“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft

[Anonymous]

Wow The video above - not even the life of the mother.

80

[Anonymous]

As every woman who enjoys sex and is good in bed knows: giving it gives us just as much power as refusing to

The unemployed, uneducated, divorced men who can't seem to find a woman to have their babies are about to not even get laid ever again- why would a woman even mercy f'ck them- its simply not worth the risk..

maybe they will compensate with more booze, more opiates and more time with their Dog...until they die

Prostitutes are gonna make a killing...they should be smart and raise their rates to $10K an hour

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In some face, it is your religious belief to follow medical advice such as in Orthodox Judaism. There are cases where due to medical reasons a woman is advised to get an abortion and that is sanctioned by her religion. So I could see some cases being brought before the court having to do with freedom of religion in that respect

Freedom of religion will not trump the right to life.

Also, religion-neutral laws that apply to everyone equally can't typically be challenged on First Amendment grounds. Your religion may believe in animal sacrifice, for example, but government can ban the killing of animals outside of a licensed slaughterhouse.

[Anonymous]

This is just a first draft, folks. It’s not that significant. My admittedly optimistic best guess is that in June we are going to be looking at a 5-4 or 6-3 vote to uphold the MS law but leave Roe intact but weakened. Under that theory, the draft may have been leaked to take the sting out of that right wing disappointment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is just a first draft, folks. It’s not that significant. My admittedly optimistic best guess is that in June we are going to be looking at a 5-4 or 6-3 vote to uphold the MS law but leave Roe intact but weakened. Under that theory, the draft may have been leaked to take the sting out of that right wing disappointment.

I find no comfort in this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In some face, it is your religious belief to follow medical advice such as in Orthodox Judaism. There are cases where due to medical reasons a woman is advised to get an abortion and that is sanctioned by her religion. So I could see some cases being brought before the court having to do with freedom of religion in that respect

Freedom of religion will not trump the right to life.

Also, religion-neutral laws that apply to everyone equally can't typically be challenged on First Amendment grounds. Your religion may believe in animal sacrifice, for example, but government can ban the killing of animals outside of a licensed slaughterhouse.

Yeah that’s is not true. If it was a religious practice the government would have a hard time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As every woman who enjoys sex and is good in bed knows: giving it gives us just as much power as refusing to

The unemployed, uneducated, divorced men who can't seem to find a woman to have their babies are about to not even get laid ever again- why would a woman even mercy f'ck them- its simply not worth the risk..

maybe they will compensate with more booze, more opiates and more time with their Dog...until they die

Prostitutes are gonna make a killing...they should be smart and raise their rates to $10K an hour

Lol. Refreshing take.

[Anonymous]

Will women be able to sue condom makers and birth control manufacturers if they end up pregnant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is just a first draft, folks. It’s not that significant. My admittedly optimistic best guess is that in June we are going to be looking at a 5-4 or 6-3 vote to uphold the MS law but leave Roe intact but weakened. Under that theory, the draft may have been leaked to take the sting out of that right wing disappointment.

This is such a white man take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is just a first draft, folks. It’s not that significant. My admittedly optimistic best guess is that in June we are going to be looking at a 5-4 or 6-3 vote to uphold the MS law but leave Roe intact but weakened. Under that theory, the draft may have been leaked to take the sting out of that right wing disappointment.

No, most likely the draft was leaked by some ring wing clerk to try to force Kavanaugh to hold his position in case he got cold feet. But this is very likely how the final outcome will be - regardless of the leak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, raise child support payments to include full time salary while a woman is home with her " forced birth baby" for the first 18 months of life- so men pay the woman's salary plus essentials for the baby and RENT

In DC , that should be about $2,500 for rent plus $1,000 for food plus $600 month for health insurance , plus more for supplemental day care ( $1800 mos ) FOR EACh and EVERY Forced Birth= about $6,000 a month every man in DC has to pay a woman who is FORCED to have " his baby"

And , of course, for 18 YEARS

Keep your legs closed and it's not a problem

Rape, incest, threats to life of the mother at 30 weeks.....

It's like you purposely can't conceive of real life events that happen where a woman needs an abortion.

No, they can’t conceive of a time where women, wives, did not have a choice on whether to have 15+ kids. The “keep your legs closed” is misogynistic slut-shaming. Do you really think Roe and Griswold came about because of promiscuous women LOLing their way into abortion? Those rulings came about because nice, White women were SICK AND TIRED of having 10+ babies. And being sick and tired of not having control over when they had those babies. And they didn’t want their daughters and granddaughters to be forced into the same situations.

+10000

[Anonymous]

Proposed law in Missouri. If the sex occurred in MO you can’t get an abortion elsewhere.

https://www.senate.mo.gov/22info/pdf-bill/intro/SB1202.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In some face, it is your religious belief to follow medical advice such as in Orthodox Judaism. There are cases where due to medical reasons a woman is advised to get an abortion and that is sanctioned by her religion. So I could see some cases being brought before the court having to do with freedom of religion in that respect

Freedom of religion will not trump the right to life.

Also, religion-neutral laws that apply to everyone equally can't typically be challenged on First Amendment grounds. Your religion may believe in animal sacrifice, for example, but government can ban the killing of animals outside of a licensed slaughterhouse.

Yeah that’s is not true. If it was a religious practice the government would have a hard time.

So, if your religion believes in human sacrifice, the murder laws don't apply to its practitioners? If you believe in ritualized prostitution, the vice squad can't shut down your brothel?

The 1st Amendment forbids government from discriminating against people based on religion. It in no way requires government to let you use your religion to opt out of neutrally applied non-discriminatory laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So do women not get the right to life anymore?. Last I heard it was in the Constitution and I shouldn't have to give up my life to bring another one into this world

Are you serious? It's not in the Constitution. It's in the Declaration of Independence.

It is in the Constitution, though.

“No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

So make a law at the federal level

Again, what makes you think this court wouldn’t invalidate that law?

Make sure it follows constitutional guidelines and they won’t

The opinion goes out of its way not to preclude a federal ban.

[Anonymous]

Excellent opinion piece from two Constitutional law professors and a respected SCOTUS journalist about what this decision says about the Court and the future of Constitutional law:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/03/supreme-court-abortion-leak-politics-law-overturn-roe/