Leaked Supreme Court Decision signals majority set to overturn Roe v. Wade

[The Grand Nudger]

The American Right knows that power is the only thing that matters, and they will do anything to get it.

Well, that's the thing.  The right views these issues as an existential crisis, kill or be killed, while the left does not, or at least has not in the past.

No one could believe they were serious.  When the dog catches the mailman, it gets shot.  Maybe that made sense before, but for the current crop of nuts, the only way out is through. So politicians who probably have a string of abortions behind them, running on a family values platform of hookers, blow, and treason.... knowing that they always voted against their constituents interests and would find some other way if it weren't this one - are gonna do it.

They'll be cheered for it. The person who can set themselves on fire the most effectively and loudly, will probably end up being president someday - and they all know it.

[vulcanlogician]

Those who have read the draft will know that the express intent of the opinion is to democratize the issue by eliminating its dependence on the opinion of 9 unelected officials and return it to elected legislative bodies. In this particular case, it is difficult to argue that conservatives are the ones relying on antidemocratic means to secure their political goals.

At what level should the fundamental rights of a woman be decided?  Perhaps it should go down to the county level, or even the city level?

A constitution that allows the right to privacy, but that doesn't include the right to private medical choices about their own body?  That is B.S. .  The "originalists" on the court truly believe that if an idea wasn't part of the zeitgeist at the moment that the constitution was written, then it obviously wasn't meant to be a right.

The Religious Right hates "rights".  I have had discussions with conservative religious friends, and they literally believe that there can be no rights but what the majority allows.  They believe legislature must have supremacy over courts.

They hate the Constitution too. Though you'd never guess it the way they talk.

The Constitution says the president appoints justices. But conservatives basically ripped the constitution in half when it came time for Obama to appoint a justice. That's why we're here right now. I never want to hear a Republican praise the constitution again.

[The Grand Nudger]

You have to listen to them talk for awhile. They love their constitution. It just doesn't say what ours does. That's the problem with america, dontchaknow?

Even their history is alternate. Some dumb shitbird just said that abortion isn't deeply rooted in our history. Some dumb shitbird who happens to be a supreme court justice. I don't know buddy, think they might have been aborting some babies. Same comments were made about teh gays. Like they weren't always with us.

[onlinebiker]

At what level should the fundamental rights of a woman be decided?  Perhaps it should go down to the county level, or even the city level?

A constitution that allows the right to privacy, but that doesn't include the right to private medical choices about their own body?  That is B.S. .  The "originalists" on the court truly believe that if an idea wasn't part of the zeitgeist at the moment that the constitution was written, then it obviously wasn't meant to be a right.

The Religious Right hates "rights".  I have had discussions with conservative religious friends, and they literally believe that there can be no rights but what the majority allows.  They believe legislature must have supremacy over courts.

What the majority allows. You said it. In Iran that majority might let you live if you are not Shiite Muslim, as long as you know your place and never raise your voice. Men in Afghanistan have rights, especially the right to deny females educations, jobs, and positions of political power. But conversely and equally oppressive would be someone like Saddam who ruled with a minority party of Baathists over a majority of the population who were other. 

The truth is America is being held hostage by a very large minority who thinks they are the majority. But regardless, our government is not based on majority rule, or minority oppression of the majority. I see the Constitution as a tool to create as much balance and fairness as possible. But like anything in life, the tool can be abused. "Might makes right" literally is what they are arguing, and that would be true if you are a majority Imam ruling over Iran, or a powerful minority such as Saddam was, ruling over a majority of others.

Nobody likes the prospect of having an abortion, not the doctor, not the female, nobody. But we don't live in a perfect world and as such privacy to me should be the supreme guide in law making and judicial precedent. It is true that the Supreme Court has reversed prior Supreme Court rulings and that ability should be protected as an idea for long term stability. But like any tool it can be abused and our right wing leaning Scotus is pretending to make it a states rights issue, when they damned well know it is pulpit politics that they support.

Nobody is being held hostage you blubbering fool.


You just have to put some effort into the policies you want - and you need a bunch of like minded people doing the same.

Bitching, moaning and making lots of noise - AKA "protesting" won't do it. 

Hiring lawyers and lobbyists and playing the damned game is the only thing that really works.

But you do you....

[vulcanlogician]

You have to listen to them talk for awhile.  They love their constitution.  It just doesn't say what ours does.  That's the problem with america, dontchaknow?  

Even their history is alternate.  Some dumb shitbird just said that abortion isn't deeply rooted in our history.  Some dumb shitbird who happens to be a supreme court justice.  I don't know buddy, think they might have been aborting some babies.  Same comments were made about teh gays.  Like they weren't always with us.

Homosexuality was invented by Marxists in 1903 as a way to subvert Christianity.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Is it not the left that seeks to preserve killing as a legally availabe remedy to the inconvenient existence of some living organisms?

Nope it's the left rightfully giving women the choice to remain pregnant and the right to their own bodies 

Those who have read the draft will know that the express intent of the opinion is to democratize the issue by eliminating its dependence on the opinion of 9 unelected officials and return it to elected legislative bodies. In this particular case, it is difficult to argue that conservatives are the ones relying on antidemocratic means to secure their political goals.

The issue is not up for a popular vote as many issues shouldn't be. There is time for democracy and a time issues should be above it.

[GUBU]

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/...co-reports

Obergfell is almost certainly on the chopping block as well. Possibly Lawrence v. Texas as well.

I remember when Susan "My middle name is concerned" Collins said Kavanaugh assured her that Roe V Wade was settled law. But we shouldn't be surprised. She doesn't care about Roe V Wade except when it comes to getting people to vote for her. Otherwise she would've broken party ranks and voted to enshrine the right to abortion into law.

They'll probably look to reinstate Plessy vs Ferguson next.

Oh, and my money's on Alito being the leak.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Is it not the left that seeks to preserve killing as a legally availabe remedy to the inconvenient existence of some living organisms?

Those who have read the draft will know that the express intent of the opinion is to democratize the issue by eliminating its dependence on the opinion of 9 unelected officials and return it to elected legislative bodies. In this particular case, it is difficult to argue that conservatives are the ones relying on antidemocratic means to secure their political goals.

I was speaking more generally about the right abandoning all but power as a goal in politics.  Abortion wasn't an issue with Christians or the right before some evangelical leaders realized that it could function as a wedge issue to drive voters to conservatism.  It is that history which led us to here.  Regarding whether Roe vs. Wade was anti-democratic or not requires begging the question of whether outlawing abortion in the first two trimesters is unconstitutional.  You don't get to assume that as a given.  Either it is or it isn't.  It is not anti-democratic to abide by the method of resolving such questions enshrined in the constitution without arguing that the constitution itself is anti-democratic, which it appears that you are doing.  The federal government reserves certain powers to itself, including determining whether something is constitutional or not.  All other powers are reserved to the states.  So, no, Roe v. Wade wasn't anti-democratic.  Quite the opposite.

Nice rhetoric, though.

Indeed the right doesn't give a damn about life it's about control . If they cared about life then they would never support something that will lead to more death.

[GUBU]

If Alito's comments are in the final draft, it is open season on women and gays.  This is the religious Right's wet dream come true.

So, Alito's idea is that if a right existed in 1776, then it exists now.  If it didn't exist then, it can't exist now.  What a f'ing ass-hole.

In that case then abortion rights are explicitly enshrined in the law of the land. In 1776 no christian sect was against abortion, they simply weren't done (so often) because a safe technique hadn't been developed.

[Angrboda]

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/...co-reports

Obergfell is almost certainly on the chopping block as well. Possibly Lawrence v. Texas as well.

I remember when Susan "My middle name is concerned" Collins said Kavanaugh assured her that Roe V Wade was settled law. But we shouldn't be surprised. She doesn't care about Roe V Wade except when it comes to getting people to vote for her. Otherwise she would've broken party ranks and voted to enshrine the right to abortion into law.

They'll probably look to reinstate Plessy vs Ferguson next.

Oh, and my money's on Alito being the leak.

Either Alito or someone in Alito's employ. It's hard to imagine anyone else having access to it. If that's the case, it would seem to have been leaked in order to support overturning Roe v. Wade. What other motive would there be for one of Alito's people to do this?