Plan B Forum

In the majority draft now in circulation, the Supreme Court will be completely overturning its precedents in Roe and Casey.

In defiance of the 13th Amendment, the Court has ruled that pregnant women are now the slaves of the fetuses commandeering their bodies.

What a dark day for freedom.

“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division.” (Alito)

What were the damaging consequences?

On the other hand, what does one judge's drafted opinion really mean? It seems that all we've accomplished by seeing the draft is that we know one judge's opinion on Roe. Is it possible that somehow finding and releasing this draft to the public is just a way to give the democratic candidates something to use to scare people into not voting for republican candidates in the upcoming primaries.

I'm curious though. Does anyone think that all republicans are anti-abortion? My guess is there are many republican politicians who say they are anti-abortion but in fact they are simply parroting the party line, just as I'm sure there are anti-abortion democrats.

It's drafted as the majority opinion, so at least 5 of them are signing onto it.

Assume for a moment that this draft opinion becomes the law of the land. In an instant - because of statutes already on the books and "trigger" laws designed for such an occasion - abortion would be illegal in 22 states.

The legality of the procedure would become a vicious political battleground in the midst of an election year.

This is the significance of what may be unfolding in the Supreme Court.

Draft opinions, however, are just that - drafts. And there have been accounts of justices shifting their views as the opinion-drafting process unfolds within the cloistered court chambers. This unprecedented leak short-circuits all that.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61302740

I would like to commend the integrity of the Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.

It's good to know that there are at least some government officials who, once they have been bought, will stay bought.    (/sarcasm)

-"BB"-

Why is a court deciding what should be a political matter? Who voted these judges in?

Gob wrote: ↑

Tue May 03, 2022 9:35 am

Why is a court deciding what should be a political matter? Who voted these judges in?

It is not only a political matter. Like it or not, laws must comply with the Constitution. A previous (unelected, except by Presidents) court decided abortion was a Constitutional right - something to do with privacy or something.

And now it appears another court (unelected, except by Presidents) is deciding whether or not THAT decision was a correct interpretation/application of the Constitution.

Neither the Legislative nor the Executive can decide what is and is not Constitutional. The Constitution reserves that right to the (unelected) Supreme Court.

This Court may well decide that Roe v Wade meets Constitutional requirements - altho' they are much less enamored of it than the more liberal-leaning judges of the past. They may decide that it does not. In which case, state laws will kick in. And the whole sorry mess will begin all over again.

The point of the Court is to stop either mobs or political parties from riding roughshod over the populace. In this case, 50%+++ are going to feel ridden over if RvW is overturned

So, that's one fucked system you have there. All based on a document written in 1789, might as well base your political system on the bible. You should try "democracy".

Gob wrote: ↑

Tue May 03, 2022 11:22 am

So, that's one fucked system you have there. All based on a document written in 1789, might as well base your political system on the bible. You should try "democracy".

Well your hereditary system supported by your tax dollars is completely fucked up too so we haven’t cornered the market on fucked up. Plus your fucked up system has been going on much longer.

Not to mention that your "Constitution" isn't even written; it just says what the judges say it does--kind of like here (except we do have a written document to look at now and then). Democracy does work most of the time, but we need to rely on deeper held principles to protect the rights of others (especially those unpopular), Personally, I'd much rather have that written document (however flawed), but both systems (which are pretty similar) have generally protected the minority from the tyranny of the majority most of the time. At least we haven't been sent to the Bastille for expressing unpopular opinions.

Here, if anything resembling that draft (If it is, indeed, a draft--who knows? The USSC is not in the business of distributing draft opinions to the public) becomes the final opinion, it will be a sad day because democracy does not always work when the mob attacks the right of the individual, be it free speech (could we have any form of democracy without protecting unpopular speech?), book banning, ... I'd love to see a country where everyone would live their lives and let others live their own; but human beings being what they are, that is not coming nay time soon.

Remember, it was a Republican nominee for SCOTUS (Judge Bork) who declared the 9th and 10th amendments were dead.

I sort of look at the headline for this thread as a major step toward equal rights for women in America. This has long been the reality for males over the age of 18. It is called Selective Service, or 'the draft'. Under that situation, the government has the right and power to conduct various personal invasions of autonomy and security of person, such as the close inspection of genitals by an inspector with minimal medical training (also called 'short arm inspection') or involuntary servitude (such as 'police the area' which means inspecting the grass and removing any cigarette butts or other garbage) or the ultimate extinguishing of all rights by death (also called 'the last great measure of sacrifice')

Why the great expressions of surprise? Has this not been promised as one of the goals of the US senate in the advice and consent process of membership on SCOTUS? Don't blame this on only the GOP. The senate Dems when they achieved majority control did not change the veto power of Senator Mitchell.

Try Democracy? Really? Imagine the results of every political policy decided by a Gallup poll.

What have been the damages from Roe? All those poor souls doomed to Hell forever without baptism. This draft opinion is an expression of state religion.

snailgate.

Burning Petard wrote: ↑

Tue May 03, 2022 2:22 pm

All those poor souls doomed to Hell forever without baptism.

Well that's not written anywhere (except perhaps in the infertile minds of certain Romish persons).

BP, and remember it was a republican appointee (a Nixon appointee actually) who wrote the majority opinion in Roe.

And Meade--

Well that's not written anywhere (except perhaps in the infertile minds of certain Romish persons

As I recall, isn't there a verse in John where Jesus says one must be born of the water and the spirit or he cannot enter heaven. That's what I recall seeing in many "born again" comic books handed out as a recruitment tool. Maybe not hell, but their fate is certainly some sort of hades, or limbo, or the nicer side of Abraham's Bosom if they cannot enter the Kingdom. (not that I buy it, even the pope (Francis, I think) said he trusts the fate of those souls to the mercy of god. I agree with that for all souls)

Big RR wrote: ↑

Tue May 03, 2022 2:57 pm

As I recall, isn't there a verse in John where Jesus says one must be born of the water and the spirit or he cannot enter heaven. That's what I recall seeing in many "born again" comic books handed out as a recruitment tool. Maybe not hell, but their fate is certainly some sort of hades, or limbo, or the nicer side of Abraham's Bosom if they cannot enter the Kingdom. (not that I buy it, even the pope (Francis, I think) said he trusts the fate of those souls to the mercy of god. I agree with that for all souls)

My money's on the simpler and gracious explanation - humans are born first to earth (of water) and then to the kingdom (of the Spirit). After all, it was an answer in the context of Nicodemus cracking funny and asking if he needed to be born physically a second time - no, just the once for that, says Jesus but then there's the second part - the Spirit.

I'm with you that the God of love and mercy (yours still does those things, right? ) has his way of sorting things out - and no hades/limbo/railway waiting room is involved. But . . . you know . . . John . . . well . . .

But . . . you know . . . John . . . well . . .

Perhaps, I always thought he wrote Revelation on acid.

I’m not religious anymore but even when I was, I believed that any God worth loving would accept the souls of innocents straight into heaven without concern for stupid human rituals. As someone who endured abuse in childhood, I always believed that my unbaptized six week old elder sister who died of SIDS and the fetus after me who was aborted were the luckiest children my parents ever had - gone straight to the arms of Jesus, who loves the little children.

I’ve never understood why so many religious people are so concerned for fetuses and so utterly unconcerned for the born. I can’t think of anything more unchristian than that.

Anyone know of any coathanger factories that I can invest in? I foresee a huge increase in demand.

Scooter wrote: ↑

Tue May 03, 2022 10:00 pm

Anyone know of any coathanger factories that I can invest in? I foresee a huge increase in demand.

I read somewhere that the last wire coat hanger factories in the US shut down about 10 years ago.