The Abortion Thread

[jhu72]

Thank you scumbag republiCONs -- you are 100% responsible for this.

[MDlaxfan76]

Report on full Florida abortion amendment petition. 1.45 million signatures expected by the end of the year. Only 891,523 are needed, which have already been attained. Once on the ballot, 60% of voters must vote to pass the amendment. The voter coalition responsible for the petition claims 70% of Florida voters support the proposed amendment.

This seems like a wildly improbable possibility, but could this petition effort lead to a flip of Florida in next year's simultaneous Presidential election? Motivated voters showing up?

Probably not, as Trump criticized the 6 week ban, but gotta expect that if it's close to possible, the ads will run hard on Trump taking credit for overturn of Roe again and again and again...

[PizzaSnake]

Report on full Florida abortion amendment petition. 1.45 million signatures expected by the end of the year. Only 891,523 are needed, which have already been attained. Once on the ballot, 60% of voters must vote to pass the amendment. The voter coalition responsible for the petition claims 70% of Florida voters support the proposed amendment.

This seems like a wildly improbable possibility, but could this petition effort lead to a flip of Florida in next year's simultaneous Presidential election? Motivated voters showing up?

Probably not, as Trump criticized the 6 week ban, but gotta expect that if it's close to possible, the ads will run hard on Trump taking credit for overturn of Roe again and again and again...

As they should.

I know Palestinian-Americans are pissed, but things could actually be worse for them with a second Orangifada.

And Stein and Kennedy? Egoists. I don’t like the duopoly either, but it is what there is. So, Biden or Trumpenfuhrer? Not even close.

[jhu72]

Report on full Florida abortion amendment petition. 1.45 million signatures expected by the end of the year. Only 891,523 are needed, which have already been attained. Once on the ballot, 60% of voters must vote to pass the amendment. The voter coalition responsible for the petition claims 70% of Florida voters support the proposed amendment.

This seems like a wildly improbable possibility, but could this petition effort lead to a flip of Florida in next year's simultaneous Presidential election? Motivated voters showing up?

Probably not, as Trump criticized the 6 week ban, but gotta expect that if it's close to possible, the ads will run hard on Trump taking credit for overturn of Roe again and again and again...

.... obviously 60% is a heavy lift, but I don't bet against any organization that is fighting this battle given what has been going on since Kansas.
150,000 + Florida republicans joining the battle in a highly public fashion bodes well. Even Ann Coulter has come out against the intentional cruelty of republiCONs and their obvious glee in their belief that this is "owning the libs."

[MDlaxfan76]

Report on full Florida abortion amendment petition. 1.45 million signatures expected by the end of the year. Only 891,523 are needed, which have already been attained. Once on the ballot, 60% of voters must vote to pass the amendment. The voter coalition responsible for the petition claims 70% of Florida voters support the proposed amendment.

This seems like a wildly improbable possibility, but could this petition effort lead to a flip of Florida in next year's simultaneous Presidential election? Motivated voters showing up?

Probably not, as Trump criticized the 6 week ban, but gotta expect that if it's close to possible, the ads will run hard on Trump taking credit for overturn of Roe again and again and again...

.... obviously 60% is a heavy lift, but I don't bet against any organization that is fighting this battle given what has been going on since Kansas.
150,000 + Florida republicans joining the battle in a highly public fashion bodes well. Even Ann Coulter has come out against the intentional cruelty of republiCONs and their obvious glee in their belief that this is "owning the libs."

I think that's 1.5 million...

[jhu72]

... republiCONs are going to have a much bigger problem in 2024 than they think!

The voters seeing the behavior of you dumbasses as fascist is much larger than you think. Every state has women and men organizing around your attempts to control women and reproduction. Even in the most republiCON friendly states you are going to see tremendous push back against your stupidity by traditional republican voters! Lots and lots of local and state republiCON office holders are going to lose their offices in 2024!!

A good example is what is going on in Idaho.

1) Four women with highly problematic pregnancies and a handful of medical workers, doctors, nurses, techs, etc. have filed a lawsuit against the state based on the state's abortion ban. The group is only asking for the state to make it clear under what medical emergency conditions with the mother and/or the fetus are medical abortions allowed. The case was heard yesterday, where the Attorney General argued the case should be dismissed on the grounds that the women in question had already all received abortions out of state, in Oregon. The Attorney General referred to the pregnancy events as "hypothetical". Well chosen words. The judge claims he will rule on the motion to dismiss after the first of the year.

If you can't understand why all of this is so problematic for the anti-abortion movement and the republiCONS, go back to sleep!

2) Three days ago, three republiCON women, one of whom authored the Idaho abortion ban, announced the formation of a Reproduction Educational Network. This group claims their mission is to provide education to Idaho citizens about reproductive matters. They are especially concerned with contraceptive knowledge. They decided to begin this effort because people are misunderstanding the difference between abortion and contraception and what is allowed, they claim. Some Idaho republiCON law makers are encouraging the confusion. One male scumbag has recently introduced an amendment to the abortion ban to ban IUDs and Plan B, neither of which are abortive. The scumbag is currently avoiding the press.

3) Idaho has a major OBGYN shortage in the state. The OBGYNs have been leaving the state for over year. Specialists in problematic pregnancies and delivers basically don't exist in the state, most left in 2022. OBGYNs who handle regular delivers are also leaving because they have no access to experienced help with difficult cases. This is untenable. This also causes a economic problems for hospitals and medical groups. Baby delivery is a cash cow for most of these organizations, nationwide. There is the knock on effect of what happens with pediatricians. There is almost always a close relationship between OBGYNs and pediatricians, both working as referring physicians out of the same hospitals, recommending each other to patients. How this is going to workout will have to be seen. Idaho pediatricians referring patients to out of state OBGYNs is going to be real interesting.

... republiCON law makers are so smart. Just the smartest. I think a lot of them, even in red states are going to graduate to being hypothetical in 2024!

[jhu72]

Texas is losing $14.5 billion in annual economic activity due to their abortion ban. According to a group of Texas business owners. This amounts to 8% of the Texas 2022 GDP.

[cradleandshoot]

Texas is losing $14.5 billion in annual economic activity due to their abortion ban. According to a group of Texas business owners. This amounts to 8% of the Texas 2022 GDP.

Ahhhhhh so death is a profitable business...good to know.

[cradleandshoot]

That hot potato was touched a long time ago and a reasonable decision was made. Then the evangelicals and born agains who have a direct line to God got involved and fukt everything up. This decision should be made by the woman who is pregnant and that woman alone (the father should have some say but ultimately the woman has the last word), it's no one else's decision to make. Spare me the sanctimonious judges who damn her, they can all go phuk themselves.

Then that goes back to WWJD. Two different set of circumstances. One requires an abortion to save the moms ability to have another baby. The other is a mom aborting a healthy baby because it's the wrong gender. One is understandable the other is not. Any of you folks out there think that aborting a healthy baby because it was the wrong gender is a good thing?? If you are a Christian how would you defend your decision to Jesus face to face? Jesus wouldn't let the angry mob stone the adulteress to death. I wonder how he would feel about aborting a healthy baby?? How many of you Christians out there would feel comfortable debating your position face to face with Jesus? What exactly would you tell Jesus to his face??? Love the sinner but hate the sin.

This is the woman's decision, period. Where does the agnostic and atheist fit in here? They don't buy the Christians and Jesus stuff, they're not afraid to face him (uh oh, could Jesus be a she?) after making their decision. They still have to go by your moral high ground? Is abortion about God or murder (in some people's eyes)? Frankly, if I'm a 16 year old pregnant girl I don't much give a schidt what anybody thinks of my decision, I'm going to do what I think is best and I'll live with that.
(More atheists in younger generations, that crowd is growing.)

I have no moral high ground. I failed as a Catholic with no regrets. Your confusing my personal beliefs with what the law of the land is. A woman any woman has the right to make that decision. What troubles me is the reason. If your pregnancy can cause you physical harm it becomes a very difficult choice but it should be your choice. The dynamics change when you walk into the procedure room with a healthy baby girl in your womb. Papa bear wants a healthy baby boy and doesn't want a baby girl. Does that scenario bother you even a little bit?? FTR my wife worked in these procedure rooms as a newly minted pediatric nurse. She did her job like the professional she is. Here is something you seldom hear about but happens frequently. After the procedure in recovery the patient becomes grief stricken at what she has just done. Guess who inherits the job of consoling and comforting the grief stricken patient? Does that sound like a fun job to you? My wife couldn't have children . How do you think that effected her? It hit her so hard she chose to be a GI nurse after doing her time in hell. You have to have the proper frame of mind to be a nurse in these rooms. This is some food for thought for you. Nurses are trained to help save lives, they are not trained to help take a human life. When you see it happen up close and personal it bothers you until you get numb to it. Nobody ever leaves the building with a shiny sticker saying I aborted my baby today.

[dislaxxic]

The Most Interesting Part of the New York Times’ Scoop on the Fall of Roe

On Friday morning, the New York Times dropped an exceptionally well-reported piece by Jodi Kantor and Adam Liptak sketching out the flaccid arc of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that overturned Roe v. Wade. Dobbs ought not to have been brought to the Supreme Court, argued there, or decided as it was decided in the spring of 2022, so it is fascinating and infuriating to get an inside look at exactly how it happened. It’s a credit to Kantor and Liptak that they were able to find sources willing to confirm that every step of the Dobbs appeal was a pro forma, overdetermined, and ends-driven slam dunk for a conservative legal movement that had no regard for precedent, doctrine, or the appearance of legitimacy and a decadeslong commitment to ending Roe.

But the true shock of their piece lies in fact that none of it is shocking: Samuel Alito came to the court wishing to overturn Roe and lied about that fact at his confirmation hearings; Neil Gorsuch didn’t even bother to read the draft opinion authored by Alito before he agreed to put his name to it, or else secretly viewed a draft before it was circulated to other justices; Amy Coney Barrett has someone in her chambers who wants us to see her as a tormented and complicated woman, even as she refused to do anything but rubber-stamp an opinion that would confirm to the world that she was a token, partisan, politics-haired appointment. And Brett Kavanaugh? He is precisely as absurdly self-important, scheming, untrustworthy, and ineffectual as we all knew him to be.

[snip]

We all read The Brethren. We aren’t children. We fully expect logrolling, horse-trading, behind-the-scenes maneuvering, and outcome-driven decision-making from justices, who attempt to hide from us the fact that they are mere politicians, they’re just poor. We are told by the Supreme Court’s defenders that no such thing as crass political maneuvering could ever happen at the sacred temple on One First Street. We are assured that the robed oracles merely read briefs, take votes, and render judgments in good-faith, largely as a result of the noise-canceling originalist headphones they wear once they are sworn into office. The New York Times piece is stunning and unsurprising: The only thing that is worth tracking is that this maneuvering is now so publicly known, reported in the Times like the fundamentally political story that it so obviously is. The sources who leaked this information, possibly including a justice, evidently believed it was important for Americans to know what went down here.

With each new peek behind the curtain, this fantasy becomes more difficult to buy into, even for those desperate to believe. It turns out that the justices—at least five of them on the right—are functionally indistinguishable from cynical partisan lawmakers making deals in the Senate cloakroom. It turns out that abortion rights vanished in America because five conservatives barely tried to hide the fact that they could do that, simply because they could do that. And it turns out that they’re increasingly bad at covering their tracks.

Problem is, these hacks may well have condemned the GOP to near-permanent minority for generations, or at least until abortion rights get codified into law at the federal level...which could happen the next time the Dems get full control of the government.

That may happen sooner rather then later...

..

[cradleandshoot]

The Most Interesting Part of the New York Times’ Scoop on the Fall of Roe

On Friday morning, the New York Times dropped an exceptionally well-reported piece by Jodi Kantor and Adam Liptak sketching out the flaccid arc of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that overturned Roe v. Wade. Dobbs ought not to have been brought to the Supreme Court, argued there, or decided as it was decided in the spring of 2022, so it is fascinating and infuriating to get an inside look at exactly how it happened. It’s a credit to Kantor and Liptak that they were able to find sources willing to confirm that every step of the Dobbs appeal was a pro forma, overdetermined, and ends-driven slam dunk for a conservative legal movement that had no regard for precedent, doctrine, or the appearance of legitimacy and a decadeslong commitment to ending Roe.

But the true shock of their piece lies in fact that none of it is shocking: Samuel Alito came to the court wishing to overturn Roe and lied about that fact at his confirmation hearings; Neil Gorsuch didn’t even bother to read the draft opinion authored by Alito before he agreed to put his name to it, or else secretly viewed a draft before it was circulated to other justices; Amy Coney Barrett has someone in her chambers who wants us to see her as a tormented and complicated woman, even as she refused to do anything but rubber-stamp an opinion that would confirm to the world that she was a token, partisan, politics-haired appointment. And Brett Kavanaugh? He is precisely as absurdly self-important, scheming, untrustworthy, and ineffectual as we all knew him to be.

[snip]

We all read The Brethren. We aren’t children. We fully expect logrolling, horse-trading, behind-the-scenes maneuvering, and outcome-driven decision-making from justices, who attempt to hide from us the fact that they are mere politicians, they’re just poor. We are told by the Supreme Court’s defenders that no such thing as crass political maneuvering could ever happen at the sacred temple on One First Street. We are assured that the robed oracles merely read briefs, take votes, and render judgments in good-faith, largely as a result of the noise-canceling originalist headphones they wear once they are sworn into office. The New York Times piece is stunning and unsurprising: The only thing that is worth tracking is that this maneuvering is now so publicly known, reported in the Times like the fundamentally political story that it so obviously is. The sources who leaked this information, possibly including a justice, evidently believed it was important for Americans to know what went down here.

With each new peek behind the curtain, this fantasy becomes more difficult to buy into, even for those desperate to believe. It turns out that the justices—at least five of them on the right—are functionally indistinguishable from cynical partisan lawmakers making deals in the Senate cloakroom. It turns out that abortion rights vanished in America because five conservatives barely tried to hide the fact that they could do that, simply because they could do that. And it turns out that they’re increasingly bad at covering their tracks.

Problem is, these hacks may well have condemned the GOP to near-permanent minority for generations, or at least until abortion rights get codified into law at the federal level...which could happen the next time the Dems get full control of the government.

That may happen sooner rather then later...

..

Hard for me to believe that Republicans being condemned to permanent minority rule would bother you all that much. Matter of fact I would think that prospect would make you very happy.

[jhu72]

The Most Interesting Part of the New York Times’ Scoop on the Fall of Roe

On Friday morning, the New York Times dropped an exceptionally well-reported piece by Jodi Kantor and Adam Liptak sketching out the flaccid arc of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that overturned Roe v. Wade. Dobbs ought not to have been brought to the Supreme Court, argued there, or decided as it was decided in the spring of 2022, so it is fascinating and infuriating to get an inside look at exactly how it happened. It’s a credit to Kantor and Liptak that they were able to find sources willing to confirm that every step of the Dobbs appeal was a pro forma, overdetermined, and ends-driven slam dunk for a conservative legal movement that had no regard for precedent, doctrine, or the appearance of legitimacy and a decadeslong commitment to ending Roe.

But the true shock of their piece lies in fact that none of it is shocking: Samuel Alito came to the court wishing to overturn Roe and lied about that fact at his confirmation hearings; Neil Gorsuch didn’t even bother to read the draft opinion authored by Alito before he agreed to put his name to it, or else secretly viewed a draft before it was circulated to other justices; Amy Coney Barrett has someone in her chambers who wants us to see her as a tormented and complicated woman, even as she refused to do anything but rubber-stamp an opinion that would confirm to the world that she was a token, partisan, politics-haired appointment. And Brett Kavanaugh? He is precisely as absurdly self-important, scheming, untrustworthy, and ineffectual as we all knew him to be.

[snip]

We all read The Brethren. We aren’t children. We fully expect logrolling, horse-trading, behind-the-scenes maneuvering, and outcome-driven decision-making from justices, who attempt to hide from us the fact that they are mere politicians, they’re just poor. We are told by the Supreme Court’s defenders that no such thing as crass political maneuvering could ever happen at the sacred temple on One First Street. We are assured that the robed oracles merely read briefs, take votes, and render judgments in good-faith, largely as a result of the noise-canceling originalist headphones they wear once they are sworn into office. The New York Times piece is stunning and unsurprising: The only thing that is worth tracking is that this maneuvering is now so publicly known, reported in the Times like the fundamentally political story that it so obviously is. The sources who leaked this information, possibly including a justice, evidently believed it was important for Americans to know what went down here.

With each new peek behind the curtain, this fantasy becomes more difficult to buy into, even for those desperate to believe. It turns out that the justices—at least five of them on the right—are functionally indistinguishable from cynical partisan lawmakers making deals in the Senate cloakroom. It turns out that abortion rights vanished in America because five conservatives barely tried to hide the fact that they could do that, simply because they could do that. And it turns out that they’re increasingly bad at covering their tracks.

Problem is, these hacks may well have condemned the GOP to near-permanent minority for generations, or at least until abortion rights get codified into law at the federal level...which could happen the next time the Dems get full control of the government.

That may happen sooner rather then later...

..

Hard for me to believe that Republicans being condemned to permanent minority rule would bother you all that much. Matter of fact I would think that prospect would make you very happy.

... it will certainly make a majority of American women happy Mr. Wafflehead.

[cradleandshoot]

The Most Interesting Part of the New York Times’ Scoop on the Fall of Roe

On Friday morning, the New York Times dropped an exceptionally well-reported piece by Jodi Kantor and Adam Liptak sketching out the flaccid arc of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that overturned Roe v. Wade. Dobbs ought not to have been brought to the Supreme Court, argued there, or decided as it was decided in the spring of 2022, so it is fascinating and infuriating to get an inside look at exactly how it happened. It’s a credit to Kantor and Liptak that they were able to find sources willing to confirm that every step of the Dobbs appeal was a pro forma, overdetermined, and ends-driven slam dunk for a conservative legal movement that had no regard for precedent, doctrine, or the appearance of legitimacy and a decadeslong commitment to ending Roe.

But the true shock of their piece lies in fact that none of it is shocking: Samuel Alito came to the court wishing to overturn Roe and lied about that fact at his confirmation hearings; Neil Gorsuch didn’t even bother to read the draft opinion authored by Alito before he agreed to put his name to it, or else secretly viewed a draft before it was circulated to other justices; Amy Coney Barrett has someone in her chambers who wants us to see her as a tormented and complicated woman, even as she refused to do anything but rubber-stamp an opinion that would confirm to the world that she was a token, partisan, politics-haired appointment. And Brett Kavanaugh? He is precisely as absurdly self-important, scheming, untrustworthy, and ineffectual as we all knew him to be.

[snip]

We all read The Brethren. We aren’t children. We fully expect logrolling, horse-trading, behind-the-scenes maneuvering, and outcome-driven decision-making from justices, who attempt to hide from us the fact that they are mere politicians, they’re just poor. We are told by the Supreme Court’s defenders that no such thing as crass political maneuvering could ever happen at the sacred temple on One First Street. We are assured that the robed oracles merely read briefs, take votes, and render judgments in good-faith, largely as a result of the noise-canceling originalist headphones they wear once they are sworn into office. The New York Times piece is stunning and unsurprising: The only thing that is worth tracking is that this maneuvering is now so publicly known, reported in the Times like the fundamentally political story that it so obviously is. The sources who leaked this information, possibly including a justice, evidently believed it was important for Americans to know what went down here.

With each new peek behind the curtain, this fantasy becomes more difficult to buy into, even for those desperate to believe. It turns out that the justices—at least five of them on the right—are functionally indistinguishable from cynical partisan lawmakers making deals in the Senate cloakroom. It turns out that abortion rights vanished in America because five conservatives barely tried to hide the fact that they could do that, simply because they could do that. And it turns out that they’re increasingly bad at covering their tracks.

Problem is, these hacks may well have condemned the GOP to near-permanent minority for generations, or at least until abortion rights get codified into law at the federal level...which could happen the next time the Dems get full control of the government.

That may happen sooner rather then later...

..

Hard for me to believe that Republicans being condemned to permanent minority rule would bother you all that much. Matter of fact I would think that prospect would make you very happy.

... it will certainly make a majority of American women happy Mr. Wafflehead.

Sure because all women love aborting their babies. I guess your qualified to speak for all women. You ever witnessed an actual abortion doc? I betcha you would puke all over your hush puppies if you did. It ain't exactly what PP advertises it to be. No woman ever leaves the clinic with an I ABORTED MY BABY TODAY sticker with a big smiley face on it. I'm sure every abortion puts a huge smile on your face.

[DMac]

c&s wrote
Sure because all women love aborting their babies.

Why would write something like this?
What women want is the right to make their own call and not have some evangelical aszwhole like Ken Paxton making it for them. Pretty simple and 100% the way it should be. The graphics of the procedure is incidental.

[MDlaxfan76]

The Most Interesting Part of the New York Times’ Scoop on the Fall of Roe

On Friday morning, the New York Times dropped an exceptionally well-reported piece by Jodi Kantor and Adam Liptak sketching out the flaccid arc of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that overturned Roe v. Wade. Dobbs ought not to have been brought to the Supreme Court, argued there, or decided as it was decided in the spring of 2022, so it is fascinating and infuriating to get an inside look at exactly how it happened. It’s a credit to Kantor and Liptak that they were able to find sources willing to confirm that every step of the Dobbs appeal was a pro forma, overdetermined, and ends-driven slam dunk for a conservative legal movement that had no regard for precedent, doctrine, or the appearance of legitimacy and a decadeslong commitment to ending Roe.

But the true shock of their piece lies in fact that none of it is shocking: Samuel Alito came to the court wishing to overturn Roe and lied about that fact at his confirmation hearings; Neil Gorsuch didn’t even bother to read the draft opinion authored by Alito before he agreed to put his name to it, or else secretly viewed a draft before it was circulated to other justices; Amy Coney Barrett has someone in her chambers who wants us to see her as a tormented and complicated woman, even as she refused to do anything but rubber-stamp an opinion that would confirm to the world that she was a token, partisan, politics-haired appointment. And Brett Kavanaugh? He is precisely as absurdly self-important, scheming, untrustworthy, and ineffectual as we all knew him to be.

[snip]

We all read The Brethren. We aren’t children. We fully expect logrolling, horse-trading, behind-the-scenes maneuvering, and outcome-driven decision-making from justices, who attempt to hide from us the fact that they are mere politicians, they’re just poor. We are told by the Supreme Court’s defenders that no such thing as crass political maneuvering could ever happen at the sacred temple on One First Street. We are assured that the robed oracles merely read briefs, take votes, and render judgments in good-faith, largely as a result of the noise-canceling originalist headphones they wear once they are sworn into office. The New York Times piece is stunning and unsurprising: The only thing that is worth tracking is that this maneuvering is now so publicly known, reported in the Times like the fundamentally political story that it so obviously is. The sources who leaked this information, possibly including a justice, evidently believed it was important for Americans to know what went down here.

With each new peek behind the curtain, this fantasy becomes more difficult to buy into, even for those desperate to believe. It turns out that the justices—at least five of them on the right—are functionally indistinguishable from cynical partisan lawmakers making deals in the Senate cloakroom. It turns out that abortion rights vanished in America because five conservatives barely tried to hide the fact that they could do that, simply because they could do that. And it turns out that they’re increasingly bad at covering their tracks.

Problem is, these hacks may well have condemned the GOP to near-permanent minority for generations, or at least until abortion rights get codified into law at the federal level...which could happen the next time the Dems get full control of the government.

That may happen sooner rather then later...

..

Hard for me to believe that Republicans being condemned to permanent minority rule would bother you all that much. Matter of fact I would think that prospect would make you very happy.

... it will certainly make a majority of American women happy Mr. Wafflehead.

Sure because all women love aborting their babies. I guess your qualified to speak for all women. You ever witnessed an actual abortion doc? I betcha you would puke all over your hush puppies if you did. It ain't exactly what PP advertises it to be. No woman ever leaves the clinic with an I ABORTED MY BABY TODAY sticker with a big smiley face on it. I'm sure every abortion puts a huge smile on your face.

All?
"a majority" does not equal "all".

But yes, a majority of women would prefer the Republican politicians stop telling them they can't make decisions for themselves. And a huge majority of younger women feel that way.

Your post is immensely offensive cradle.
Abortion is frequently a difficult decision with an unwanted pregnancy. In many others it's not a difficult decision but marks the unhappy occurrence of a failed pregnancy or serious threat to the woman's health.

Was your intent to be offensive?

[ggait]

C&S is just a troll. Ignore him. Listen to the data.

Abortions nationally increased in the first year without Roe. Voters across the country, when given the chance, always choose choice.

Americans supported choice before Roe, during Roe, and now after Roe.

Now that abortion is an open issue politically, choice is very clearly here to stay. Unless you are a low resource woman stuck in a backward bubba state.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The Most Interesting Part of the New York Times’ Scoop on the Fall of Roe

On Friday morning, the New York Times dropped an exceptionally well-reported piece by Jodi Kantor and Adam Liptak sketching out the flaccid arc of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that overturned Roe v. Wade. Dobbs ought not to have been brought to the Supreme Court, argued there, or decided as it was decided in the spring of 2022, so it is fascinating and infuriating to get an inside look at exactly how it happened. It’s a credit to Kantor and Liptak that they were able to find sources willing to confirm that every step of the Dobbs appeal was a pro forma, overdetermined, and ends-driven slam dunk for a conservative legal movement that had no regard for precedent, doctrine, or the appearance of legitimacy and a decadeslong commitment to ending Roe.

But the true shock of their piece lies in fact that none of it is shocking: Samuel Alito came to the court wishing to overturn Roe and lied about that fact at his confirmation hearings; Neil Gorsuch didn’t even bother to read the draft opinion authored by Alito before he agreed to put his name to it, or else secretly viewed a draft before it was circulated to other justices; Amy Coney Barrett has someone in her chambers who wants us to see her as a tormented and complicated woman, even as she refused to do anything but rubber-stamp an opinion that would confirm to the world that she was a token, partisan, politics-haired appointment. And Brett Kavanaugh? He is precisely as absurdly self-important, scheming, untrustworthy, and ineffectual as we all knew him to be.

[snip]

We all read The Brethren. We aren’t children. We fully expect logrolling, horse-trading, behind-the-scenes maneuvering, and outcome-driven decision-making from justices, who attempt to hide from us the fact that they are mere politicians, they’re just poor. We are told by the Supreme Court’s defenders that no such thing as crass political maneuvering could ever happen at the sacred temple on One First Street. We are assured that the robed oracles merely read briefs, take votes, and render judgments in good-faith, largely as a result of the noise-canceling originalist headphones they wear once they are sworn into office. The New York Times piece is stunning and unsurprising: The only thing that is worth tracking is that this maneuvering is now so publicly known, reported in the Times like the fundamentally political story that it so obviously is. The sources who leaked this information, possibly including a justice, evidently believed it was important for Americans to know what went down here.

With each new peek behind the curtain, this fantasy becomes more difficult to buy into, even for those desperate to believe. It turns out that the justices—at least five of them on the right—are functionally indistinguishable from cynical partisan lawmakers making deals in the Senate cloakroom. It turns out that abortion rights vanished in America because five conservatives barely tried to hide the fact that they could do that, simply because they could do that. And it turns out that they’re increasingly bad at covering their tracks.

Problem is, these hacks may well have condemned the GOP to near-permanent minority for generations, or at least until abortion rights get codified into law at the federal level...which could happen the next time the Dems get full control of the government.

That may happen sooner rather then later...

..

Hard for me to believe that Republicans being condemned to permanent minority rule would bother you all that much. Matter of fact I would think that prospect would make you very happy.

... it will certainly make a majority of American women happy Mr. Wafflehead.

Sure because all women love aborting their babies. I guess your qualified to speak for all women. You ever witnessed an actual abortion doc? I betcha you would puke all over your hush puppies if you did. It ain't exactly what PP advertises it to be. No woman ever leaves the clinic with an I ABORTED MY BABY TODAY sticker with a big smiley face on it. I'm sure every abortion puts a huge smile on your face.

Who got you the pictures? Was it a HIPAA violation? Someone share private patient information with you? That’s against the law and the perpetrator should be locked up.

[jhu72]

... republiCON AG after losing anti-abortion vote in Ohio continues to threaten, terrorize women. What a POS.

[jhu72]

An analysis of who is changing their minds about abortion.

... sure suburban women are taking a stand for their own health, but this is not where the biggest change is seen. Older conservative rural men were the cohort in Ohio that saw the biggest change during the recent referendum.

[CU88a]

DEPLORABLE
Death panels did come to fruition, in r states..

https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/11/us/britt ... index.html

"An Ohio woman who suffered a miscarriage and left the nonviable fetus at home will not be criminally charged, a grand jury decided Thursday."