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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack the court already. JFC

With the two Republicans pretending to be Democrats Sinema and Manchin, how would you suggest doing this, precisely? With the entire goddan GOP off their effing rockers and unwilling to govern, how do you see this working out?

Oh? You think Congress won't change after this?

No, I don't think Congress will change. Maybe a few seats will be impacted, but nothing on a grand scale. DCUM posters think everyone in the country is thinking like them. That is not the case.

I think you’re in a right wing bubble if you don’t get how many women across America rightly understand this sht opinion to mean that the GOP wants their theocracy at the expense of women.

70% of women on average favor not overturning Roe. 30% of women favor overturning Roe. That's a definitive majority, but not a majority I'm convinced that can impact elections en masse, especially since anti-choice advocates have been more politically active than pro-choice advocates.

FTFY. This is the step too far, the move too clearly misogynist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack the court already. JFC

With the two Republicans pretending to be Democrats Sinema and Manchin, how would you suggest doing this, precisely? With the entire goddan GOP off their effing rockers and unwilling to govern, how do you see this working out?

Oh? You think Congress won't change after this?

No, I don't think Congress will change. Maybe a few seats will be impacted, but nothing on a grand scale. DCUM posters think everyone in the country is thinking like them. That is not the case.

I think you’re in a right wing bubble if you don’t get how many women across America rightly understand this sht opinion to mean that the GOP wants their theocracy at the expense of women.

70% of women on average favor not overturning Roe. 30% of women favor overturning Roe. That's a definitive majority, but not a majority I'm convinced that can impact elections en masse, especially since anti-choice advocates are more politically active than pro-choice advocates.

Up until the last year or two (and elections haven't happened yet after the Texas law was uphold by SCOTUS), there wasn't much reason for pro-choice advocates to be politically active.

Now there is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack the court already. JFC

With the two Republicans pretending to be Democrats Sinema and Manchin, how would you suggest doing this, precisely? With the entire goddan GOP off their effing rockers and unwilling to govern, how do you see this working out?

Oh? You think Congress won't change after this?

No, I don't think Congress will change. Maybe a few seats will be impacted, but nothing on a grand scale. DCUM posters think everyone in the country is thinking like them. That is not the case.

I think you’re in a right wing bubble if you don’t get how many women across America rightly understand this sht opinion to mean that the GOP wants their theocracy at the expense of women.

70% of women on average favor not overturning Roe. 30% of women favor overturning Roe. That's a definitive majority, but not a majority I'm convinced that can impact elections en masse, especially since anti-choice advocates are more politically active than pro-choice advocates.

I agree except that this might be the motivation needed to pull some women off the sidelines. I suspect there are many who really weren’t fully aware that Roe v Wade was under threat. People tend to be less motivated to vote for the status quo vs. a change.

[Anonymous]

My God. I tremble for my daughters. One is not even sexually active yet, but I'm going to get her an IUD ASAP.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

I want negligent insemination laws with draconian penalties NOW.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack the court already. JFC

With the two Republicans pretending to be Democrats Sinema and Manchin, how would you suggest doing this, precisely? With the entire goddan GOP off their effing rockers and unwilling to govern, how do you see this working out?

Oh? You think Congress won't change after this?

No, I don't think Congress will change. Maybe a few seats will be impacted, but nothing on a grand scale. DCUM posters think everyone in the country is thinking like them. That is not the case.

I think you’re in a right wing bubble if you don’t get how many women across America rightly understand this sht opinion to mean that the GOP wants their theocracy at the expense of women.

70% of women on average favor not overturning Roe. 30% of women favor overturning Roe. That's a definitive majority, but not a majority I'm convinced that can impact elections en masse, especially since anti-choice advocates are more politically active than pro-choice advocates.

I agree except that this might be the motivation needed to pull some women off the sidelines. I suspect there are many who really weren’t fully aware that Roe v Wade was under threat. People tend to be less motivated to vote for the status quo vs. a change.

+1

The GOP friendly corporate media has done a (purposely) bad job at talking about this, always using forced birther framing and just really slowly boiling us all in water. If you didn’t search out alternative progressive media, you could go about your days unaware and in relative bliss.

No more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want negligent insemination laws with draconian penalties NOW.

+1

That one actually might help men see that they do actually have to be involved with women’s rights, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Such a lengthy opinion when all they have to say is “because the Catholic Church is against abortion.”

[phone]

And more appalling that these were judges appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote.

We are no longer a functional representative democracy.

We were never a functional representative democracy. Since the founding of this country, we've been ruled by a wealthy minority -- a minority that tells us to what to think, what to say, what to do, what to eat, where to work, etc.

That happens by consent. When the consent is no longer there, then things change. This country has changed a lot since its founding. Those of us who didn't sleep through school, or through any stories from family members or friends, know this.

+1
What people understand and were willing to believe has changed a lot.

So far one thing I know to be true, the GOP doesn’t care about America or the women who live here. If they did:

I don’t think they will change the filibuster but maybe Collins, Murkowski, and the Ds can whip up 60 votes to protect women?

Susan "but he promised me he'd uphold Roe" Collins???? LOLOLOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rampant anti catholic bigotry on this thread.

I am catholic. They have been carrying on about this for many years adnaseum.

Gee, I wonder why? Anti-women, anti-birth control, homophobic, rampant child sexual abuse, hoarding of wealth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Oh for this the potted plant takes a stance? Not for the corruption of the Thomases or the illegitimacy of the court packed with right wingers installed by presidents no one wanted?

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

And no way to leave a comment online or on the phone to that scuzz bucket Roberts. No one gives a hoot about the leak, you moron. You’re presiding over an illegitimate joke of a court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Such a lengthy opinion when all they have to say is “because the Catholic Church is against abortion.”

[phone]

And more appalling that these were judges appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote.

We are no longer a functional representative democracy.

We were never a functional representative democracy. Since the founding of this country, we've been ruled by a wealthy minority -- a minority that tells us to what to think, what to say, what to do, what to eat, where to work, etc.

That happens by consent. When the consent is no longer there, then things change. This country has changed a lot since its founding. Those of us who didn't sleep through school, or through any stories from family members or friends, know this.

+1
What people understand and were willing to believe has changed a lot.

So far one thing I know to be true, the GOP doesn’t care about America or the women who live here. If they did:

I don’t think they will change the filibuster but maybe Collins, Murkowski, and the Ds can whip up 60 votes to protect women?

Susan "but he promised me he'd uphold Roe" Collins???? LOLOLOL.

Collins sounds open to passing something. If they can get 50 votes for something in Senate they can protect access nationwide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn’t be surprised if it came from Ginny Thomas. We already know Clarence talks to her about cases.

How would leak benefit her?

To get the GOP base riled up and excited.

And we know that Roberts was pushing a compromise position that kept Roe in place. If Kav joins Roberts in a concurring then Roe stands. If Kav joins the four ultra-activists then Roe falls. The vote is 6-3 to uphold the MO ban but 4-4 on overturning Roe. Kav is the one who decides what happens.

My DD's reproductive rights in the hand of that piece of sh-- frat boy. Fantastic.