Draft Alito opinion leaked overturning Roe

Good! If businesses pulled conferences & contracts from cities/states due to voting laws (ex, Atlanta), then it's time for the "find out" stage when it comes to this, too.

 

I also am not a lawyer but my understanding is that you have to be allowed by statute to sue the state. I am guessing that these states aren't allowing law suits. I will shut up on this topic and leave it to people who know.

 

These anti women states are in for a rude awakening. They are going to find out how much intelligence and money is tied to people who respect women on principal. I would stop all new business being conducted in gillead.

 

Used to be military policy that single women who got pregnant were required to get an abortion.

 

This will get some people attention. What woman of child bearing age would want to live in one of the ban states if given an alternate?

 

I think you mean that pregnant service women were required to leave the military or get an abortion.

 

Dishonorable discharge or separation rather than an honorable discharge, so they put their thumb on the scale towards getting an abortion.

 

The best example is probably Ginsburg's first landmark gender discrimination case, Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld (420 U.S. 636, 1975), which concerned the denial of social security death benefits as the surviving spouse to a widower whose wife passed away. The Supreme Court in a unanimous decision held that surviving spouses regardless of gender were entitled to survivors' benefits. Under the law in effect prior to the decision eligibility for benefits was limited to widows but not widowers .

 

Going to bump this back up in the hopes we can move the abortion discussion from the Texas shooting thread to here.

It is completely hypocritical that it's okay to take away women's bodily autonomy over an "all life is sacred even when they're not a life yet" argument and yet be perfectly okay with having assault weapons readily available and relatively easy to get because of "gun rights".

Prolifers need to think about that. Are they truly prolife or is it that they're probirth and then they don't care?

 

Well, we agree on one thing, this turned very silly very quickly.

1. If whether people have these benefits doesn't affect your opinion on abortion, why should it affect mine? What am I supposed to demand the right of a fetus to cash a check, if I'm going to advocate for its right to life? That seems more than a little silly for obvious reasons.
2. You can have beneficiaries in a Will for people who aren't born yet. Can my estate plan include unborn beneficiaries? | Korshak & Associates, P.A.
3. Nobody is disputing the fact that fetuses have limited experiences, even more so than that of an infant, based on the fact that it is inside its mother. That doesn't change the fact that just because it isn't eligible for a social security number, doesn't mean you have the right to kill it. That's like saying just because I am ineligible for social security checks, people should be able to kill me. Anybody who says people shouldn't be allowed to kill me is a hypocrite because I am ineligible for social security checks.
4. If a fetus isn't a person, why is it double murder to kill a pregnant mother?
5. You're right that it all comes down to whether the fetus is a human life.

 

Hi...so-

1. Your right that example is silly. But to qualify for anything- insurance, welfare, etc, you have to be born. Coverage starts from date of birth not conception. I had 10 days after their births to put kids on insurance policy. Couldn't do it beforehand even with the one that was a scheduled C-section because he wasn't born yet.

I had complications. All medical care related to that went through my doctors not pediatricians. While there are neonatal specialists those still bill under the mother.

2. You can have your cat or even great grandchildren decades from even being thought of in wills so don't see that as a point.

3. You're already born so no, you can't just be killed because you can't get Social Security. Anything in life you apply for and/or qualify for begins with your name and date of BIRTH.

4. It isn't, at least not everywhere. Some places from the moment she's pregnant it's double homicide. Others it's third trimester. Others it's viability - and it's viability that I think should be a threshold except for maternal life/catastrophic event.

5. What is life? Grass has nerve endings, digestive systems, etc. We don't face homicide for killing grass. Sperm moves on its own, has DNA, etc. Why don't men face homicide charges each time they masturbate? Killing thousands, millions of potential children.

I'd joke about women being charged if they have a period but that's too close to what someone will likely try. That's once a month. So is she guilty?

Viability is really the best compromise. Even the earlier days the line was "quickening" which was around 15-16 weeks I believe. That all changed in the late 1800s or so with the Catholic Church changing its stance & others following suit. We have science now so 16-18 weeks is plenty of time and just have exceptions for rape/incest/maternal health/catastrophic event. Then because it's still legal people whose religion allows for abortion wouldn't have their faiths trampled on too.

 

Freakonomics years ago made a pretty compelling case that starting with Roe abortions were a primary driver in the decades decrease in crime.

 

Supreme Court Roe v. Wade leak investigation heats up as clerks are asked for phone records in unprecedented move - CNNPolitics

 

So the "real" issue is the leak, not that they are setting a precedent for taking away rights. okie dokie.....