Dobbs watch thread (Row v Wade Overturned)

[tnt]

@BraveGear

I thought the Left loved legislating from the bench.

This isn’t legislating from the bench.

It is however, proof of lying in confirmation processes.

[tzu]

No, the Court was conservative even about its pace of rights expansion. It became regressively activist with the rise of Reagan and the falangist New Right.

[TheRedComet]

Not the same sort of passion, though.

Abortion by its very nature radicalizes both sides of the debate. It cuts far too deep.

It’s why it was a political warzone from the moment Roe was decided in 1973.

[TommyLucchese]

@TheRedComet

Nah way before that.

It arguably started with Marbury.

It definitely came into the clear with decisions like Dred.

The judicial and executive branches have amassed far more power than they were ever supposed to have. By comparison the legislative branch has allowed it to happen. They clap like dumb seals every time the executive or judiciary does their jobs for them.

I’m sure in the society we’ve created where no one can economically afford to have children until their late twenties/early thirties and if you have a child earlier it will destroy your life, this is what the under 35s are gonna be real concerned about.

[Jezcoe]

@TheRedComet

For birth control?

It has extremely high cross ideological and gender support.

It took decades to reverse other things.

It took decades to get where we are with guns. That started in the 70’s.

If they are determined… I can see it happening.

Especially since this decision explicitly says that it should be revisited.

[zantax]

@TheRedComet

For the rank and file it’s unintended.

Of course the ones writing the briefs have deeper motivations and plans.

With that said, the outcry in regards to something like birth control and gay marriage cut across party and ideological lines much more so than abortion, which by its very nature could never be compromised on.

Hopefully they will check theirselves if they attempt to go after something that has broad bipartisan support. Like birth control.

The court is inherently political. It’s been that way since the 60s. They have to take the political winds into consideration.

Returning to the states. If you live in a state that would ban contraception I would suggest a move is in order.

[TommyLucchese]

@TheRedComet

Not the same sort of passion, though.

Abortion by its very nature radicalizes both sides of the debate. It cuts far too deep.

It’s why it was a political warzone from the moment Roe was decided in 1973.

My dude, go back ten years or so from Roe and see how polarizing making birth control legal only for married couples was.

[BraveGear]

You want judicial nominees to agree with liberals before they can be confirmed?

That seems to be what you are implying.

[tzu]

And we all damned well know the petty little theocrats, whose great-grandfathers did treason in defense of slavery, will criminalize ‘sodomy’ throughout the Old Confederacy and its client regions.

[TommyLucchese]

@zantax

Returning to the states. If you live in a state that would ban contraception I would suggest a move is in order.

Make the coup you want easier. All wins for you.

[zantax]

@Jezcoe

@TheRedComet

For birth control?

It has extremely high cross ideological and gender support.

It took decades to reverse other things.

It took decades to get where we are with guns. That started in the 70’s.

If they are determined… I can see it happening.

Especially since this decision explicitly says that it should be revisited.

Not revisited to ban it, revisited to return the issue to the states. Any evidence any state wants to ban contraception?

[Jezcoe]

@TheRedComet

Abortion by its very nature radicalizes both sides of the debate.

Abortion advocacy wasn’t very radicalized.

Now it will be.

Yay? I guess?

[margaretms2]

You realize “millions” of people support lots of things. It’s a meaningless claim.

But the demographics of abortion rights skew by age. It’s okay though: neither you, nor the GOP give a ■■■■ in the grand scheme.

[BraveGear]

Well, it was Democrats that engaged in and defended slavery, so I guess you’ll have to take it up with them.

[TommyLucchese]

@zantax

Returning to the states. If you live in a state that would ban contraception I would suggest a move is in order.

“If you’re gay I would suggest you move to a state that won’t throw you in prison or chemically castrate you. Easy peasy.”

[tzu]

So, definitely publicly torching your forged ‘Constitutionalist’ card. That’s refreshing. You guys were always faking belief in ‘full rights and immunities’.

[tzu]

So stupidly, aggressively tired, this argument.

[TheRedComet]

But it was widely accepted. The entire generation, minus the fundamentalist religious nut jobs, embraced it completely by the late 1980s.

Abortion never ceased being controversial. There was always a sizable group (probably 40% of the country) that vehemently despised it and actively fought against it from the day it was decided until today’s decision.

[tnt]

@BraveGear

You want judicial nominees to agree with liberals before they can be confirmed?

That seems to be what you are implying.

Of course not.

But when you say “RvW is settled law” in your hearing, then you vote to overturn RvW…well…your a liar.

[BraveGear]

I’m more concerned about being thrown in prison for the crime of misgendering somone.