[brandon]

If you don't like abortion don't have one, but don't make it illegal for everyone else. I understand they are leaving it up to individual states. What happened to live and let live?

[johnforbes]

Apparently the draft was leaked to put pressure on Kavanaugh and Barrett, who have not thus far been notable for spinal fortuitude.

Might work?

[elklindo69]

So they first went after abortion.

What next....contraceptives? According to the line of conservative thinking, there is no constitutional right for someone to possess contraceptives. Therefore according to the conservatives in the supreme court, it would be left up to the states. And then the red states would outlaw contraceptives and contraceptives would be legal in blue states.

So if you were to cross state lines and get busted with condoms then I imagine you would be arrested and prosecuted?

Our right to privacy got pretty much shot down with those people....

[brandon]

Not contraceptives, gay marriage.

[brandon]

Mr. Forbes, you're probably correct sir.

[Clownkicker]

As they say, if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.

And someone SHOULD put pressure on Kavanaugh to keep his word given in his confirmation hearings that he wouldn't vote to eliminate Roe v. Wade.

It wouldn't bode well that a new Justice proves he's a liar right at the beginning of his tenure. No moral American will respect him after that.

[elklindo69]

OK...so the guy who was so blown out drunk through college that he could not remember how many women he sexually assaulted....went out lied to congress regarding Roe vs Wade.

I'm totally shocked!!!!

[johnforbes]

President Joe Biden’s recent support for Roe v. Wade appears to contradict his past actions A resurfaced report by the New York Times reveals the Democrat voted to overturn Roe v. Wade back in 1982.

According to the National Review, citing a New York Times article from 2019, Biden proposed a constitutional amendment in 1982 that would allow individual states to set their own abortion policies. Additionally, a 1994 letter by then-Senator Biden stated he had voted to defund abortion on 50 separate cases.

This comes in direct contradiction to Biden’s statement Tuesday in which he criticized the Supreme Court over reports it may overturn Roe v. Wade.

[Clownkicker]

johnny, stop living in the past. It's now forty years later.

Try to grow up and evolve a little.

If Biden can do it, we have to believe even a partisan hack like you can do it as well.

Why do conservatives dread change so much? It is the only thing they can count on in this life, yet they fear it irrationally.

[elklindo69]

From what I remember Trump was pro choice before he decided to become a conservative...

And if all of you conservatives are more upset over a leaked document than you are of the wife of a supreme court justice who just happened to aid and abet a criminal conspiracy to overturn an election...well then you are probably on the wrong side of the law,

[johnforbes]

Joe was a mature person in 1982, a legislator, and at that time he had been suspended from law school for plagiarism and gotten back in and gotten into public office.

Also, 1982 was not the Stone Age. There was indoor plumbing and television and even electrical lighting inside houses.

Yet, even in 1982 in the very modern age, Joe did NOT want Roe v Wade.

[Clownkicker]

It is a really stunning admission by johnforbes that he has not changed a single political opinion since he became an adult.

Unfortunately, that means johnny is either lying or he's a complete imbecile.

Or both.

Grow up, johnny. Your childish "Weltbild" makes you look ridiculous.

[elklindo69]

From what I understand, now the far right wing loons are claming that Ketanji Brown Jackson leaked the SC draft opinion that would overturn Roe v Wade......even though she is not currently on the court.

Apparently idiocy is a feature of the republican party not a bug.

[johnforbes]

The purpose of the leak was probably to get Kavanaugh and Barrett to cave in. It might work because apparently RINO Roberts wants to keep Roe too.

But Joe was a mature person in 1982, a legislator, and at that time he had been suspended from law school for plagiarism and gotten back in and gotten into public office.

Also, 1982 was not the Stone Age. There was indoor plumbing and television and even electrical lighting inside houses.

Yet, even in 1982 in the very modern age, Joe did NOT want Roe v Wade.

[sillydaddy]

Biden just heard that today is "Cinco de Mayo" so he called Kraft Foods to congratulate them...

[elklindo69]

If the typical person were caught lying under oath, they would be in a shitload of trouble. However when blown out drunk Brett and Barrett lie to the congress they get to spend a lifetime doling out their fucked up values on the county.

Typical conservatives..........................

[johnforbes]

Supposedly, they voted in Feb to overturn Roe, so if true that was plenty of time for leftists to sit on that info.

Probably it was more than one person because it seemed like a coordinated demonstration popped up.

Of course, others are saying RINO Roberts leaked the draft to try to get Barrett and/or Kavanaugh to cave.

Who knows on this rainy, gloomy Friday afternoon?

[Clownkicker]

I fail to see the conservative reasoning behind wanting to eliminate abortion.

They have been bitching and moaning for years that Democrats have a dastardly plan to get lots more poor blacks and Latinos to immigrate to this country. So what do they do? They develop their own plan to make sure we have more poor blacks and Latinos in this country to supposedly vote Democrat one day. Go figgur.

White women get about a third of abortions in the U.S. and on average they are more likely to be able to afford to travel to a state where abortion is still legal. The other two thirds are blacks and Latinos who, on average, are less able to afford to travel.

The result will be more poor newborn blacks and Latinos on Red State welfare rolls and in the public schools in a few years, as well as more mothers on welfare since they will not be able to go to work with a newborn in the home.

It's the conservative dream solution to all our problems. They have been telling us for decades that we just don't have enough poor people on welfare. This is "compassionate conservatism" in practice; ensure that hundreds of thousands more people are poor, born with physical problems, born drug addicted, born to victims of rape and incest, and on welfare.

But Republicans in Tennessee HAVE been trying to lower the marriage age to 16, 15, 14, (there's no limit) to allow conservatives to marry (move in with, no marriage license) and now they will be able to force these child victims to deliver their babies to them. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... union.html

Modern Trump-supporter conservatives are truly sick.

[johnforbes]

Abortion is a complex issue for people willing to consider both sides.

Seems like federalizing it was needless, and the "logic" behind the Roe decision was poor in any event.

Why not leave it to the states?

However, the Left may well be correct that doxing the 5 justices who reportedly voted for it (Roberts as usual voted with the Dems apparently) will cause Kavanaugh and Barrett to become scared of being criticized and they may switch to the comfort of the leftists on the Georgetown wine and cheese party circuit.

[elklindo69]

If you remember the state of Connecticut tried to ban birth control but it was overturned by the Supreme Court due to the right to privacy. So according to Alito's reasoning, birth control should be regulated by the states since it does not explicitly state in the US constitution that we have a right to have birth control.

And there are these radical right wing loons out there who will go and attempt to outlaw birth control. And if they were to get the supreme court to go along with them, how would it be enforced without violating the constitution? I just cant really understand why these conservatives have to go poking around in people's personal affairs....doesn't make sense.

[johnforbes]

Seems reasonable to send it back to the states and let them decide.

For half a century, the Supreme Court has been making up "rights" that simply are nowhere to be found in the Constitution or the Federalist Papers or anywhere.

Gideon, Escobedo, Miranda, Griswold, Mapp...there's a ton of stuff simply made up by judges.

And what is a judge? A politician in a robe.

[Clownkicker]

Some pithy commentary on this topic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1XKrgRhdT0


And on an ironically unrelated note, five Republican Congressmen just received subpoenas for refusing to testify voluntarily before the Jan. 6 Committee.
Said the Congressmen, "You can't force us to do anything. We're not pregnant."

[johnforbes]

Judge Watusi didn't even know how to define a "woman," so this issue can get complicated.

Even when Clowntoker is dressed in female clothing, he still looks like a guy.

[Clownkicker]

Whereas when johnforbes is in his elaborate drag get up, he is indistinguishable from a woman. He's a regular "Crying Game" situation.

It just goes to show you, a real man will always look like a man no matter how he's dressed.

Then there are the swishy androgynous johnforbeses of the world.

[johnforbes]

Fortunately, my reliable staffers submitted Clowntoker's DNA to a biolab in Ukraine to settle this question.

The results follow:

Clowntoker is 43 percent "woman" plus 37 percent "womxn" with the remaining 67 percent being "leftist loon."

[brandon]

What happens when they start de-federalizing the rest of the supposed bad legislation? Are people going to move to states based on their politics? That’s a bad road to start down.

[elklindo69]

So first they came for abortion, what next?

Prophylactics
IUDs
Hormone Treatments
Assisted Reproductive Techniques

Perhaps those right wing loons will ban the withdrawal technique because that literally prevents impregnation. Maybe they will ban sex except for procreation. The right wing is really the American Taliban when you think about it.

[johnforbes]

Isn't it an oxymoron to claim a leftist has ever really thought about anything?

For Elkin, no thought is necessary, and all he need do is mouth the leftist orthodoxy of the moment, eh?

[Clownkicker]

johnny, elklindo's list of things Republicans will, given the chance, outlaw next are not merely "leftist orthodoxy"

They are real plans and proposals by Republicans.

"Days after the leak of a draft Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade, [Republican] Brent Crane, a senior state lawmaker in Idaho, said publicly he wanted to hold hearings on banning emergency contraception. Earlier this month, Louisiana lawmakers considered a bill that would have classified abortion as homicide — and that could, experts say, have criminalized IUDs and emergency contraception as well. The Louisiana bill ultimately failed." [for now]-19thnews.org

You're pretending this stuff isn't real, johnny. It is. Your problem is you keep thinking there is some reasonable limit to what Republicans will do to remove control of a woman's body from her. There isn't. You Republican clowns are EXACTLY like the Taliban in this regard; religious nuts who fear women controlling their own bodies and women having equal rights to men. (That's what the state mandating that a woman must, under threat of criminal penalties become an incubator for the government.) Such laws are already in the works, being planned by religious organizations and cynical and vile old white men who pretend they care about babies while they adamantly refuse to raise taxes to pay for prenatal care, shelter, food, pediatric healthcare, or adequate education. In fact, they actually campaign on how they AREN'T going to provide healthcare for anyone, let alone for the children they will force to be born into poverty, because that would be "socialism." (As if there is anything wrong with that. But then, conservatives never actually think about anything. They simply have a mindless knee jerk reaction to words like that.

Try thinking about the implications of this for a change, johnny, instead of simply shrugging off the despicable actions of the Party you support by obediently mouthing the Rightist Republican orthodoxy of the moment.

[elklindo69]

The right wing has an extremist faction that is absolutely opposed to all forms of birth control and abortion who only support sexual activity not only when it is within the marriage but when it is meant to procreate. And the use of all forms of contraceptives just gets in the way.

I imagine that these people are creating their pathway for their vision where the fetus is actually a person thereby receiving protections under the constitution. As with anything else when you are dealing with extremists, when you give them an inch they are going to take a mile.

Legal experts predict that ruling, if it ends up being the court’s final decision, could threaten the court’s 1965 ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut, which established the right to privacy and legalized birth control (for married couples only at the time), because the court can use its ruling against Roe to then overturn Griswold based on its reasoning.

Some Republicans have already expressed opposition to Griswold, suggesting that precedent could be challenged in court next, such as Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Arizona Senate candidate Blake Masters.

Even if Griswold isn’t overturned, some abortion bills already threaten contraceptive methods like Plan B, such as a bill that’s moving forward in Louisiana and Missouri’s “trigger ban” to outlaw abortion as soon as the court overturns Roe.

Those bills could have broader implications beyond abortion by defining the life of an “unborn child” as starting at fertilization or conception, which would affect common birth control methods, and likely in vitro fertilization, as not all eggs artificially fertilized through IVF result in a pregnancy.

[Clownkicker]

Republicans had better watch out, they just might get what they want.

If a fetus is declared a "person" at conception, then the fetus would be enslaving the unwilling woman carrying it if she has no option to abort. This would be state-enforced involuntary servitude; the state forcing an unwilling woman to be in the service of another human being without any compensation. This violates the 13th Amendment.

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

Presumably the fetus 'person' could also be charged with the crime of endangering the life of the woman forced to carry a pregnancy to term against her will, since pregnancy carried inherent risks to the life and health of a woman.

Next Republicans will be declaring sexual intercourse a crime so they can prosecute a pregnant woman, convict her of the crime of "having sex" and then legally force her into involuntary servitude to the fetus as punishment for her 'crime'.

[johnforbes]

Even Einstein could not follow the twisty trail of hypotheticals outlined by Clownslacker supra.

[Clownkicker]

No, johnny, YOU couldn't follow it because you are incapable of critical thought.

You can only retain and regurgitate the partisan tripe your handlers slop into your trough for you.

You are utterly incapable of considering the implications of a single fertilized cell being declared a person, or the implications of a fetus being declared a person.