That is utterly disgusting. That block of 5 conservative justices can all burn in hell.
Mary L. Trump putting her 2 cents here.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Abortion
- Thread starter Pagh Wraith
- Start date
Mary L. Trump putting her 2 cents here.
Gotta think that other rights considered inviolable just might not be such.That is utterly disgusting. That block of 5 conservative justices can all burn in hell.
And feck you Susan Collins.
Grim.
What should she have said?“Vote accordingly”
Republicans altogether have chosen that path while conservatives in other countries have far more moderated views on abortion. The thing here is that the GOP is pushing the United States backwards into the second tier category of all countries with that decision. First-tier countries don't have issues with abortion and other acquired rights, and will definitely NOT overturn a past decision that meant being open for more rights.“Vote accordingly”
edit: had to add a "NOT" at a key area in the post.
"If you have a vagina, or even like them just a little bit, don't vote for the fascist cnuts." ?
Tweet is already kinda long for that, though.
Just don’t see what is so vexing about ‘vote accordingly.’
The only problem is that there are a share of vaginas out there going on board with that crap of an upcoming decision. They have no clue as to what that actually means.
We have her crazy uncle to thank for thisThat is utterly disgusting. That block of 5 conservative justices can all burn in hell.
Mary L. Trump putting her 2 cents here.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I'm probably going to look like an idiot for predicting this, but I think Roberts will dissent.
And most importantly, don't forget Moscow Mitch. He used double standards to deny a moderate judge to Obama during an electoral year while pushing ahead a totally inept ultraconservative judge in similar circumstances under Trump.
edit:
That won't be enough. Thomas and Alito are leading the pack for the other 3 Trump-appointed and McConnell-sanctioned clowns.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
“The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion,” the draft concludes.
I bet this changes when the Court upholds a federal ban on abortion in the next few years.
I bet this changes when the Court upholds a federal ban on abortion in the next few years.
i think the fact it won't be enough is another reason for him to dissent. That and I don't think he wants his name attached to this and the inevitable political maelstrom which will follow.
If she thinks the Republican Party is a bunch of fascists then....well I might get banned for giving her some recommendations. You can’t out vote fascism, you have to repress it by force.
The American state was never intended to be a mass democracy, the answer to keeping abortion for good is to get rid of the Supreme Court. But that would undermine such a pillar of the American state and have such repercussions that no one political party or upper class parts of America society would ever support it.
So what’s left is going getting big numbers online about impending fascist dictatorship and then asking for $10 donations for Nancy Pelosi re-election. It’s like screaming about incoming famines caught by global warming and then asking everyone to stop using paper straws, the analysis and the answer are completely detached from other each.
Ugh grim. Imagine the GOP takes the house and senate in 2022, then Trump wins with De Santis as his VP in 2024. Armageddon.
bingo, that’s the right answer!
There's nothing in that quote that's contrary to a federal ban - in fact, this opinion makes a federal ban exceptionally easy to uphold as all that would need to be argued to this court is that the law was passed to protect unborn life. And this would override any state law or constitutional provisions otherwise.
Suspect gay marriage is not far behind for the chopping block.
America is a basket case.
How? Trump didn't steal supreme cour seats.
This is on Turtle and the rest of the cnuts.
Terrible public policy, but Rowe v Wade was always vulnerable.
As the tweet says above - vote accordingly.
As the tweet says above - vote accordingly.
It is indeed.
Surprised Roe lasted that long. Both sides have maintained it's a terrible legal ruling.
But it should have been codified into law a long time ago.
I'm too cynical and jaded to muster any sort of emotion on this one, so meh.
But it should have been codified into law a long time ago.
I'm too cynical and jaded to muster any sort of emotion on this one, so meh.
How is it that pro-lifers, who are vehemently anti-abortion, are overwhelmingly pro-gun and pro-military whose ultimate purpose is to, you know, kill people?
No doubt rich conservatives will secretly do abortions in liberal states. Pathetic stuff this.
Ah, you assume they are rational.
You know feck it , I'm gonna say it great news.
Hopefully we get a federal ban as well aside from the obvious cases(rape, life of the mother being in danger etc etc)
Hopefully we get a federal ban as well aside from the obvious cases(rape, life of the mother being in danger etc etc)
Why are you against abortion aside from obvious cases?
To put it succinctly, I believe life starts at conception and I also believe that the government has a duty to protect its citizens lives.
(I believe it could only protect lives not take it so I'm also against the death penalty but that's a whole other can of worms and frankly is almost extinct anyway)
Would you sign to raise all those children?
How do you reconcile your belief that life starts at conception with permitting abortion in the case of rape? Surely, two wrongs don't make a right, and if the unborn baby truly is a life, should it be punished for the way it was conceived?
Mostly as an unfortunate pragmatic matter, that's why I also believe rape should be punished with the most severe terms.
And also the victim to be immediately prescribed contraceptive measures (they give them an injection right ? Im not too knowledgeable on the medical side of it) unless the victim chooses to keep the baby.
Its not perfect but hopefully with sever punitive measures against rape and such it could be severely reduced.
Life does start at conception but it's not a very complex form of life and it certainly isn't a 'citizen'. Are you against killing rats, which are a more complex life form than an early stage embryo? What about live stock? Again higher level of consciousness, sentient beings with more intelligence and ability to feel pain than an early stage embryo.
No, I'm only concerned about my fellow human beings which and embryo certainly is.
A lot of semantics gets involved but unless science somehow proves without a shadow of doubt that the embryo is somehow less of a living being and not deserve of the right to live , its a risk too great to take.
Hopefully science will advance to a stage were the embryo could simply continue his development out of the womb so the whole discussion becomes obsolete .
Per the leaked draft he is not supposed to be part of the majority opinion so this is not an outlandish prediction.
In the US?
Shouldn't we strive for an ideal?In the US?
Yes I think a government should protect its citizens. I don't think the US is striving for that. At all.
Edit: Plus I believe protecting your citizens include women as well.
If anything, it's the perfect situation for Roberts. He gets to dissent, and keep the image of the serious, professional non-political Chief Justice.