Rep. Andy Levin offers an exemplary Democratic Party response to political adversity
ROB BESCHIZZA 12:47 PM FRI JUN 24, 2022

https://i0.wp.com/boingboing.net/wp-...rJUYAAfFIS.png :har::har::har:

Rep. Andy Levin's (D-Michigan) response to today's Supreme Court ruling brims with confidence in his party's ability to engage practically and purposefully with its political adversaries. If we need more, though, here's Nancy Pelosi reading some inspirational poetry.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...-response.html

Oh Christ!!! The Cross State Boarder Abortion Wars are about to start.
Good thing we got new Gun Laws!!!
And what about the coming pandemic of pregnant Fem... Wom... Persons?
(Are We still allowed to say pregnant?)
:o

Don't worry, going to another state for an abortion costs money which most women who want an abortion don't have. Those who cross state borders for an abortion are usually affluent enough that you actually want them to come.

Nobody right in his mind shoots people bringing in money, not even the IRA was so foolishly stupid. But then, the IRA weren't christian fundamentalists...

:hmmm:

Or maybe the USA simply wants to retain its #1 spot in maternal mortality..?

Almost everywhere I read things like it's a restriction of woman's right-

Well what about the unborn babies right !?

I know there are being discussed on when is the embryo end when is it a human

I don't know since I'm not an expert on this subject.

This could be why a woman can have an abortion up to week 12 here in Denmark and Sweden.

Maybe it's nothing but an embryo up to week 12.

My personal view-standpoint.

I really don't have any-I only hope that no unborn baby-not embryo is killed.
When it comes to Rape and incest-Then the woman shall have the right to an abortion.

If I had a girlfriend and she became pregnant and wanted an abortion-I would be truly sad..Not forcing her to keep it-But hope she will.

Markus

What most Europeans read in their local headlines and here as well. Is the U.S. just outright banned abortions. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact if most people got off their high horse and looked for themselves. They would find most State restrictions are very similar to some European laws on abortion. Liberal media will tell you Florida banned abortion. They didn't, under normal circumstances it is allowed up to 15 weeks, sound familiar? It should especially to those living in Europe.

Like I said earlier most people here think there should be an option for the woman however most people also think there should be limitations. But it is now up to the states to set those limitations. I think only five states have outright bans. But I'm sure with time that will change too.

States like Virginia and California see no problem aborting a baby at the third trimester and even hint at new born. But they do promise to keep the infant comfortable until its terminated. :roll:

Thirteen states used trigger laws to implement what effectively are abortion bans (Arkansas, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Wyoming). In some states this became effective immediately, some have a short grace period (a few days), but all thirteen will have a restrictive abortion law within 30 days. All these ban abortions in the first and second trimester. Half of the states (seven) don't even allow abortions in case of rape or incest.
Alabama, West Virginia and Arizona have similar laws in the pipe and/or blocked by courts, which very likely will change within weeks.

Georgia, Ohio and South Carolina have implemented "heartbeat bills" (all currently blocked by courts), which translates into "abortions are illegal after the sixth week of pregnancy", which in turn effectively means an abortion ban, because only a very small amount of women discover their pregnancies within that time, let alone with time to spare to arrange for an abortion.
Don't even try to claim that this is "an option for the woman".



That's nineteen states in my count.

I think after this decision the US has complete and utterly become a medieval country again. But nothing a revolution cold not correct :03:

I think you can add Texas to the 6 week time line too.



"A small amount of women discover"...? :har::har::har: We've been through that argument before here. So' I'll ask again. Am I to assume that you and these small amount of women are still unaware how babies are made? Maybe after your night of drunkin' debauchery you might consider 'Plan B'.

You sure are assuming that people getting abortions are just using it as a form of 'morning after pill', so they can go have more wild sex orgies.

I shouldn't have to tell you how unbelievably stupid that is, but here we are.

Contraceptives can fail and pregnancy tests can show false negatives, six weeks is a very short time for someone who is not expecting to be pregnant.

Due to this ruling, women will suffer, women will die and lives will be destroyed. And for what? Something something states' rights? Bible thumping?

What the hell? Everyone is going to die, suffer, lives destroyed? At what point does that happen? Jesus Christ lighten up Francis

Plan B has a 95% success rate if taken within a day of intercourse. Being every adult ought to be aware how babies are made it stands to reason a pregnancy after intercourse should not come as a surprise or something to be "discovered". For chrissakes its not a treasure hunt. If you’re really worried then go get a check-up and abortion within six weeks, no suffering, no deaths, no lives ruined. I am just absolutely astonished how unbelievably stupid people are that they can’t figure that out. But here we are.

LOL, it sure felt that way trying to get into MaryLou's panties back in the day.

As a reformed right winger(my saving grace is I was not nor am I a religious type) I can translate some statements I have seen on here, social media etc. Almost like these people are parroting talk radio and Fox News lol.


Statement: "The Supreme Court did not ban abortion, they just sent it back to the states."

Translation from Wingnut speech and splainin' into English:


“Really, it is okay to violate a persons autonomy as long it’s the state government doing it … not the federal government...and they have a vagina .” lol


Remember that time in history when “states rights” was used to justify the violation of autonomy of black people (and others)? I.e slavery. Pepperidge Farm remembers.


Furthermore, these are same people screaming, fighting against mandates last year over the injection. I was one of them, I put my career and a lot on the line refusing to be required to take the injection and we ultimately won. Also been vindicated (as knew we would since) by respected entities such as New England Journal of medicine. Was never against the injection, simply being forced was wrong , just as it is wrong to prevent a woman from terminating a pregnancy is she desires.

Now, unlike many others on that side of the issue, I am not contradicting myself. As I said then, body autonomy is a right and allowing states to decide if they can violate women's autonomy is wrong. The so called originalists on the court, went full on activist in order to push their personal religious views into public policy. They lost all moral and intellectual high ground. I nearly went blind today reading to obtuse ignorance in the majority opinion today.

https://external-content.duckduckgo....600&f=1&nofb=1

So what changed?


Just curious.