The Republicans who want to ban birth control

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They can try to ban contraceptives but I just don't think it can happen. Unless the Supreme Court rules in favor of this and I cannot imagine they have grounds for this.

In the meantime, they can use it as a political rally cry - have not idea why they feel the need - but whatever. Maybe it appeals to MAGA I suppose but I actually don't think any real child bearing people regardless of political denomination would go for this. I know that the traditional right wingers Catholic fanatics would but I don't know that it's the top of their priority list. In any case, whatever they shout about on this topic, I think it is just noise.

It's mortifying for sure but as I said, there are a ton of folks now who believe that women's lives should be only about bearing children. I'm not sure that it's a new concept. There will ALWAYS be crazies like this. There are crazies everywhere these days, we just hear about them more now than ever

Personally, I'm not really that concerned this will ever get off the ground. Roe v Wade is something that's been on the table for many many years - it was always something that was in danger of being reversed depending on the Supreme Court make-up. It was always a potential threat that could happen but banning contraceptives has no precedent.

That hasn't stopped this Supreme Court of religious fanatics on any of their other recent, egregious decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They can try to ban contraceptives but I just don't think it can happen. Unless the Supreme Court rules in favor of this and I cannot imagine they have grounds for this.

In the meantime, they can use it as a political rally cry - have not idea why they feel the need - but whatever. Maybe it appeals to MAGA I suppose but I actually don't think any real child bearing people regardless of political denomination would go for this. I know that the traditional right wingers Catholic fanatics would but I don't know that it's the top of their priority list. In any case, whatever they shout about on this topic, I think it is just noise.

It's mortifying for sure but as I said, there are a ton of folks now who believe that women's lives should be only about bearing children. I'm not sure that it's a new concept. There will ALWAYS be crazies like this. There are crazies everywhere these days, we just hear about them more now than ever

Personally, I'm not really that concerned this will ever get off the ground. Roe v Wade is something that's been on the table for many many years - it was always something that was in danger of being reversed depending on the Supreme Court make-up. It was always a potential threat that could happen but banning contraceptives has no precedent.

That hasn't stopped this Supreme Court of religious fanatics on any of their other recent, egregious decisions.

There IS precedent for banning birth control. That is what the Comstack Act is!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They can try to ban contraceptives but I just don't think it can happen. Unless the Supreme Court rules in favor of this and I cannot imagine they have grounds for this.

In the meantime, they can use it as a political rally cry - have not idea why they feel the need - but whatever. Maybe it appeals to MAGA I suppose but I actually don't think any real child bearing people regardless of political denomination would go for this. I know that the traditional right wingers Catholic fanatics would but I don't know that it's the top of their priority list. In any case, whatever they shout about on this topic, I think it is just noise.

It's mortifying for sure but as I said, there are a ton of folks now who believe that women's lives should be only about bearing children. I'm not sure that it's a new concept. There will ALWAYS be crazies like this. There are crazies everywhere these days, we just hear about them more now than ever

Personally, I'm not really that concerned this will ever get off the ground. Roe v Wade is something that's been on the table for many many years - it was always something that was in danger of being reversed depending on the Supreme Court make-up. It was always a potential threat that could happen but banning contraceptives has no precedent.

As another PP just noted: Comstock is precedent. And the Supreme Court shouldn’t have been able to disregard 50 years of established law; that’s egregious.

Go ahead and pretend it’s “just noise” but they’re telling you what they’re going to do if they get power.

[Anonymous]

The timing is comical. It will just juice support for the Ds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They can try to ban contraceptives but I just don't think it can happen. Unless the Supreme Court rules in favor of this and I cannot imagine they have grounds for this.

In the meantime, they can use it as a political rally cry - have not idea why they feel the need - but whatever. Maybe it appeals to MAGA I suppose but I actually don't think any real child bearing people regardless of political denomination would go for this. I know that the traditional right wingers Catholic fanatics would but I don't know that it's the top of their priority list. In any case, whatever they shout about on this topic, I think it is just noise.

It's mortifying for sure but as I said, there are a ton of folks now who believe that women's lives should be only about bearing children. I'm not sure that it's a new concept. There will ALWAYS be crazies like this. There are crazies everywhere these days, we just hear about them more now than ever

Personally, I'm not really that concerned this will ever get off the ground. Roe v Wade is something that's been on the table for many many years - it was always something that was in danger of being reversed depending on the Supreme Court make-up. It was always a potential threat that could happen but banning contraceptives has no precedent.

Whoa, what? This poster is completely wrong. Banning contraceptives absolutely has a precedent. See the Comstock Act, as another poster mentioned.

As far as scotus, Griswold v Connecticut is the scotus case that recognized that married couples can use contraception without government interference. Griswold recognizes a right to privacy and Roe was based on Griswold. In his Dobbs concurrence, Justice Thomas said Griswold should be reconsidered.

Please pay attention or you and all of us will lose more rights. The right to contraception is on the table in the November election. Vote accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They can try to ban contraceptives but I just don't think it can happen. Unless the Supreme Court rules in favor of this and I cannot imagine they have grounds for this.

In the meantime, they can use it as a political rally cry - have not idea why they feel the need - but whatever. Maybe it appeals to MAGA I suppose but I actually don't think any real child bearing people regardless of political denomination would go for this. I know that the traditional right wingers Catholic fanatics would but I don't know that it's the top of their priority list. In any case, whatever they shout about on this topic, I think it is just noise.

It's mortifying for sure but as I said, there are a ton of folks now who believe that women's lives should be only about bearing children. I'm not sure that it's a new concept. There will ALWAYS be crazies like this. There are crazies everywhere these days, we just hear about them more now than ever

Personally, I'm not really that concerned this will ever get off the ground. Roe v Wade is something that's been on the table for many many years - it was always something that was in danger of being reversed depending on the Supreme Court make-up. It was always a potential threat that could happen but banning contraceptives has no precedent.

Griswold vs. CT was decided in 1962, 10 years before Roe. In the decision overturning Roe, multiple conservative justices indicated willingness to look at other decisions based on the now non-existent "right to privacy."

You are right of course that it would NOT be politically popular. And it's questionable if Roberts or Cavanaugh would want to go that far. But there are likely four votes in favor of overturning Griswold, minimum.

No new law as needed, as mentioned previously, as it's just a matter of enforcing Comstock.

[Anonymous]

Yup folks, they're coming for your contraceptives. And right after, gay marriage. Ha ha he he. Keep voting for a Trump. Low taxes and illegals is where it's at.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yup folks, they're coming for your contraceptives. And right after, gay marriage. Ha ha he he. Keep voting for a Trump. Low taxes and illegals is where it's at.

There was a non fiction book published around 2005 about emergency preparedness. I read it because I am petrified about flight and that whole plane crash thing, and I wish I could remember the title because it was so reassuring. Most plane crashes are pretty “controlled” and most people survive them.

You know who doesn’t survive survivable crashes? The people who freeze and psychologically refuse to acknowledge what is happening around them. The people who want to pretend that if they just vote third party or something, that another Republican will somehow have enough brakes on themselves that it will be okay. It’s time for you guys to realize that the plane the GOP has driven us around in has crashed. You can get out now, but if you freeze, if you are unable to acknowledge what they are planning, you will burn.

[Anonymous]

1. Hawley's wife lied under oath in that case and should be disbarred.
2. Republcians are going to push WHITE NATIONALISM. RIGHT WING RELIGIOUS CRAP
3. Women are hosed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. Hawley's wife lied under oath in that case and should be disbarred.
2. Republcians are going to push WHITE NATIONALISM. RIGHT WING RELIGIOUS CRAP
3. Women are hosed

We’re not hosed if we vote Democratic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. Hawley's wife lied under oath in that case and should be disbarred.
2. Republcians are going to push WHITE NATIONALISM. RIGHT WING RELIGIOUS CRAP
3. Women are hosed

Say what now about Hawley’s wife?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They can try to ban contraceptives but I just don't think it can happen. Unless the Supreme Court rules in favor of this and I cannot imagine they have grounds for this.

In the meantime, they can use it as a political rally cry - have not idea why they feel the need - but whatever. Maybe it appeals to MAGA I suppose but I actually don't think any real child bearing people regardless of political denomination would go for this. I know that the traditional right wingers Catholic fanatics would but I don't know that it's the top of their priority list. In any case, whatever they shout about on this topic, I think it is just noise.

It's mortifying for sure but as I said, there are a ton of folks now who believe that women's lives should be only about bearing children. I'm not sure that it's a new concept. There will ALWAYS be crazies like this. There are crazies everywhere these days, we just hear about them more now than ever

Personally, I'm not really that concerned this will ever get off the ground. Roe v Wade is something that's been on the table for many many years - it was always something that was in danger of being reversed depending on the Supreme Court make-up. It was always a potential threat that could happen but banning contraceptives has no precedent.

That hasn't stopped this Supreme Court of religious fanatics on any of their other recent, egregious decisions.

There IS precedent for banning birth control. That is what the Comstack Act is!

They've been signaling for banning birth control all along. All of their attacks on Roe were also attacks on Griswold. The penumbra and right to privacy the conservatives have always ridiculed is the jurisprudence that prevents states from banning birth control.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They can try to ban contraceptives but I just don't think it can happen. Unless the Supreme Court rules in favor of this and I cannot imagine they have grounds for this.

In the meantime, they can use it as a political rally cry - have not idea why they feel the need - but whatever. Maybe it appeals to MAGA I suppose but I actually don't think any real child bearing people regardless of political denomination would go for this. I know that the traditional right wingers Catholic fanatics would but I don't know that it's the top of their priority list. In any case, whatever they shout about on this topic, I think it is just noise.

It's mortifying for sure but as I said, there are a ton of folks now who believe that women's lives should be only about bearing children. I'm not sure that it's a new concept. There will ALWAYS be crazies like this. There are crazies everywhere these days, we just hear about them more now than ever

Personally, I'm not really that concerned this will ever get off the ground. Roe v Wade is something that's been on the table for many many years - it was always something that was in danger of being reversed depending on the Supreme Court make-up. It was always a potential threat that could happen but banning contraceptives has no precedent.

That hasn't stopped this Supreme Court of religious fanatics on any of their other recent, egregious decisions.

There IS precedent for banning birth control. That is what the Comstack Act is!

They've been signaling for banning birth control all along. All of their attacks on Roe were also attacks on Griswold. The penumbra and right to privacy the conservatives have always ridiculed is the jurisprudence that prevents states from banning birth control.

+1 Clarence Thomas votes in lockstep with Alito but still bothered to issue a separate concurrence in Dobbs that put Griswold, Obergefell and other major SCOTUS decisions in jeopardy. Like he was rubbing his hands together waiting to decapitate those decisions too.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/24/thomas-constitutional-rights-00042256

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They can try to ban contraceptives but I just don't think it can happen. Unless the Supreme Court rules in favor of this and I cannot imagine they have grounds for this.

In the meantime, they can use it as a political rally cry - have not idea why they feel the need - but whatever. Maybe it appeals to MAGA I suppose but I actually don't think any real child bearing people regardless of political denomination would go for this. I know that the traditional right wingers Catholic fanatics would but I don't know that it's the top of their priority list. In any case, whatever they shout about on this topic, I think it is just noise.

It's mortifying for sure but as I said, there are a ton of folks now who believe that women's lives should be only about bearing children. I'm not sure that it's a new concept. There will ALWAYS be crazies like this. There are crazies everywhere these days, we just hear about them more now than ever

Personally, I'm not really that concerned this will ever get off the ground. Roe v Wade is something that's been on the table for many many years - it was always something that was in danger of being reversed depending on the Supreme Court make-up. It was always a potential threat that could happen but banning contraceptives has no precedent.

That hasn't stopped this Supreme Court of religious fanatics on any of their other recent, egregious decisions.

There IS precedent for banning birth control. That is what the Comstack Act is!

They've been signaling for banning birth control all along. All of their attacks on Roe were also attacks on Griswold. The penumbra and right to privacy the conservatives have always ridiculed is the jurisprudence that prevents states from banning birth control.

+1 Clarence Thomas votes in lockstep with Alito but still bothered to issue a separate concurrence in Dobbs that put Griswold, Obergefell and other major SCOTUS decisions in jeopardy. Like he was rubbing his hands together waiting to decapitate those decisions too.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/24/thomas-constitutional-rights-00042256

I guess he’s feeling pretty secure his colleagues won’t got after Loving. If Roe is gone and Griseold and Obergefell are on shaky grounds, I’m not sure I’d be in a hurry to shove them off as Loving surely won’t be far behind.

[Anonymous]

Many of us predicted this and more. The GOP doesn’t see women as humans. We’re just wombs in their eyes. In the GOPs ideal universe women do not deserve control over our bodies (see AL SC decision). First it was abortion, now it is IVF, next it will ge contraception. Just watch