How do y’all feel about this?
I personally think it is stupid to not guarantee these rights at a federal level. Abortion goes beyond people simply being immature and not having protected sex. Also, there have been some talks from one of the the justices to over turn same-sex marriage and potentially taking action on things such as contraceptive pills and birth control. What the hell is going through these people’s heads?
My belief is that it should be available to everyone. If you don't believe in abortions... then don't get one. And if you do, then you should be able to
Banning abortion doesn't stop abortions. It just stops safe abortions. Someone who really wants to abort a pregnancy is going to abort that pregnancy.. even if they have to put their own life in danger to do it.
Especially right now more than most times, due to the huge inflation, it's hard enough for many people to keep themselves afloat without the huge cost of having and raising a child. A back alley procedure from an untrained amateur for a one time payment.. or even something one does by themselves is going to be seen as a much more viable option than going through with the pregnancy.
All in all.. I see this as a step backwards.
these people are beyond insane and they aren't going to just stop here.
they're absolutely going to go after things like contraception, lgbt rights, interracial marriage, etc if they ain't stopped.
fucking white christian nationalism right here and they're going to be the end of this country.
it's not a prediction, it's fact. Clarence Thomas has clearly stated his intent to overturn Griswold (protecting contraceptives & medical privacy), Lawrence (banning sodomy), & Obergefell (protecting gay marriage).
For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.
Source: 597 U. S. ____ (2022), https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf page 119 of pdf
if Roe getting overturned doesn't affect you, or you even support it due to religious reasons or personal biases, it has still laid the groundwork for losing Griswold, which will have far-reaching implications that will be really bad for everyone.
speaking of, recall that discussions of partisan rights issues don't go well on this forum (aka get out while you can): Thread
I regret clicking on that, I think I lost braincells just skimming through it.
As for this thread, I have mixed opinions on the actual Roe v Wade, but I agree w/5 that it does lay the groundwork for far more concerning changes.
this is good because now murder cannot happen
What an utterly stupid decision. Why is the government getting involved in an individual's personal affairs?
like i said on another thread, politics are retarded
I don’t support the idea of killing a human (or fetus depending on your stance) but I understand why abortion is absolutely necessary in our society. This situation is sort of similar to the gun debate. Restrict guns and you create a black market for illegal weapons. Restrict abortion and you create a (less safe) black market for abortion. Those that argue it is immoral to protect abortion must acknowledge the consequences if abortion loses federal protection. More kids will be abandoned, women who may feel pressured to get an abortion in an unsafe environment risk death or serious injury, kids grow up in homes not able to financially or emotionally support them. I believe we all have the goal to prevent the loss of life no matter which side you are on and that is why abortion is not something we can morally prohibit no matter how much you disagree with it.
i think this is one of the few things i struggle to see the otherside of the issue. i mean i dont think abortions should be done after the state of fetal viability starts (when a child can be born, albeit underdeveloped) unless the woman or child are at risk. which i believe is one of the few cases here in the UK where you can get an abortion at anytime if you have a good reason for it. thats as far as i go in terms of the preservation of new life side of the argument. i think once it goes past a certain point you've made your decision and it would be too developed (unless you're stuck in a long backlog of people who need abortions for some reason)
but yeah, its obvious woman dont want pregnancies they never asked for. ill never in my entire life experience pregnancy but i can only understand and see carrying a fetus for 9 months is quite an undertaking and commitment and when you are forced down this path and you cant get an abortion i dont think i could honestly imagine the pain of it to be honest but i'd understand. sticking to an unwanted pregnancy for 9 months is not good and should not be forced to carry it from the get go. and certainly not when it was put in through assault. or contraceptive accidents
also to note given the rise of inflation and state of the world i think most people share the opinion with me bringing kids into this world isn't good. especially for younger people like myself who likely lives with their parents because housing market in the uk is 💀
no way you'd want to be stuck with a kid you cant financially support if you can barely support yourself especially again if it was forced on you
i think thats honestly as middle ground i can get. even though im not advocating for abortion right before the child is born (unless again the mother or child is at risk) because its a bit of a fucked time to wait until the child can be born to make this choice. i lean a lot for woman to take their own action to this, even if you took the metaphorical gun away from my head because im a bloke and its an experience ill never have or should not have a say on. i'd still be saying the same thing because its not right to have to suffer pregnancy if you didn't want a child in the first place
but this is a pretty clapped overturning in the states.
↩ batchest You forgot medical complications and botched miscarriages can happen, and AFAIK the states where abortion is being banned don't have laws to allow hospitals to save pregnant women until it's too late, so you risk losing both the mother and the child.
"Fun" fact, Judaism does allow abortion if the woman can be killed by the pregnancy (according to some Jews on the internet).
oh come on. you have got to be fucking kidding me.
interracial marriage? no way you actually believe the supreme court justices want to ban interracial marriage. and white christian nationalism? you act like all christians hate everyone who isnt a white male. stop slandering mainstream religious beliefs and straw manning anyone who disagrees with you.
i still dont get this argument. i dont see how we shouldnt ban something because people will do it illegally anyways. to me its like saying “we should drop the fda and all food safety regulations because people will eat anything if theyre hungry enough.” same thing goes for banning drugs. “well theyll just go buy sketch shit if theyre desperate enough, so we might as well legalize selling heroin to whoever.”
only 20% of abortions are for economic or social reasons. the main reason for getting an abortion is not economic hardship. saying we should keep abortions because its hard financially on the mother is not a good reason because it only applies to 1/5 of abortions.
Why should it matter why you chose to get an abortion..? And the reality is the cost of living is on the rise and a lot of people don't want to be parents. Why should we force someone to give birth to a child they don't want just to put the child up for adoption? The adoption systems in most countries are already at a breaking point, and a lot of children never end up getting adopted...
The disappointing thing with this ruling is it is not pro life, it is anti-choice, which is where I personally take issue. By all means you can be pro-life, but you should also be pro-choice imho. If you want to be anti-choice then before banning abortion and setting the country as a whole back hundreds of years find a better solution to deal with the problem you've just created.
Unwanted children ruin lives. Murdering a child who cannot feel anything does not ruin lives, because the life in question has no experiences of the real world and cannot feel pain. This applies to first trimester abortions. I am not interested in discussing second/third trimester abortions, because then we have to talk about when a “life” begins.
Many "pro-life" activists in some places miss the elephant in the room. Lack of sex ed. Epidemic misinformation about science in private schools. Lack of accessible healthcare for all. Lack of social aid for who's in need.
You don't stop floods by declaring them illegal, you go after the causes of the floods.
↩ enchy oh come on. you have got to be fucking kidding me.
interracial marriage? no way you actually believe the supreme court justices want to ban interracial marriage. and white christian nationalism? you act like all christians hate everyone who isnt a white male. stop slandering mainstream religious beliefs and straw manning anyone who disagrees with you.
given they have openly and overtly stated their intentions to overturn case law regarding gay marriage, right to contraception and such, it is not in any way unreasonable to assume they would ban interracial marriage..
i don't get your point here
