Supreme Court Overturning Roe v Wade

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9568
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: Supreme Court Overturning Roe v Wade

Post by Res Ipsa »

Kishkumen wrote:
Tue May 03, 2022 10:04 pm
Is it possible that this was leaked by a right-wing radical Justice (or his spouse ;-)) in order to keep the discussion locked in this place, in other words, using the publicity of this version to keep others from changing positions or tweaking this further?
That's certainly possible, and I've heard folks who clerked at the Supreme Court argue that that's likely what happened. A clerk would be putting his or her entire legal career on the line by leaking this. A Supreme Court clerkship is THE golden ticket to the elite legal/judicial part of the profession. And, given that this appears to have been an early draft prepared back in February, the number of people at the time who had access to it is pretty limited. I there's a good chance of identifying the leaker. If the motive was to cause a public outcry, why not leak the current version?

Or maybe it's Hunter Biden's laptop redux.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
K Graham
God
Posts: 1676
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:25 am

Re: Supreme Court Overturning Roe v Wade

Post by K Graham »

Xenophon wrote:
Tue May 03, 2022 5:05 pm
I'm curious what even is the political calculus behind the leak, if there even was any.

If it was leaked by those disagreeing with the overturn I think they've made matters worse. I doubt you convince the majority to flip with any sort of public backlash. And worse, if the majority had already flipped and the court actually wasn't going to overturn you've now sullied that flip and setup a fairly easy argument that the only reason the court caved was because of public pressure. Accelerating the outrage timeline just doesn't make much sense to me.

I appreciate your input as well Res, especially about needing to codify the conduct in a much more official capacity.

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.
"I am not an American ... In my view premarital sex should be illegal" - Ajax18
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Supreme Court Overturning Roe v Wade

Post by Kishkumen »

Kukulkan wrote:
Tue May 03, 2022 10:10 pm
That is a very interesting theory. I want to imagine this wasn't done by an actual Justice but rather a zealous clerk, but with how things have been recently, anything is on the table.
I agree. Anything is on the table now. We have lived through an insurrection promoted by members of Congress and President.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
K Graham
God
Posts: 1676
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:25 am

Re: Supreme Court Overturning Roe v Wade

Post by K Graham »

I'm not pro-murdering babies.

I'm pro-Becky who found out at her 20 week anatomy scan that the infant she had been so excited to bring into this world had developed without life sustaining organs.

I'm pro-Susan who was sexually assaulted on her way home from work, only to come to the horrific realization that her assailant planted his seed in her when she got a positive pregnancy test result a month later.

I'm pro-Theresa who hemorrhaged due to a placental abruption, causing her parents, spouse, and children to have to make the impossible decision on whether to save her or her unborn child.

I'm pro-little Cathy who had her innocence ripped away from her by someone she should have been able to trust and her 11 year old body isn't mature enough to bear the consequence of that betrayal.

I'm pro-Melissa who's working two jobs just to make ends meet and has to choose between bringing another child into poverty or feeding the children she already has because her spouse walked out on her.

I'm pro-Brittany who realizes that she is in no way financially, emotionally, or physically able to raise a child.

I'm pro-Emily who went through IVF, ending up with SIX viable implanted eggs requiring selective reduction in order to ensure the safety of her and a SAFE amount of fetuses.

I'm pro-Christina who doesn't want to be a mother, but birth control methods sometimes fail.

I'm pro-Jessica who is FINALLY getting the strength to get away from her physically abusive spouse only to find out that she is carrying the monster's child.

I'm pro-Vanessa who went into her confirmation appointment after YEARS of trying to conceive only to hear silence where there should be a heartbeat.

I'm pro-Lindsay who lost her virginity in her sophomore year with a broken condom and now has to choose whether to be a teenage mom or just a teenager.

I'm pro-Courtney who just found out she's already 13 weeks along, but the egg never made it out of her fallopian tube so either she terminates the pregnancy or risks dying from internal bleeding.

You can argue and say that I'm pro-choice all you want, but the truth is:

I'm pro-life.

Their lives.

Women's lives.

You don't get to pick and choose which scenarios should be accepted.

Women's rights are meant to protect ALL women, regardless of their situation!
"I am not an American ... In my view premarital sex should be illegal" - Ajax18
User avatar
Kukulkan
High Priest
Posts: 361
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2021 5:36 pm
Location: Slipping deeper into the earth

Re: Supreme Court Overturning Roe v Wade

Post by Kukulkan »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Tue May 03, 2022 10:40 pm
The newest type of bills are crafted to prevent women from leaving the state to get an abortion. Also, some subject a woman who miscarries to a criminal investigation that could result in jail time. Some literally require a doctor to let the mother die rather than save her life by removing the fetus. Some require doctors to transplant an ectopic pregnancy even through its impossible, and puts the mother's life at risk. So, it's not just a matter of popping over border for a quick D&C. A significant number of women, mostly poor and black, will die because of the handcuffs these laws put on doctors and nurses.

I understand your point about the constitutional basis of Roe. But do you really believe that the government can throw you in jail for using birth control? Or for marrying outside your race? Because all of these court decisions flow from exactly the same basis: a basic sphere of freedom into which the government cannot intrude. And, because an individual's rights aren't limited to those named in the Constitution (actually, it's just the opposite), the fact that the bill of rights doesn't specifically include the right of a woman to decide whether to give birth doesn't mean she shouldn't have that right.

I live in a free state and not a handmaiden state, so I'm not directly affected. But if the government has the power to force women to give birth, how can anyone argue with a straight face that there is any area of private or personal behavior that the government cannot control? All these parents that think they have the right to raise their children as they choose? Or control what is taught by the state in schools? Or tell them what they have to wear on their faces? Rejecting the precedent on which Roe is based permits the government to reach into their private family life and do whatever they want. Striking down Roe would be the biggest threat to Americans' individual liberty in a long time.
I agree that many of the bills in deep red states are barbaric and prehistoric. I would interested to see how they would enforce women leaving the state to get an abortion. Also I wasn't aware that some states let the mother die. If true that is very disturbing. What states do that?

I personally don't think that Roe being overturned presents a dire threat to women's lives, but I might be wrong on that. I guess I am a proponent of having abortion being legal but rare. Maybe that stance is just a relic of my conservative days. We need to be promoting contraceptives and making them readily available. If the Republicans truly wanted abortions to stop they would push that, but they don't. Which is sad.
"I advise all to go on to perfection and search deeper and deeper into the mysteries of Godliness." -Joseph Smith
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 7062
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: Supreme Court Overturning Roe v Wade

Post by canpakes »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Tue May 03, 2022 10:40 pm
The newest type of bills are crafted to prevent women from leaving the state to get an abortion. Also, some subject a woman who miscarries to a criminal investigation that could result in jail time. Some literally require a doctor to let the mother die rather than save her life by removing the fetus. Some require doctors to transplant an ectopic pregnancy even through its impossible, and puts the mother's life at risk. So, it's not just a matter of popping over border for a quick D&C. A significant number of women, mostly poor and black, will die because of the handcuffs these laws put on doctors and nurses.

I understand your point about the constitutional basis of Roe. But do you really believe that the government can throw you in jail for using birth control? Or for marrying outside your race? Because all of these court decisions flow from exactly the same basis: a basic sphere of freedom into which the government cannot intrude. And, because an individual's rights aren't limited to those named in the Constitution (actually, it's just the opposite), the fact that the bill of rights doesn't specifically include the right of a woman to decide whether to give birth doesn't mean she shouldn't have that right.

I live in a free state and not a handmaiden state, so I'm not directly affected. But if the government has the power to force women to give birth, how can anyone argue with a straight face that there is any area of private or personal behavior that the government cannot control? All these parents that think they have the right to raise their children as they choose? Or control what is taught by the state in schools? Or tell them what they have to wear on their faces? Rejecting the precedent on which Roe is based permits the government to reach into their private family life and do whatever they want. Striking down Roe would be the biggest threat to Americans' individual liberty in a long time.

And all of this is brought to you by the party of ‘limited government’ and ‘personal freedom’.
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9568
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: Supreme Court Overturning Roe v Wade

Post by Res Ipsa »

Kukulkan wrote:
Wed May 04, 2022 1:28 am
Res Ipsa wrote:
Tue May 03, 2022 10:40 pm
The newest type of bills are crafted to prevent women from leaving the state to get an abortion. Also, some subject a woman who miscarries to a criminal investigation that could result in jail time. Some literally require a doctor to let the mother die rather than save her life by removing the fetus. Some require doctors to transplant an ectopic pregnancy even through its impossible, and puts the mother's life at risk. So, it's not just a matter of popping over border for a quick D&C. A significant number of women, mostly poor and black, will die because of the handcuffs these laws put on doctors and nurses.

I understand your point about the constitutional basis of Roe. But do you really believe that the government can throw you in jail for using birth control? Or for marrying outside your race? Because all of these court decisions flow from exactly the same basis: a basic sphere of freedom into which the government cannot intrude. And, because an individual's rights aren't limited to those named in the Constitution (actually, it's just the opposite), the fact that the bill of rights doesn't specifically include the right of a woman to decide whether to give birth doesn't mean she shouldn't have that right.

I live in a free state and not a handmaiden state, so I'm not directly affected. But if the government has the power to force women to give birth, how can anyone argue with a straight face that there is any area of private or personal behavior that the government cannot control? All these parents that think they have the right to raise their children as they choose? Or control what is taught by the state in schools? Or tell them what they have to wear on their faces? Rejecting the precedent on which Roe is based permits the government to reach into their private family life and do whatever they want. Striking down Roe would be the biggest threat to Americans' individual liberty in a long time.
I agree that many of the bills in deep red states are barbaric and prehistoric. I would interested to see how they would enforce women leaving the state to get an abortion. Also I wasn't aware that some states let the mother die. If true that is very disturbing. What states do that?

I personally don't think that Roe being overturned presents a dire threat to women's lives, but I might be wrong on that. I guess I am a proponent of having abortion being legal but rare. Maybe that stance is just a relic of my conservative days. We need to be promoting contraceptives and making them readily available. If the Republicans truly wanted abortions to stop they would push that, but they don't. Which is sad.
Sorry, there has been such a flurry of bills that I can’t remember which state is which. I’m totally with you on the birth control point.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 5810
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: Supreme Court Overturning Roe v Wade

Post by Moksha »

Xenophon wrote:
Tue May 03, 2022 4:17 pm
How are we feeling about this draft being leaked?
Dirty deeds done in silence was what Chief Justice Snidely Whiplash dedicated his life to and now leakers are unveiling the dastardly plot ahead of time! It ruins the suspense when we would otherwise have learned that young Nell was squished under the train wheels!!!

It's like learning who JR shot before the beginning of the next season. Is no evil sacred?
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Supreme Court Overturning Roe v Wade

Post by Kishkumen »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Tue May 03, 2022 10:46 pm
That's certainly possible, and I've heard folks who clerked at the Supreme Court argue that that's likely what happened. A clerk would be putting his or her entire legal career on the line by leaking this. A Supreme Court clerkship is THE golden ticket to the elite legal/judicial part of the profession. And, given that this appears to have been an early draft prepared back in February, the number of people at the time who had access to it is pretty limited. I there's a good chance of identifying the leaker. If the motive was to cause a public outcry, why not leak the current version?
Interesting, yes. I am very worried about what the future holds. So much extremism and rule/tradition breaking.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Supreme Court Overturning Roe v Wade

Post by Kishkumen »

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.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
Post Reply