Roe v Wade struck down

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Let’s reflect on the fact that all that happened is power is returned to the people through their states!

Different strokes for different folks.

You can have abortion on demand in California or Massachusetts. We can respectfully restrict it here in the Deep South.

We all win.

Right, because poor women in the south can easily pop over to California. They’ll just take the shifts off work, book the plane ticket for them and their children, and pay for a hotel room. Then they’ll pay for the procedure in cash. Right? All so simple! And what about women who find out that their fetus is incompatible with life at the 20 week anatomy scan? They should put their own health and their sanity on the back burner so you can pretend you’re saving someone? Your feelings do not supersede anyone else’s right to obtain medical care. Period.

We now have 4D scans that are used for glamour photos of the baby. Our technology has far surpassed the 20 week scan, to the point where fetal surgery can be done to correct a lot of defects in utero.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our state, our choice.

I am proud that we have chosen life in TN.

Oh great more meth addicted people in the world- cause you won’t actually take care of the people, just the fetuses.

Isn't TN last in the country in education?

Nashville is booming and TN is one of the fastest growing states at the moment.

I went to Nashville five years apart. The destruction done by Dems in charge ignoring the laws was unreal. Place went from clean to homeless on every bench. I was assaulted a couple times by them just walking down the street, because their aggression is ignored by Dem legislature. I still love Nashville but I’m always amazed at how fast things can be trashed in the name of compassion.

DId you ask the question where were the homeless before? We’re they forced out of housing because of mental illness, gentrification? Did you ask any questions in a way geared to help the issues you saw?
I’m not even suggesting you do anything about it because you were just visiting, but did you think beyond a reflexive, “the Dems did this”
Your post would suggest no, you did not. Start thinking, not blaming.

Yes. I was told that a decision was made to build a large homeless shelter next to the Winery venue, which made things much more dangerous. It would make much more sense to build large homeless shelters in a less populated area of TN if you really wanted to help people. More land, etc. But the decision was made to build it there for political reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Loving v. Virginia is based on the same legal foundation of constitutional right to privacy as every other thing Clarence Thomas targeted, but he left that one out. Why?

Ohhh, good point.

And I have yet to hear one person explain the distinction. There is no reason not to go there anymore, especially if we are turning it all over to the states to decide.

Virginia made that decision long ago. SCOTUS overturned the decision based on a constitutional right to privacy, but that has been negated now. Right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Childless politicians being the face of pro-choice is really bad optics. AOC is nearly 33 years old, unmarried and childless; she does not comprehend what she is fighting for. If you are pro-choice, that's fine, but you ought to seek leaders with children to fight for it and be the face of it.

Why is this an issue. Is this a another “motherhood is magical” thing? Because she can certainly comprehend that she wants to make her own choices for her life without being married with a child.

What a stupid post.

The fact that 59% of abortion patients already have at least one child means there are plenty of pro-choice mothers to pick from.

And that’s not including the mothers like me who haven’t had abortions but became even more pro-choice once we experienced the full difficulties of pregnancy, childbirth, and parenting. My (unplanned) child is the light of my life, but I wouldn’t wish this on anyone who wasn’t willing going in.

I was always pro-choice but became staunchly so when pregnant with my first. It was hard AF. And by the time I got accidentally pregnant with a third that was most definitely not wanted, I was busy researching my abortion options. Fortunately for me, nature intervened and I miscarried. I had to have a D&C to make sure everything was gone. But some of these sickos believe even that is a crime. Its my most fervent wish that all of these people rot in hell.

+1. First pregnancy with husband ended in a miscarriage. I had to have a D&C which I guess would be illegal now?

A Dand C is not an abortion dip shit.

Yes, actually, it is. If a doctor has to assist your miscarriage, congratulations. You have had an abortion.

I have federal health insurance and they paid for my D & C after a miscarriage; they wouldn't have paid for an abortion to end a live pregnancy. But yeah, the laws in red states are going to call it all "abortion".

No they will not because they are by definition NOT.

It’s right here in my medical record. It gave me a jolt the first time I read it.

Keep living in denial though.

Just because someone wrote it down, doesn’t mean it’s the correct term. Oftentimes, things get written down in a particular way for insurance coding.

It’s really dawning on you that the abortion that saved your life after your missed miscarriage wouldn’t be available, isn’t it? You literally thought pro choice women were feminazis and you thought your state would offer carve outs for “good” women like you. Have you built your whole life around being a good, docile woman who doesn’t push men, doesn’t do icky things like keep her name when she got married and vote Democratic? At the back of your mind, do you know that your husband needs to approve of you and your appearance?

Come to the side of light, of truth. I have books for you to read when you wake from your subservient dream.

I’ve never had an abortion? Who are you speaking with?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Let’s reflect on the fact that all that happened is power is returned to the people through their states!

Different strokes for different folks.

You can have abortion on demand in California or Massachusetts. We can respectfully restrict it here in the Deep South.

We all win.

Right, because poor women in the south can easily pop over to California. They’ll just take the shifts off work, book the plane ticket for them and their children, and pay for a hotel room. Then they’ll pay for the procedure in cash. Right? All so simple! And what about women who find out that their fetus is incompatible with life at the 20 week anatomy scan? They should put their own health and their sanity on the back burner so you can pretend you’re saving someone? Your feelings do not supersede anyone else’s right to obtain medical care. Period.

We now have 4D scans that are used for glamour photos of the baby. Our technology has far surpassed the 20 week scan, to the point where fetal surgery can be done to correct a lot of defects in utero.

I had a baby last year. The doctor specifically told me that they were looking for defects that could not be fixed. You can’t do a thing for a child who has missing or malformed organs. There are many women who find out at the anatomy scan that their child will not survive, no matter the medical intervention. I know some of them. They don’t deserve to be put through legal hell in what is certainly the worst week of their life. You are a terrible person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Loving v. Virginia is based on the same legal foundation of constitutional right to privacy as every other thing Clarence Thomas targeted, but he left that one out. Why?

Because he’s a self-serving corrupt POS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Loving v. Virginia is based on the same legal foundation of constitutional right to privacy as every other thing Clarence Thomas targeted, but he left that one out. Why?

Ohhh, good point.

And I have yet to hear one person explain the distinction. There is no reason not to go there anymore, especially if we are turning it all over to the states to decide.

Virginia made that decision long ago. SCOTUS overturned the decision based on a constitutional right to privacy, but that has been negated now. Right?

They would probably say that interracial marriage is not really controversial anymore, whereas abortion is still contentious and divisive and therefore subject to the political processes.

I also heard yesterday, you can't control what race you were born, but you can control things with abortion. But in the next sentence they were saying gay marriage is next...

Lol, I have a headache.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Let’s reflect on the fact that all that happened is power is returned to the people through their states!

Different strokes for different folks.

You can have abortion on demand in California or Massachusetts. We can respectfully restrict it here in the Deep South.

We all win.

Right, because poor women in the south can easily pop over to California. They’ll just take the shifts off work, book the plane ticket for them and their children, and pay for a hotel room. Then they’ll pay for the procedure in cash. Right? All so simple! And what about women who find out that their fetus is incompatible with life at the 20 week anatomy scan? They should put their own health and their sanity on the back burner so you can pretend you’re saving someone? Your feelings do not supersede anyone else’s right to obtain medical care. Period.

We now have 4D scans that are used for glamour photos of the baby. Our technology has far surpassed the 20 week scan, to the point where fetal surgery can be done to correct a lot of defects in utero.

I had a baby last year. The doctor specifically told me that they were looking for defects that could not be fixed. You can’t do a thing for a child who has missing or malformed organs. There are many women who find out at the anatomy scan that their child will not survive, no matter the medical intervention. I know some of them. They don’t deserve to be put through legal hell in what is certainly the worst week of their life. You are a terrible person.

I understand BUT they can do these scans much earlier now. They wait until 20 weeks for convenience. By 12 weeks, all organs are already there. There are genetic tests that can be done as early as 6-8 weeks. The states will further refine the laws.

This is good for Democrats as states use the popular vote, not electoral. So if you don’t like a governor, etc, you can vote them out via the popular vote. That’s why Virginia is usually decided by Fairfax and Loudoun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Let’s reflect on the fact that all that happened is power is returned to the people through their states!

Different strokes for different folks.

You can have abortion on demand in California or Massachusetts. We can respectfully restrict it here in the Deep South.

We all win.

Right, because poor women in the south can easily pop over to California. They’ll just take the shifts off work, book the plane ticket for them and their children, and pay for a hotel room. Then they’ll pay for the procedure in cash. Right? All so simple! And what about women who find out that their fetus is incompatible with life at the 20 week anatomy scan? They should put their own health and their sanity on the back burner so you can pretend you’re saving someone? Your feelings do not supersede anyone else’s right to obtain medical care. Period.

Poor women in the south are voting with rich women in the south to choose life!

Take a seat white savior.

I love how you assume that all women seeking abortions are women of color.

Most were Black or Hispanic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Loving v. Virginia is based on the same legal foundation of constitutional right to privacy as every other thing Clarence Thomas targeted, but he left that one out. Why?

Ohhh, good point.

And I have yet to hear one person explain the distinction. There is no reason not to go there anymore, especially if we are turning it all over to the states to decide.

Virginia made that decision long ago. SCOTUS overturned the decision based on a constitutional right to privacy, but that has been negated now. Right?

They would probably say that interracial marriage is not really controversial anymore, whereas abortion is still contentious and divisive and therefore subject to the political processes.

I also heard yesterday, you can't control what race you were born, but you can control things with abortion. But in the next sentence they were saying gay marriage is next...

Lol, I have a headache.

I get that, and I see the hand gestures towards "we're modern now" in this thread.

I'm just trying to be very clear that when the legality of banning interracial marriage went before SCOTUS, the ruling that the decision was overturned based on *interpretation* of the Fourteenth Amendment and extension to civil right to marry, as well as basic freedoms assumed therein.

Sure, any given state might not be motivated to prohibit or invalidate interracial marriages right now. But Thomas' argument seems to be that there is no federal recourse to stopping them from doing so.

States' rights, y'all. Whoopee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Let’s reflect on the fact that all that happened is power is returned to the people through their states!

Different strokes for different folks.

You can have abortion on demand in California or Massachusetts. We can respectfully restrict it here in the Deep South.

We all win.

Right, because poor women in the south can easily pop over to California. They’ll just take the shifts off work, book the plane ticket for them and their children, and pay for a hotel room. Then they’ll pay for the procedure in cash. Right? All so simple! And what about women who find out that their fetus is incompatible with life at the 20 week anatomy scan? They should put their own health and their sanity on the back burner so you can pretend you’re saving someone? Your feelings do not supersede anyone else’s right to obtain medical care. Period.

We now have 4D scans that are used for glamour photos of the baby. Our technology has far surpassed the 20 week scan, to the point where fetal surgery can be done to correct a lot of defects in utero.

I had a baby last year. The doctor specifically told me that they were looking for defects that could not be fixed. You can’t do a thing for a child who has missing or malformed organs. There are many women who find out at the anatomy scan that their child will not survive, no matter the medical intervention. I know some of them. They don’t deserve to be put through legal hell in what is certainly the worst week of their life. You are a terrible person.

I understand BUT they can do these scans much earlier now. They wait until 20 weeks for convenience. By 12 weeks, all organs are already there. There are genetic tests that can be done as early as 6-8 weeks. The states will further refine the laws.

This is good for Democrats as states use the popular vote, not electoral. So if you don’t like a governor, etc, you can vote them out via the popular vote. That’s why Virginia is usually decided by Fairfax and Loudoun.

None. Of. This. Matters.

All of this will be decided by legislatures and women have no rights to contest the most restrictive laws. Total bans. Just own what you’ve done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Let’s reflect on the fact that all that happened is power is returned to the people through their states!

Different strokes for different folks.

You can have abortion on demand in California or Massachusetts. We can respectfully restrict it here in the Deep South.

We all win.

Right, because poor women in the south can easily pop over to California. They’ll just take the shifts off work, book the plane ticket for them and their children, and pay for a hotel room. Then they’ll pay for the procedure in cash. Right? All so simple! And what about women who find out that their fetus is incompatible with life at the 20 week anatomy scan? They should put their own health and their sanity on the back burner so you can pretend you’re saving someone? Your feelings do not supersede anyone else’s right to obtain medical care. Period.

We now have 4D scans that are used for glamour photos of the baby. Our technology has far surpassed the 20 week scan, to the point where fetal surgery can be done to correct a lot of defects in utero.

I had a baby last year. The doctor specifically told me that they were looking for defects that could not be fixed. You can’t do a thing for a child who has missing or malformed organs. There are many women who find out at the anatomy scan that their child will not survive, no matter the medical intervention. I know some of them. They don’t deserve to be put through legal hell in what is certainly the worst week of their life. You are a terrible person.

I understand BUT they can do these scans much earlier now. They wait until 20 weeks for convenience. By 12 weeks, all organs are already there. There are genetic tests that can be done as early as 6-8 weeks. The states will further refine the laws.

This is good for Democrats as states use the popular vote, not electoral. So if you don’t like a governor, etc, you can vote them out via the popular vote. That’s why Virginia is usually decided by Fairfax and Loudoun.

None. Of. This. Matters.

All of this will be decided by legislatures and women have no rights to contest the most restrictive laws. Total bans. Just own what you’ve done.

In fact, since states use popular vote, you have MORE power in each state to get rid of the restrictive laws by tossing out those enforcing them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Let’s reflect on the fact that all that happened is power is returned to the people through their states!

Different strokes for different folks.

You can have abortion on demand in California or Massachusetts. We can respectfully restrict it here in the Deep South.

We all win.

Right, because poor women in the south can easily pop over to California. They’ll just take the shifts off work, book the plane ticket for them and their children, and pay for a hotel room. Then they’ll pay for the procedure in cash. Right? All so simple! And what about women who find out that their fetus is incompatible with life at the 20 week anatomy scan? They should put their own health and their sanity on the back burner so you can pretend you’re saving someone? Your feelings do not supersede anyone else’s right to obtain medical care. Period.

Poor women in the south are voting with rich women in the south to choose life!

Take a seat white savior.

I love how you assume that all women seeking abortions are women of color.

Most were Black or Hispanic.

DP. It looks like women identified as non-Hispanic White were pretty well represented, though, as about a third of all abortions.

Among the 30 areas that reported race by ethnicity data for 2019, non-Hispanic White women and non-Hispanic Black women accounted for the largest percentages of all abortions (33.4% and 38.4%, respectively), and Hispanic women and non-Hispanic women in the other race category accounted for smaller percentages (21.0% and 7.2%, respectively).

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/ss/ss7009a1.htm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Let’s reflect on the fact that all that happened is power is returned to the people through their states!

Different strokes for different folks.

You can have abortion on demand in California or Massachusetts. We can respectfully restrict it here in the Deep South.

We all win.

Right, because poor women in the south can easily pop over to California. They’ll just take the shifts off work, book the plane ticket for them and their children, and pay for a hotel room. Then they’ll pay for the procedure in cash. Right? All so simple! And what about women who find out that their fetus is incompatible with life at the 20 week anatomy scan? They should put their own health and their sanity on the back burner so you can pretend you’re saving someone? Your feelings do not supersede anyone else’s right to obtain medical care. Period.

We now have 4D scans that are used for glamour photos of the baby. Our technology has far surpassed the 20 week scan, to the point where fetal surgery can be done to correct a lot of defects in utero.

I had a baby last year. The doctor specifically told me that they were looking for defects that could not be fixed. You can’t do a thing for a child who has missing or malformed organs. There are many women who find out at the anatomy scan that their child will not survive, no matter the medical intervention. I know some of them. They don’t deserve to be put through legal hell in what is certainly the worst week of their life. You are a terrible person.

I understand BUT they can do these scans much earlier now. They wait until 20 weeks for convenience. By 12 weeks, all organs are already there. There are genetic tests that can be done as early as 6-8 weeks. The states will further refine the laws.

This is good for Democrats as states use the popular vote, not electoral. So if you don’t like a governor, etc, you can vote them out via the popular vote. That’s why Virginia is usually decided by Fairfax and Loudoun.

None. Of. This. Matters.

All of this will be decided by legislatures and women have no rights to contest the most restrictive laws. Total bans. Just own what you’ve done.

In fact, since states use popular vote, you have MORE power in each state to get rid of the restrictive laws by tossing out those enforcing them.

What you are advocating is the antithesis of American constitutional democracy. Not all of us are stupid enough to fall for your shit. What you’re advocating is the kind of “freedom” women under the Taliban enjoy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Let’s reflect on the fact that all that happened is power is returned to the people through their states!

Different strokes for different folks.

You can have abortion on demand in California or Massachusetts. We can respectfully restrict it here in the Deep South.

We all win.

Right, because poor women in the south can easily pop over to California. They’ll just take the shifts off work, book the plane ticket for them and their children, and pay for a hotel room. Then they’ll pay for the procedure in cash. Right? All so simple! And what about women who find out that their fetus is incompatible with life at the 20 week anatomy scan? They should put their own health and their sanity on the back burner so you can pretend you’re saving someone? Your feelings do not supersede anyone else’s right to obtain medical care. Period.

We now have 4D scans that are used for glamour photos of the baby. Our technology has far surpassed the 20 week scan, to the point where fetal surgery can be done to correct a lot of defects in utero.

“A lot”? Bullsh1t.

Forced birthers just don’t live in reality.