- Joined
- Jan 29, 2007
- Messages
- 7,950
- Reaction score
- 2,001
But, my feelz?
I just think it's a policy based on religion.
Would be a Political nightmare.
Do you support Roe Vs. Wade?
- Thread starter Mark Hunts FIST
- Start date
But, my feelz?
I just think it's a policy based on religion.
Would be a Political nightmare.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,603
- Reaction score
- 29
definitely, the problem in the current environment is that each side swings to a more extreme end of the pendulum. I had a conversation with a guy once that made the statement about how "racism is gone, we have a black president" I said that there would be a push back at some point and you'll see that not only is racism still alive but it will develop into something more. I just didn't expect it to come about so quickly.
The election victory of the Democratic socialist woman in NY is as much a reflexive reaction to Trump than the Democratic opponent she beat in my opinion and I expect to see even more, want more proof look at all the extreme white supremacists and flat out racists running on the GOP ticket. It used to be the only one that was opening racist in modern times was David Duke, now a days there are people out there running that are making Duke look like Bobby Kennedy.
I also think the whole notion of a judge on the Supreme court or any other Federal judgeship having life time appointment is a bad thing. Trump will be gone within the next couple years or the next six years but his SCOTUS appointments will last for decades.
Yeah well unfortunately the sad reality is that you'll see very clear partisan splits on many cases in the Supreme Court. I'm not sure for how long this has been the case(wouldn't be surprised if this is the norm for the last century), but it has really dampened my hopes for legitimate positive change in the law of the land.
You don't have to go back very far to see that corporate money's stranglehold on the SC with Citizen's United.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 26,142
- Reaction score
- 15,143
Citizens United and the Gore Vs Bush thing settle the debate on whether the supreme court is a political body.
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 12,551
- Reaction score
- 3,401
Congress has manipulated the number of SCOTUS justices several times in the past (most notably during A. Johnson's term). I think it's a bad idea to attempt it, but it's legal.
The SCOTUS is supposed to be the most impartial and decentralized court in the US, yet you can clearly see major trends in the cases which only cover the last 6 months. In a truly non-partisan system the variance of dissent should be MUCH greater than 0 to 1.
For a chuckle:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/06/18/us/politics/supreme-court-decisions.html
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2009
- Messages
- 15,112
- Reaction score
- 0
I don't follow.
IGIT
Silver Belt
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2005
- Messages
- 10,046
- Reaction score
- 941
hello and greetings, Mark Hunts FIST,
i always have a few thoughts anytime this topic comes up.
1) it will be interesting to see who is and isn't a libertarian
2) i figure if Roe vs Wade is overturned, then the act of an abortion would be...what? attempted murder? manslaughter? will pregnant women who are caught seeking this procedure be forced by the state, at gunpoint, to give birth? will doctors, nurses and family be indicted on conspiracy to commit murder charges?
3) will women who vote GOP all feel comfortable with "big government" telling them what they can do with their own bodies? some may...but i think most women are going to find that idea offensive, in the end.
i support Roe vs Wade, but i think it would be fun and interesting to see it overturned.
adios GOP, when that happens.
- IGIT
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2014
- Messages
- 12,101
- Reaction score
- 6,463
Abortion should always be an independent and personal choice available to women. The government should have no say in the matter nor should it subsidize it. Let special interest groups subsidize for those that can't afford it or the service can be provided pro bono. But not a dime of federal or state money should be invested.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2007
- Messages
- 24,699
- Reaction score
- 5,311
Yes.
The plummeting crime rates since the 80s are to thank for that.
I support increased locations and funding for planned parenthood clinics in lower socioeconomic places. One on every corner.
The plummeting crime rates since the 80s are to thank for that.
I support increased locations and funding for planned parenthood clinics in lower socioeconomic places. One on every corner.
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2010
- Messages
- 27,063
- Reaction score
- 39,103
Not going to happen and then will the Consevative Christians realize the GOP has been playing them the whole time. The economic elites are the cog the drives the Republican engine. There is not enough of them to win elections so the GOP need to dog whistle poor whites and Christians and have figured how to obtain their undying loyalty while simultaneously fucking them in the ass.
When neither happens will you still support the GOP?
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2018
- Messages
- 1,235
- Reaction score
- 0
It may never happen, and some of the GOP just pay lip service. But there is no chance of the Democrat Party getting us there.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2012
- Messages
- 9,081
- Reaction score
- 15
I am 50/50 on abortion, on the one hand, I support it because it kills babies.
But on the other hand, it gives women rights.
But on the other hand, it gives women rights.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2012
- Messages
- 33,277
- Reaction score
- 49,506
I would have preferred Roe v Wade to have never happened in the first place, but now that it’s here, there are significant things I would want to see changed before it’s overturned or else it seems like a “win” for a slogan with no love or compassion involved.
Streamline our adoption process. It is far, far too expensive for a family to adopt a child in need in this country. Costs need to be brought down significantly, but not at the expense of checks that the family is a safe and sound one
My personal idea is a sponsor system. A family “sponsors” a woman who became pregnant and does not want the child. The family pays for all of her medical expenses related to the pregnancy (including checkups and anything need afterwards as a result) and also possibly lost wages if that applies. The family then gets either open or closed adoption of the child that’s born and the unwanting mother gets to go on with her life
Then it needs to be proven that there are enough ready, willing, and able to adopt families out there for all the children currently killed in the womb. This is where the churches need to step up and get people registered and checked out by social services
Increases aide and opportunity for low income families and single mothers. Conservatives have to give ground on this if you want to force a woman to have a child when she’s not financially ready but made a mistake.
Free/health insurance provided birth control of multiple varieties. Again, conservatives, if we truly want to get rid of abortions (like I do) we need to give ground on some of the related aspects.
Our foster care system needs to be properly funded and improved, as there are higher chances of the children now kept by subpar parents ending up in the system.
Once all of these conditions are met, I will very happily see the end of abortions in America
Streamline our adoption process. It is far, far too expensive for a family to adopt a child in need in this country. Costs need to be brought down significantly, but not at the expense of checks that the family is a safe and sound one
My personal idea is a sponsor system. A family “sponsors” a woman who became pregnant and does not want the child. The family pays for all of her medical expenses related to the pregnancy (including checkups and anything need afterwards as a result) and also possibly lost wages if that applies. The family then gets either open or closed adoption of the child that’s born and the unwanting mother gets to go on with her life
Then it needs to be proven that there are enough ready, willing, and able to adopt families out there for all the children currently killed in the womb. This is where the churches need to step up and get people registered and checked out by social services
Increases aide and opportunity for low income families and single mothers. Conservatives have to give ground on this if you want to force a woman to have a child when she’s not financially ready but made a mistake.
Free/health insurance provided birth control of multiple varieties. Again, conservatives, if we truly want to get rid of abortions (like I do) we need to give ground on some of the related aspects.
Our foster care system needs to be properly funded and improved, as there are higher chances of the children now kept by subpar parents ending up in the system.
Once all of these conditions are met, I will very happily see the end of abortions in America
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 57,522
- Reaction score
- 25,168
Thoughtful suggestions. I agree that conservatives are going to have to step up to the plate when and if Roe vs Wade is ever overturned. Personally, I'm far less certain of this than other here seem to be. The current adoption system is a trainwreck. My friends have been trying to adopt and it is pulling teeth.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2015
- Messages
- 45,236
- Reaction score
- 6,620
Something to notice with the "pro life" crowd - they almost never say a positive word about the rights of the woman. It gives an idea of where they are coming from, and how they view women. They also seldom (never in my experience) have a sufficient answer to the question of the woman's consent to the parasitic nature of pregnancy.
They are all about the baby until it is born, and then they can't be bothered to support the necessary social infrastructure to handle it, thereby perpetuating a cycle of poverty and crime, willingly. It is a mental disorder, the inability to resolve this cognitive dissonance, and its effects on this issue are nearly unique to religious belief, of which nearly the entire "pro-life" political movement is composed. It is deeply costly moral braying. In many cases it is outright sadism.
They are all about the baby until it is born, and then they can't be bothered to support the necessary social infrastructure to handle it, thereby perpetuating a cycle of poverty and crime, willingly. It is a mental disorder, the inability to resolve this cognitive dissonance, and its effects on this issue are nearly unique to religious belief, of which nearly the entire "pro-life" political movement is composed. It is deeply costly moral braying. In many cases it is outright sadism.
