Roe v Wade Overturned

While it's still a little too early McConnell may end up finding that Karma is a real bitch. If the Democrats increase their majority margin in the Senate, a real possibility, not only will Mitch remain the Minority Leader the Dems may also do away with the filibuster effectively neutering McConnell by taking away the power to veto legislation that he currently has as the Minority Leader.

 

our country was founded on the protection of the minority from the majority. we should not lose that or it will be even worse than it is now.

 

Personally, I believe that the Senate should return to the "talking filibuster". If the minority wants to block legislation that they believe is truly egregious they should take the floor of the Senate and debate until a motion for cloture is either defeated or passes. The minority should not have the ability to block legislation simply by proclamation. When the Constitution was drafted the Founders expressly decided not require a super majority to enact legislation. The Constitution only expressly requires super majorities to override presidential vetoes, to remove the president from office following impeachment or to ratify treaties.

 

I can agree with that and would hope the minority to muster the forces to stall authoriatarion measures while arousing public opposition to proposed legislation

 

They won't do it unless the control the House, Senate and POTUS. If they do then the filibuster is gone

 

The filibuster is strictly a Senate procedural device. If the Democrats end up with a reasonable majority in the Senate they could eliminate it completely since it's the majority party that writes the rules. I do think that if the Democrats completely eliminate the filibuster they could end up regretting it in the future since the majority party that controls the senate will almost certainly change, one of the reasons I support a return to the talking filibuster rather than elimination of the procedural device in its entirety.

 

For any dems wanting the filibuster gone, just think about what would get passed with a bare Republican majority if they didn’t have it.
And then think again on whether you want it. Because what they would pass is light years worse than what you couldn’t.

 

Matt would rather have a slim majorly and an abortion ban than a big majority and abortion accessible to those who need it.

Republicans’ newly-introduced national abortion ban would put doctors in prison for up to 5 years, force women to undergo extremely invasive transvaginal ultrasounds, and keep in place statewide bans that force rape victims to give birth.

Vote accordingly!

 

Women must not be deprived their right to kill their offspring! Vote accordingly!

 

Yes, I want the filibuster gone. I want the Republicans trying to pass their agenda if they have the majority. I want the Democrats doing the same if they have their majority. Gridlock is bad.

 

Ohio's new abortion law forces doctor to fight to protect her patient's life | CNN

Another family forced to leave their state for maternal care due to the ambiguous anti-abortion laws and fear among health care providers to provide care to women, even at risk of dying. While the laws state the life of the mother is an acceptable reason for abortion, they don't specify the circumstances. Doctors cannot risk care and be prosecuted. Effectively, Ohio politicians now control what used to be a patient-doctor relationship. That is what fascism is all about.

 

I might add that under your implicit definition a zygote the size of the head of the pin or a 6-week old fetus the size of a kidney bean neither of which is remotely capable of independent survival would be considered a "child" and that the way most the so called prolife legislation is a framed a doctor would have to wait until a woman is literally on death's door before performing a medically necessary abortion in order to avoid the risk of prosecution by an overly zealous prosecutor.

 

Are sure about that? If Republicans gain control of both Houses of Congress and the presidency a Lindsey Graham style national ban on abortion would be a real possibility. While the Senate should absolutely eliminate the current version in which the minority party can simply block legislation as well as the other functions of the Senate such as the confirmation of presidential appointees by proclamation the filibuster should not be eliminated entirely with the talking filibuster which was employed very infrequently being a reasonable alternative.

Prior to 1970 the filibuster required the minority to take the floor of the Senate and debate continuously until the body voted on the motion for cloture or the legislation was withdrawn. After 1970, the minority could simply filibuster by proclaiming that it was doing so without any need for continuous debate. Notice any difference?

 

I'm sure. If they want to do that, go for it. See how that plays with Americans.

 

Who are the religious nutters, really ? Pro-aborts wanting to assign humanness to the shadowy realm of theology.

 

That's a reason I'm conflicted about it. There are some laws I think they would ram through. But part of me also thinks the Republicans tend to benefit from not having to get much done legislatively (other than tax cuts). I think they typically prefer to play defense. But assuming they had the power to repeal the Affordable Care Act, for example, would they actually do it without having something to replace it with?

 

But many pages back in this thread, right wingers told me that it was a states issue. Now what is their talking point that the GOP wants to make it federal?

 

When a fetus/embryo should be considered a human being is a matter of theology. It's completely subjective. Although I have to confess to being somewhat facetious if you believe that an embryo is a human being from the moment of conception then logically frozen embryos residing in a cryogenic receptacle should be counted for census purposes including legislative apportionment and the entitlement of political subdivisions to certain forms of state and federal assistance.

 

Teen girl denied medication refill under AZ’s new abortion law

TUCSON, Ariz. (KOLD News 13) - A 14-year-old Tucson girl was denied a refill of a life-saving prescription drug she had been taking for years just two days after Arizona’s new abortion law had taken effect.

14 year old Emma Thompson has debilitating rheumatoid arthritis and osteoporosis which has kept her in and out of the hospital for most of her life. She relies on methotrexate to help tame the effects of the disease.

But methotrexate can also be used to end ectopic pregnancies, to induce an abortion and that’s where the problem arises.

“As a mother who has had to deal with my child being very ill most of her life, I was scared, I was really worried,” said her mother Kaitlin Preble. “I was shaking. I was in tears. I didn’t know what to do.”

 

Vote, and prepare to leave if necessary