[Politics] US Supreme Court overturns Roe v Wade

[Pevenseagull]

As an aside...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...heme-on-abortions-its-ok-for-me-evil-for-thee

 

[Wardy's twin]

WTF is happening to one of the most powerful countries in the world!?
I read and watch USA News most days, the past few years have been simply mind bogglingly bizarre.

I don't think this is nothing new. The internal strife, deep racism , machoism and right wing religious zealots have been there all the time ruled by ultra wealthy corporate bodies/families, it just became more blatant with Trump.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Imagine being 8 or 9 weeks into a pregnancy and being told it is ectopic, knowing you will die when the fallopian tube bursts.

I wasn't playing a game of what is worse. Horrific decision for many reasons.

 

[Weststander]

In your rush to racialise the politics of left and right so that white is right, and the Hispanic/blacks are left…….in this case, if I understand it correctly:

The only black judge on the US supreme court supported the amendment?
Black Christians (especially in the south) in the US are not more progressive than their white church going counterparts?
Hispanics in the US and those arriving from deeply Catholic countries like Mexico, Honduras and El Salvador (where this policy exists) are far more likely to agree with this judgement than disagree.

The values of these new Hispanic Americans in particular are far likely to be conservative with their religious background, in exactly the same way as their deeply religious peers from the Middle East.

We know that full well in this country…….if you don’t believe me why don't you check out what your local mosque is doing for pride month? Do you think their madrassas have invited any drag queens in to read the young uns the Koran?

What do you reckon?

You’re making the mistake of assuming that all Catholics oppose abortion. That was repressive Ireland 60 years ago. Almost half of US Catholics do not think abortion should always be illegal.



Hispanics are overwhelmingly Democrat, fact.



Your error I suspect comes from thinking of right wing Cubans and Puerto Ricans who move to the 50 states. Representing a small proportion of all Latinos who live in the US.

 

[Shooting Star]

In terms of rhetoric, if you exchange the word “man” for “woman”, “property” for “body” and “slave” for “unborn child”, pro-abortion arguments read a lot like pro-slavery arguments from the 1850s.

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

In terms of rhetoric, if you exchange the word “man” for “woman”, “property” for “body” and “slave” for “unborn child”, pro-abortion arguments read a lot like pro-slavery arguments from the 1850s.

What nonsense

You are aware that abortion was very common during slavery - it was one of the few ways that women could exercise control over their situation by stopping themselves being treated as incubators.

As an aside - banning abortion does not stop abortions - it simply makes it more dangerous for women. Legal abortion do not increase the number of abortions it makes it safer for women - since abortion was legalised in Ireland the number of abortions have remained pretty much static.

This decision is part of a right-wing fundamentalist agenda that is also targetting, contraception, same-sex marriage and wants to recriminalise homosexuality.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I wasn't playing a game of what is worse. Horrific decision for many reasons.

Neither was I. I am looking at it from a woman’s point of view.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

For those more educated than me, I assume a pregnant woman in an state that bans abortion can't simply go to a different state? Is there a reason behind that?

 

[Stat Brother]

For those more educated than me, I assume a pregnant woman in an state that bans abortion can't simply go to a different state? Is there a reason behind that?

Yes they can, but it's not the same as going to Hampshire or Kent!

I'd imagine it's now closed, but there was a time when there was only one clinic in all of Texas.


Plus now I'd imagine as hard as it was to keep clinics going through all the protests, it's now become a million times harder.

 

[Igzilla]

For those more educated than me, I assume a pregnant woman in an state that bans abortion can't simply go to a different state? Is there a reason behind that?

Yes they can, but it's not the same as going to Hampshire or Kent!

I'd imagine it's now closed, but there was a time when there was only one clinic in all of Texas.


Plus now I'd imagine as hard as it was to keep clinics going through all the protests, it's now become a million times harder.

I think some states also prosecute anyone helping a woman to cross a state line to get an abortion.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I think some states also prosecute anyone helping a woman to cross a state line to get an abortion.

In Texas they’re trying to prosecute anyone who helps such driving someone out of state, which is why I mentioned the doctor’s advice to women who have their menstrual cycle on their phones or fitbits. Such data can be used in evidence.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

In Texas they’re trying to prosecute anyone who helps such driving someone out of state, which is why I mentioned the doctor’s advice to women who have their menstrual cycle on their phones or fitbits. Such data can be used in evidence.

I didn’t know that. It’s all a bit North Korea.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Not when the pro-life argument is based on sanctity of life. If you believe that life is a God-given right then you can't argue in favour of the death penalty.

The American constitution grants its people the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Note the word Liberty. American citizens are promised it as their right - but does that mean that it is unconstitutional to put anyone on prison? Obviously not. And no doubt you could, and perhaps would, argue that it's the same with imprisonment as it is with the death penalty - that if you believe that freedom is a God-given right, then you cannot possibly agree with the locking up of criminals. But if you argued that, you'd be wrong again, because people do believe that locking up criminals is OK while simultaneously believing that innocent people have the right to liberty.

Yes, it's fair to say that there are people who believe they do not have the right to take a life in any circumstances. But plenty of others hold that innocent people have a right to life while guilty people have forfeited theirs. It's a rational argument, even if you don't agree with it.

There are only two questions about abortion - one, is it OK to kill living human beings at an early stage of their life; and two, when do they become living human beings. Part one is surely a no, from all sides. Part two is where the difficulty lies because it isn't subject to compromise - if you believe that a foetus is a living human being worthy of protection from the day of conception, then you aren't going to agree with abortion; if you are convinced that it does not become a living human being until sometime later, then you aren't going to be bothered by its death.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I didn’t know that. It’s all a bit North Korea.

Control. Women are seen as baby carriers and no more than that.

Imagine if vasectomies were made mandatory at 16 for boys and only reversed when they got married.

 

[bhafc99]

Imagine if vasectomies were made mandatory at 16 for boys and only reversed when they got married.

Clarence Thomas licks pencil and pulls out his notebook, “Ah, now we’re talkin’, tell me more…”

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The American constitution grants its people the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Note the word Liberty. American citizens are promised it as their right - but does that mean that it is unconstitutional to put anyone on prison? Obviously not. And no doubt you could, and perhaps would, argue that it's the same with imprisonment as it is with the death penalty - that if you believe that freedom is a God-given right, then you cannot possibly agree with the locking up of criminals. But if you argued that, you'd be wrong again, because people do believe that locking up criminals is OK while simultaneously believing that innocent people have the right to liberty.

Yes, it's fair to say that there are people who believe they do not have the right to take a life in any circumstances. But plenty of others hold that innocent people have a right to life while guilty people have forfeited theirs. It's a rational argument, even if you don't agree with it.

There are only two questions about abortion - one, is it OK to kill living human beings at an early stage of their life; and two, when do they become living human beings. Part one is surely a no, from all sides. Part two is where the difficulty lies because it isn't subject to compromise - if you believe that a foetus is a living human being worthy of protection from the day of conception, then you aren't going to agree with abortion; if you are convinced that it does not become a living human being until sometime later, then you aren't going to be bothered by its death.

A Christian believes in the sanctity of life from conception but I have already given a reason for ending it to save a woman’s life. An ectopic pregnancy is extremely dangerous and was terminated medically even before abortion was legalised.
Friends of mine were desperate for a child, and suffered many miscarriages. They got past the danger weeks, only to find it was ectopic, because of the pain, she experienced. The doctors had to save her life, even though the baby was alive, because of peritonitis.
There is also the case of a foetus dying but not miscarrying, and causing sepsis in the womb. A woman has to have a D&C,which is effectively the same operation as an abortion.
Christians believe in medical reasons, but don’t accept abortions being used as contraception. Some women have multiple abortions.
Having an abortion can affect the ability to carry a healthy baby to full term at a future date, in some cases.

None of it is straightforward.

 

[Seagull27]

The American constitution grants its people the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Note the word Liberty. American citizens are promised it as their right - but does that mean that it is unconstitutional to put anyone on prison? Obviously not. And no doubt you could, and perhaps would, argue that it's the same with imprisonment as it is with the death penalty - that if you believe that freedom is a God-given right, then you cannot possibly agree with the locking up of criminals. But if you argued that, you'd be wrong again, because people do believe that locking up criminals is OK while simultaneously believing that innocent people have the right to liberty.

Yes, it's fair to say that there are people who believe they do not have the right to take a life in any circumstances. But plenty of others hold that innocent people have a right to life while guilty people have forfeited theirs. It's a rational argument, even if you don't agree with it.

If we're talking purely Christian terms, which is where a lot of the pro-life arguments come from in the US, then only God has the right to choose whether someone lives or dies, people cannot be the judge of whether someone is guilty enough to have forfeited their life. We're not talking about prison or freedom here so I'm not sure how that's relevant, but there are many Christian teachings about the sanctity of life, so it's pretty hypocritical when those who preach that for abortion don't apply the same thoughts when sentencing someone to death. I'll add that these are not my views either way as I'm not religious.

if you are convinced that it does not become a living human being until sometime later, then you aren't going to be bothered by its death.

Please try and be a bit sensitive with your language here, there will be some on NSC who have been through abortion and I'm pretty certain they would have been more than 'bothered' about it. It's not as black and white as you make out.

 

[drew]

The American constitution grants its people the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Note the word Liberty. American citizens are promised it as their right - but does that mean that it is unconstitutional to put anyone on prison? Obviously not. And no doubt you could, and perhaps would, argue that it's the same with imprisonment as it is with the death penalty - that if you believe that freedom is a God-given right, then you cannot possibly agree with the locking up of criminals. But if you argued that, you'd be wrong again, because people do believe that locking up criminals is OK while simultaneously believing that innocent people have the right to liberty.

Yes, it's fair to say that there are people who believe they do not have the right to take a life in any circumstances. But plenty of others hold that innocent people have a right to life while guilty people have forfeited theirs. It's a rational argument, even if you don't agree with it.

There are only two questions about abortion - one, is it OK to kill living human beings at an early stage of their life; and two, when do they become living human beings. Part one is surely a no, from all sides. Part two is where the difficulty lies because it isn't subject to compromise - if you believe that a foetus is a living human being worthy of protection from the day of conception, then you aren't going to agree with abortion; if you are convinced that it does not become a living human being until sometime later, then you aren't going to be bothered by its death.

Surely that isn't right. The 6th commandment states 'thou shalt not kill'. It does not provide any caveats so anybody claiming to be a christian cannot support capital punishment. They can't have it both ways.

 

[scamander]

Unsure if the point has been made but Democrats could have codified the right to abortion into federal law under Obama when they had outright control of the Senate and Congress. They chose not to presumably as it was a useful political tool to have (e.g. the fear of Roe being overturned as a way of energising their base).

Bit rich of them to complain now- they could have avoided this.

 

[Wardy's twin]

The American constitution grants its people the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Note the word Liberty. American citizens are promised it as their right - but does that mean that it is unconstitutional to put anyone on prison? Obviously not. And no doubt you could, and perhaps would, argue that it's the same with imprisonment as it is with the death penalty - that if you believe that freedom is a God-given right, then you cannot possibly agree with the locking up of criminals. But if you argued that, you'd be wrong again, because people do believe that locking up criminals is OK while simultaneously believing that innocent people have the right to liberty.

Yes, it's fair to say that there are people who believe they do not have the right to take a life in any circumstances. But plenty of others hold that innocent people have a right to life while guilty people have forfeited theirs. It's a rational argument, even if you don't agree with it.

There are only two questions about abortion - one, is it OK to kill living human beings at an early stage of their life; and two, when do they become living human beings. Part one is surely a no, from all sides. Part two is where the difficulty lies because it isn't subject to compromise - if you believe that a foetus is a living human being worthy of protection from the day of conception, then you aren't going to agree with abortion; if you are convinced that it does not become a living human being until sometime later, then you aren't going to be bothered by its death.

You and I normally disagree but I think you hit the nail on the head with what you have said , defining when a foetus is human life is surely the crux of this and its not an easy decision to make. At 12 weeks all the organs other than the brain/spinal cord are there so this is life. My niece did a lot of paediatric work when she first qualified as a doctor and that included saving the lives of babies born before 24 weeks which is the legal limit for abortion, sure they were 'only' a week earlier than the limit but it does mean making hard and fast rules is not appropriate.