DiscussMormonism.com

Kukulkan wrote: ↑

Wed May 04, 2022 1:28 am

...
I personally don't think that Roe being overturned presents a dire threat to women's lives, but I might be wrong on that. ...

You are wrong, I am afraid. There are, for instance, women who without an abortion will be forced to bear a child that is the product of rape and/or incest, and who know that their lives would be destroyed by the experience. If abortion is banned, many of them will inevitably resort in desperation to illegal and dangerous procedures without proper medical help, as they once used to. And, as they once used to, many of them will die or be maimed for life.

Roe v. Wade ended all that. But soon many women will again face the risks that we once thought were gone for ever. Thanks Mr Trump.

Moksha wrote: ↑

Tue May 03, 2022 2:46 am

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/0 ... n-00029473

"We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft circulated inside the court.

Whoever leaked this should be prosecuted and if Sotomayor ordered one of her law clerks to leak this document she should be impeached.

ajax18 wrote: ↑

Wed May 04, 2022 12:28 pm

Whoever leaked this should be prosecuted and if Sotomayor ordered one of her law clerks to leak this document she should be impeached.

For good measure, should there also be the imposition of martial law (marshal law for those of the conservative persuasion) and the immediate overturn of the 13th Amendment?

K Graham wrote: ↑

Wed May 04, 2022 12:39 am

I disagree with this. It was leaked to bring national attention to the situation in hopes that a public outcry of opposition will deter them from the path they're on. But the media is screwing this up again by making much ado about the "leak" as if it were more important than the story of overturning Roe.

Incidentally. Rep Susan Collins had already assured us that in her interviews with both Gorsuch and Cavanaugh, that they both told her that they would support Roe and have no interest in overturning it because of the importance of precedent. This is why she voted to confirm them. Time will tell if they prove to be bald faced liars.

Perhaps it is just a difference in where/how we consume media but your read on how the media is covering this is very different from mine. First and foremost, Politico obviously couldn't care less that a leak occurred, they certainly aren't focusing on that piece. And most of the headlines I'm seeing (that thing that gives most people their read on a topic) barely mention a leak, hell half of them are acting like this opinion is binding and not some draft. I've seen a ton of headlines and openers that I would label as "irresponsible journalism". When I do see dissent about the leak it is typically either an opinion piece or only from a legal experts point-of-view and is rarely leading or prominently displayed. My perspective may be warped by my absolute 0 consumption of television news so YMMV.

I'm curious what your take would be if we knew this leak was from a conservative Justice or clerk attempting to drive the narrative back to the February draft after the opinion of the Court had already moved in favor of preserving Roe? For me we play a dangerous game if we accept that leaks for the sake of driving politics are okay when our side does it versus when another does.

I'll agree entirely that there is a ton of r/leopardsatemyface material from those towards the "middle" expressing shock that this could have happened. We knew it was a possibility given the shift in the court over the last 6 years and anyone taken aback by this wasn't paying attention.

ajax18 wrote: ↑

Wed May 04, 2022 12:28 pm

Moksha wrote: ↑

Tue May 03, 2022 2:46 am

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/0 ... n-00029473

"We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft circulated inside the court.

Whoever leaked this should be prosecuted and if Sotomayor ordered one of her law clerks to leak this document she should be impeached.

What if it was one of the Conservatives Justices?

Kishkumen wrote: ↑

Wed May 04, 2022 12:19 pm

Kukulkan wrote: ↑

Wed May 04, 2022 1:28 am

I personally don't think that Roe being overturned presents a dire threat to women's lives, but I might be wrong on that.

If it opens the way for some of that barbaric legislation to take force, then it certainly is. It is in any case. In taking away a woman's ability to make decisions regarding her own health--think about those people who want to place the life of a fetus over the mother's life in every case--women's lives are imperiled. I don't see how they could not be, but please let me know what you are thinking here.

Even in the case of non-barbaric legislation, carrying a pregnancy to term and giving birth has risks to the life and health of the mother. For some non-zero number of women, forcing them to give birth against their will is a death sentence. And this death sentence Will be imposed with no due process and based on no crime whatsoever.

The implication of giving government that kind of control over its citizens is staggering.

What if it was one of the Conservatives Justices?

If one of the conservative justices leaked this document? Sure, absolutely he/she should be impeached. You can't leak documents like that without consequence. It puts the supreme court justices in danger of violent reprisal.

Another point I should add on extreme legislation. It's easy for legislators to pass legislators to pass laws that they know they will never have to enforce. When Obama was president, how many times did the Republican controlled house pass bills to repeal the ACA, knowing that Obama would veto any such bill? They got to throw red meat at their base with no downside whatsoever, because any negative effects of the bill would never happen.

Some of that may also be true of the most extreme of the anti-abortion bills that have been introduced or enacted in various states. It's all well and good to pass an extreme bill when you know it will be struck down under Roe v. Wade, because you'll never have to live with the political consequences of the results. It's another when the harmful effects actually happen and you face to face angry constituents. It may very well be that the most extreme of the laws will be amended.

ajax18 wrote: ↑

Wed May 04, 2022 4:13 pm

What if it was one of the Conservatives Justices?

If one of the conservative justices leaked this document? Sure, absolutely he/she should be impeached. You can't leak documents like that without consequence. It puts the supreme court justices in danger of violent reprisal.

Thanks, just checking.

Impeachment is one of the issues I've been mulling over. I haven't reached any conclusions yet.

I guess I view Roe v Wade akin to a new president passing a bunch of executive orders only to have the next president nullify them at the start of their term. The idea that Roe v Wade was untouchable I think was somewhat naïve of a stance to take, as we know that landmark cases have been overturned in the past. I agree with a woman's right to an abortion, yet I don't believe that right should be afforded through judicial review, it should be granted through legislation which is much more robust and galvanized.

I think of Brown v Board which overturned Plessy v Ferguson (which was thought to be untouchable), though we are seeing the reverse. While the ruling did have somewhat immediate affects (Little Rock Nine), it was truly only bolstered with the passing of the Civil Rights Act a decade later. Unfortunately we cannot trust fundamental rights to a court that has shown time and time again that it IS willing to overturn landmark cases (for the better or worse) that do deal with fundamental rights.