she has a Margaret Sanger poster at home.
Margaret Sanger would have aborted her. She's not white, after all.
-jcr
Most of those things you wouldn’t know until after birth.
Aside from downs.
She needs to be aborted.
Probably the rest of the panel too.
As an older, high-functioning Autistic, I'm not the least bit shocked by what she said. Evidence seems to prove that many of us may be the result of selfish choices by moms.
If I understand the core pro-abortion argument, people claim that any imposition on a person is wrong, and laws should support methods to remove said imposition, even when impositions arise from deliberate personal actions.
We could have some fun with this ethic.
Weve prepped these fools to be reactionary and self centered.
Thats how we control them!
Blow a dog whistle, they foam at the mouth.
Promise to give them something, they vote D forever.
Joe, you sound surprisingly lucid.
Its the pills Jill puts in my applesauce at noon.
And a fresh Depends. I get all jacked up on dat!
That's obviously ridiculous. It's that the state should not force women to give birth against their will, nor should the state settle the moral question of abortion for everyone. It's not only commonsensical, it's downright libertarian.
Yet here libertarians are, refusing to be libertarian the one moment it wouldn't make them look foolish.
I agree!
But instead of your atomistic view of human society, in which there is only "the state" and "the individual", in reality, issues like abortion and whether abortion is permissible should be settled at the level of groups in which you voluntarily choose to be a member.
In the US, that principle is implemented by having different states with different laws. That way, Tony, you can choose to live in a pro-abortion state, other people can choose to live in a pro-life state, and the vast majority of people to whom this simply doesn't matter choose their communities based on other criteria.
I'm a Libertarian, I'm pro-choice, and I know the world would be better off if you had been aborted.
-jcr
>majority of Catholics do not agree with this decision
That’s not how Catholicism works.
so this is an "attempted coup" at Reason now, right?
Pr0-abortion rioters attempted to breach the Arizona capitol building in Phoenix while the Arizona Senate was in session.
The Arizona Department of Public Safety issued the following statement: “Troopers deployed gas outside the Senate building after protesters attempted to break the glass. The crowd then moved to the Wesley Bolin Plaza where some monuments were vandalized. Gas was deployed again to disburse the crowd.”
Tolerant arent we?
ask the J24 committee
big win for localized policymaking
but seriously, the article never mentions that the vast majority of protesters aren't affected at all? come on
that's not about women's rights, that's purely anger they can't enforce cultural uniformity on everyone else
just as it isn't enough for San Francisco to have drag queen wangs waving in kids' faces, they need it to happen at every school, even in rural Kansas
Big win for State Gov-Gun Authority over people's PERSONAL life....
Yeah; You just about said it right.
does the baby have a personal life?
what "baby"???
The mythical unicorn you've pumped up in your imagination with lies and propaganda??? The chance of your pumped-up imagination having any *reality* pre-viably (The Roe v Wade ruling) is 0%.
Your just using pumped-up propaganda of imagination to push for your own [WE] mob's Gov-Gun POWER/Dictation over others PERSONAL lifes...
Pro-Life billboard to all parents....
"Hey, That's not YOUR daughter... That's our "baby" incubator!!!"
And [WE]'re going to bring out State Gov-Guns and shoot her if she refuses to incubate OUR "baby" till birth or refuses to go to prison...
Pro-Libertarian billboard to all people:
"If you don't want to be pregnant, don't get pregnant"
And if an accident occurs; WE almighty holy Gov-Gods will make SURE you reproduce...
Not any better.
There are ways to terminate pregnancy after an "accident" occurs.
Most of America believes a fetus to be a person after a certain stage of the pregnancy. A logical compromise is simply adopting the European standard on abortion.
A woman can literally NEVER get pregnant unless bodily fluid enters her body, and it comes from one source. If she consent to an activity which allows this, she assumes the risk, even with the protection. Which is like saying an illegal alien assumes all risks if she's kidnapped by cartel during migration or arrives at a state that won't give welfare to noncitizens.
You don't own autonomy and the consequences of your actions. You don't have a constitutional right to unfettered liposuction access after eating 50 pounds of fried food all day. Some states may allow it, others may put age restrictions, etc. Some states or cities ban certain fireworks in the name of safety, others may allow it. I oppose vaccine mandate, but if you're seriously ill, the government has some cause to limit your body in terms of movement.
None of this is controversial. States have their own standard on 2A, even though that's a right specifically guaranteed by the constitution. Why can't state have their own laws on abortion?
What happens if you crash your car into someone, or get drunk and max out your Visa card while losing it all at a casino. Do you just get to say "undo"?
What happens if you accidentally crash your car into a grave yard of already dead people and hurt yourself in the process but it doesn't cause any property damage?
Um........ Nothing.........
Pro-Life Power-Mad Dictators, "Nut uh. You violated our 'sacred' religious graveyard of ghosts (i.e. 'unicorns') we like to call the undead people and therefore we must use Gov-Guns to BAN you from seeking medical attention to help yourself.... Holy crap; you were driving - you deserve to be denied medical treatment!!!"
Arrogant Power-Mad authority..................
Pro=choice billboard to all people:
"Executing someone for the crime in inconveniencing you is a Constitutional right!"
who???
Support fetal ejection (Free the ?Babies?)
OR you're supporting FORCED reproduction.
Who hurt you? Be free of it.
Yep; It's about time to "Be Free" of Power-Mad Gov-Gun toting law that is violating Individual Liberty.
Gee, if only women lived years longer than men in order to compensate for the biological unfairness that forces some of them to bear a baby or two.
A fine attitude I'm sure. How about let's not require the government to force everyone to live by it if they don't want to?
Oh, can we kill you then (assuming we do not wish to live by those interfering-government rules about murder)?
Some apologists argue that pro-choicers are now tasting what pro-lifers have been served for 50 years. Pro-lifers never got a win!
Well, that's not really true. Roe was a win for everyone. If you don't like abortion, you can not get an abortion. You can try to persuade others not to get abortions. Nobody's freedom was taken away in that scenario.
Conservatives seem actually not to be able to grasp what actual human freedom is. They actually believe that it is an affront to their own freedom if they're not allowed to use state power to force people to conduct their private lives in a certain way. How unfair for them, not being able to put the jackboot of the state on women's throats all these decades.
What an unreal crock of shit.
No, Tony, you are unable to grasp what actual human freedom is. Actual human freedom isn't just that you can do whatever you want, unconstrained by society.
Actual human freedom includes the freedom to choose a community to live in, subject to rules that you and the other community members agree to, including rules that limit your own ability to make choices.
In the US, this is implemented by having the nation consist of states with many different laws and with free movement of people and goods between them. That is real liberty.
I'll grant you this: instead of 50 states, we probably should have 200 states, each with 1-2 million people.
Omg.... U have gone full on retarded...
Did you really just say; Real Liberty is having many tyrannical State's to choose from... Holy crap....
Any excuse..... Any excuse at all the justify Gov-Gun dictation....
I'll tell you what Individual Liberty is. It's not having Power-Mad [WE] mobs who Love their Gov-Guns of dictation over others. That is Real Liberty... But instead using that monopoly of Gov-Guns to ensure no one infringes someone else's Liberty...
As you Pro-Life tyrannical authoritarians just managed to do... Used Gov-Guns to TAKE away Individual Liberty from others using a F'En 'unicorn' (imagination) y'all pretended you were ensuring Liberty for.
I'm not "pro-life". As I have said before, I don't give a fuck whether women have abortions or not. I fully support California and Massachusetts and NY in allowing abortion to whatever stage they want, even post-birth if they feel like it. I also support Idaho and Oklahoma prohibiting abortion from the moment of conception.
What I oppose and despise is your Marxist view of "liberty", a view that isn't liberty at all but tyranny. You deny people the right to self-determination and instead want to impose exactly your view of society on them, if necessary at gunpoint. That is your idiotic view of "liberty".
Liberty of those State Gov-Gun of Dictation...
Yep... Full on retarded...
Here try this one on for size...
"I don't give a fuck whether women have abortions or not. I fully support Jill's, Maria's, Joy's, Martha's decision to abortion to whatever stage they want, even post-birth if they feel like it. I also support Emma's, Gina's, Emily's, Chloe's decision not to abort from the moment of conception...."
See what you're really supporting... You're selling every woman's Individual soul to [WE] State Dictation. You're selling off Individual Liberty to [WE] mob democracy...
Omg... UR a State Politician huh?? That's why you think it's "Liberty" to use Gov-Guns and tell 'those' People what to do in their personal life's...
Why that would make complete sense...
Why does a man care so much about abortion? No matter what, you can't get pregnant.
Some men believe that the principle's of Individual Liberty "for all" instead of just themselves is an important factor to keeping a free nation (in which they live)..
So really; it's just making sure they themselves don't end up behind a Gov-Gun over some unicorn B.S. propaganda.
Tony is a progressive who sees freedom only as a lack of responsibility. To be Tony-free, society must provide for all his needs, and allow people to avoid any undesired consequences.
"We had plans to do other things today, but after breakfast, the phone went 'boop' and now we're here," says Janet Berry, who was visiting D.C. with her husband from Minneapolis when they heard the decision come down.
Imma call bullshit right there. If I had to bet my life on whether they just happened to be visiting D.C. vs. whether they're professional activists on standby for the pending announcement, I would choose the latter. Tell me, friends, do you your phones go "boop" to announce pending Supreme Court decisions?
MSM always gives press and quotes from the professional activists.
The Onion has an interesting take on Post-Roe Supreme Court decisions at least
- The Supreme Court rules 5-4 to reclassify women as service animals
- The Supreme Court rules 5-4 to add Jesus into all paintings
- The Supreme Court rules 5-4 to baptize the Constitution
Great, can the libtards stop saying it's a 6-3 conservative court now?
Unlike the Onion, the Bee publishes satire about the left that is (1) actually funny and (2) much more frequently comes true.
Meanwhile, several senators have noted that Goresuch and Kavanaugh lied about Roe in their confirmation hearings and private interviews. Goresuch sits in seat which was stolen from Obama and Barret in a seat stolen from Biden, the presumptive and actual winner of the 2020 election, and was confirmed after voting had already begun. The court is packed by the GOP with liars and religious fanatics who let their superstitions rule their decision. All 6 who voted yes on overturning Roe are Catholics or raised as one (Goresuch). They fucked America bareback.
You are lying. Neither Gorsuch nor Kavanaugh committed to not overturning Roe.
NYOB, SC nominees don't publicly commit to anything but they did indicate they respected Roe as precedent as they did Casey and under stare decisis. Both Collins and Manchin said they misled them personally and in public they misled everyone.
Here's Alito lying at his SC confirmation hearing (since law school the record shows he was strongly against Roe from the beginning).
Mr. Alito applied for another position in the Justice Department, proudly citing his role in devising a strategy for those cases. “I personally believe very strongly,” he wrote in an application, that “the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion.”
"Years later, when those documents were disclosed during his Supreme Court confirmation, he assured senators that while that statement reflected his views in 1985, he would approach abortion cases with an open mind as a justice, with due respect for precedent and with no ideological agenda.
“When someone becomes a judge,” he said, “you really have to put aside the things that you did as a lawyer at prior points in your legal career and think about legal issues the way a judge thinks about legal issues.”.."
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/25/us/politics/samuel-alito-abortion.html
I fail to see the "lie".
Alito approached the issue with an "open mind" and gave "due respect to precedent". And approaching it with an open mind, he reached the conclusion that the respect "due" to Roe was to flush it down the toilet because it was an objectively bad precedent.
This has nothing to do with whether one is pro-choice or pro-life, it is a simple fact about a SCOTUS precedent.
Legislatures need to do their job and pass laws on abortion.
Cry some more, loser joe.
As to the preferred interpretation here, that this is a 10th amendment issue about states rights and so the debate is back where it belongs, regardless of the validity of that position - rights are not supposed to be subject to votes and through Griswold Roe found a right to abortion an unenumerated right - not only are US citizens much less involved in state politics, not knowing who their reps and senators are and little about legislative issues, but expecting them to relocate because of whether they are pro-life or pro-choice is ridiculous. Because local newspapers almost don't exist and because Americans rarely remain where their ancestors might have been raised, states legislatures are where issues go to be devoured by special interests we barely know about. Lastly, thinking one side or the other will be content with state limited jurisdiction is dreaming. This will be a national issue still and again, not a state crazy quilt. A court in the future will treat this ruling with all the respect and attention this one did with Roe.
Enjoy.
I feel your pain, loser.
J Fs a bigger retard than I am !
I feel your desperation cheater. More of us than you (you've won one presidential vote since 1988), your luck in the EC will run out, and with no rules anymore (your side has killed the Senate and tried to overturn an election), you'll pay the price.
Enjoy reaping what you've sown.
Lol Joe Friday is SEETHING 😀
More guns than people, loser. More than 20 million AR15 in conservative hands. 20 million AR15!!!!!! Billions of rounds, BILLIONS!
Reaping what we’ve sown? Come and get it, pathetic milksop bitch. 😀
Roe v Wade?
I prefer Row.
I cant walk well enough to Wade.
Im the first President that can fall up stairs !
I support biden and everything he is doing . He's a perfectionist. We just need to keep faith in him and have patience . Peace Guys https://www.surepac.in/
The nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, in a landmark ruling on Friday, made clear their views on abortion, with the conservative majority overturning the Roe v. Wade decision from 1973 and stripping away women’s constitutional protections for abortion.
The vote was 6-3 to uphold Mississippi’s law banning most abortions after 15 weeks, but Chief Justice John Roberts didn’t join his five fellow conservatives in overturning Roe. He wrote that there was no need to overturn the broad precedents to rule in Mississippi’s favour.
https://worldabcnews.com/what-each-conservative-u-s-supreme-court-justice-said-about-abortion-as-nominees/