Oh Charlie - say it isn't so! In their zeal to please the religious right, is it so far-fetched to believe they would try to ban birth control? Do you remember the moment when you finally accepted they were willing to support an attempted coup in their lust for power?
"is it so far-fetched to believe they would try to ban birth control?" Yes, it is extremely far-fetched. Abortion and birth control aren't remotely comparable.
Where do you get your information? We are talking about the RIGHT to something, and the hard-right zealots are to the point that birth control is the next logical step. Look at Holy Lobby, I mean, Hobby Lobby - if an employee is lucky enough to get health benefits, the company's responsibility to include birth control is specifically exempted. That's right, even an unfertilized egg is not allowed "protection" from marauding sperm - that would be tantamount to the same evil as abortion itself.
Do you know what can prevent abortion?
Birth Control. Logic has nothing to do with these people.
Do you know what helps prevent abortion?
The promise of a safety net to make sure that after this "oh-so-precious life
has been saved", the child does not spiral into poverty, poor health, or a
bleak life - nor does the mother, who may have had no options.
And yet, I know a bunch of Conservative Republicans (Catholic) that went out and put their Daughters on Birth Control the minute they were Seniors in HS or went College. I don't think everyone feels that Birth Control is verbotten. Maybe the Hard Right Evangelicals.
Now now. As a man that used to hope Charlie stepped on a rake that promptly flattened his face. I think he is one of the most centered people in opinion journalism and in fairness has just explained the chasm it will open. He doesn't need to weigh in on his position on abortion to highlight the unneeded rift it causes. While I am emphatically against changing the law. The leeking to place undue influence on the court is horrible. Its exactly the means justify the ends, at all costs, people point at Trumpists for doing. I would like to hear Charlie's take on the leak just like he gave his take on the culture war it will cause.
"Its exactly the means justify the ends, at all costs, people point at Trumpists for doing." - yep. I remember lamenting years ago that elements on the left will be happy to join the right in a race to the bottom. Buckle up.
Why's that? I'm just an angry senior woman who has lived my entire adult life with a right that has now been taken away from all women. So much for precedent!
It seems unlikely that anyone here will think you extremist, MoosesMom. Some people will disagree with you. That's different from thinking you an extremist.
Bravo to everything you wrote. Also, over turning Roe won't end abortion. Wealthy women will still find a way for a safe abortion. Poor women will return to back rooms. It's cruel and punitive.
And yet for many reasons, a woman will get one. I know one young woman who had an abortion because the fetus was deformed and would only live a few hours after birth. I know another woman who had an abortion in her twenties because she was raped by an abusive boyfriend and became pregnant from the assault. And when I was in high school a classmate bled out on the toilet after sticking a coat hanger into her uterus to abort an unwanted pregnancy. Some states are not giving exceptions for rape or incest. If they were really pro-life they would make birth control less expensive for women. They would assist financially with prenatal care and hospitalization. Instead Medicaid is being cut. The same people screaming my body my choice over vaccines want to tell a woman what she should do with her body. There will always be abortion. The law just gave access to safe medical care.
I believe that no state has the right to assert control over anyone's body. I believe that our sex and reproductive lives are not the business of the state. I believe in a personal right to privacy.
I wonder if Alito thinks the legitimacy of Thomas' marriage is determined by which state he lives in?
I agree that the state has no right to exert control over anyone's body. I also think it is possible to be pro-choice and anti-abortion at the same time. Your last question about Thomas is a good question. Miscegenation was illegal not that long ago. I remember an old guy telling me that blacks and whites could not marry because the Bible says, "Light cannot have fellowship with darkness." On the other hand, for those who believe abortion is murder, Thomas' marriage is irrelevant because no one died.
Appeals to the Bible fail on two grounds 1) Separation of church and state. Legislation cannot promote religious beliefs. If abortion is to be a crime, it must be based on a rationale that [people can accept outside of religion. For example, theft is illegal in every country, even those without the Bible. 2) The only two Biblical passages that touch on abortion both treat it as a property crime against the father. Even pro-lifers do not accept the idea that a fetus is the property of the father.
"The reversal of ROE wouldn't take the right to an abortion away from anyone." - oh, come now, don't play dumb. You and everyone else is well aware of the GOP goals here.
If you fancy yourself a traditional conservative, aren't you the least bit concerned about the fate of other unenumerated rights? Or are you confident that only the "bad" unenumerated rights will disappear and the ones you happen to like at the moment will stick around?
You're right. It should be understood as a right to privacy and a right to freedom over your own body. But for some reason other peoples' pregnancy is something a lot if people feel they have a right to control.
You are being disingenious and kind of ignoring the larger picture--which is exactly the response the people who want to take rights away are hoping for...
And as pointed out elsewhere, the basis for abortion and privacy rights exists in the 9th Amendment. The error in Roe V Wade was in not basing it in the 9th.
Lots of rights have been created over time (like corporate personhood rights) or have been changed (like 2nd amendment rights). The reality, if you want to be all constitutional about it is that the government ONLY has the powers enumerated to it with the other rights reserved either to the states or the people. In the case of something like having to give birth to a child and raise it, perhaps that right and decision should be left to the person most affected by it? Meaning NOT the government.
Heh, speaking of non-sequiturs, I see you are desperately trying to avoid the important points here. Pretending that ROE exists in a vacuum is just that: playing pretend. Overturning it is a step in a process. Nothing paranoid about it: it's been broadcast from Conservative Inc for decades. Where have you been?
Ignoring Alito's words is also playing pretend. It's not hard to see how his thinking applies to lots of unenumerated rights. I get that you don't see privacy covering abortion. Swell. Maybe you don't feel privacy should exist as an unenumerated right at all. But *you* aren't necessarily the problem here. It's what others on the authoritarian right don't find as "believable arguments" that should concern you.
I'm trying to be sympathetic to your perspective, but it seems you are operating in a context-free idealized world.
You don't think it's an "emotional argument" to try to equate slavery to a woman's right to choose regarding her own body and health? As to returning it to the States, do a little reading. The first item on their agenda if they retake power is to pass a federal law banning abortion throughout the entire US. The leaked SCOTUS opinion spells that out for them.
These sorts of personal attacks are unbecoming. It is bad enough that other comment sections are full of them. Let's not pollute the Bulwark's comment section.
Oh Charlie - say it isn't so! In their zeal to please the religious right, is it so far-fetched to believe they would try to ban birth control? Do you remember the moment when you finally accepted they were willing to support an attempted coup in their lust for power?
"is it so far-fetched to believe they would try to ban birth control?" Yes, it is extremely far-fetched. Abortion and birth control aren't remotely comparable.
Where do you get your information? We are talking about the RIGHT to something, and the hard-right zealots are to the point that birth control is the next logical step. Look at Holy Lobby, I mean, Hobby Lobby - if an employee is lucky enough to get health benefits, the company's responsibility to include birth control is specifically exempted. That's right, even an unfertilized egg is not allowed "protection" from marauding sperm - that would be tantamount to the same evil as abortion itself.
Do you know what can prevent abortion?
Birth Control. Logic has nothing to do with these people.
Do you know what helps prevent abortion?
The promise of a safety net to make sure that after this "oh-so-precious life
has been saved", the child does not spiral into poverty, poor health, or a
bleak life - nor does the mother, who may have had no options.
Do you know what else prevents abortion?
Vasectomies - check it out and tell your friends.
Hobby Lobby illustrates why health insurance should attached to the insured and be fully portable, not attach to the employer.
Vasectomies are a simple, fully reversible procedure for male birth control.
Voluntary abstinence also 100% prevents abortion, but not a viable public policy because of human nature. See the failure of Abstinence Only programs.
And yet, I know a bunch of Conservative Republicans (Catholic) that went out and put their Daughters on Birth Control the minute they were Seniors in HS or went College. I don't think everyone feels that Birth Control is verbotten. Maybe the Hard Right Evangelicals.
You only need enough in the right places, which they are currently working hard to achieve.
Exactly. I expect Charlie, et al, to hide behind the leak as the most important part of this.
Did you bother to even read todayтАЩs newsletter? Not hiding behind anythingтАж
Now now. As a man that used to hope Charlie stepped on a rake that promptly flattened his face. I think he is one of the most centered people in opinion journalism and in fairness has just explained the chasm it will open. He doesn't need to weigh in on his position on abortion to highlight the unneeded rift it causes. While I am emphatically against changing the law. The leeking to place undue influence on the court is horrible. Its exactly the means justify the ends, at all costs, people point at Trumpists for doing. I would like to hear Charlie's take on the leak just like he gave his take on the culture war it will cause.
"Its exactly the means justify the ends, at all costs, people point at Trumpists for doing." - yep. I remember lamenting years ago that elements on the left will be happy to join the right in a race to the bottom. Buckle up.
Bull. I was using it as an example of how the issue can be effectively deployedтАж
Why's that? I'm just an angry senior woman who has lived my entire adult life with a right that has now been taken away from all women. So much for precedent!
It seems unlikely that anyone here will think you extremist, MoosesMom. Some people will disagree with you. That's different from thinking you an extremist.
Bravo to everything you wrote. Also, over turning Roe won't end abortion. Wealthy women will still find a way for a safe abortion. Poor women will return to back rooms. It's cruel and punitive.
And yet for many reasons, a woman will get one. I know one young woman who had an abortion because the fetus was deformed and would only live a few hours after birth. I know another woman who had an abortion in her twenties because she was raped by an abusive boyfriend and became pregnant from the assault. And when I was in high school a classmate bled out on the toilet after sticking a coat hanger into her uterus to abort an unwanted pregnancy. Some states are not giving exceptions for rape or incest. If they were really pro-life they would make birth control less expensive for women. They would assist financially with prenatal care and hospitalization. Instead Medicaid is being cut. The same people screaming my body my choice over vaccines want to tell a woman what she should do with her body. There will always be abortion. The law just gave access to safe medical care.
Bravo! Birth control is next on their agenda. They want the control over our bodies because it gives them control over us.
That is the point no one understands. They are going to go after ALL birth control. Except vasectomies
btw - why do you support compelling others not to have one?
I believe that no state has the right to assert control over anyone's body. I believe that our sex and reproductive lives are not the business of the state. I believe in a personal right to privacy.
I wonder if Alito thinks the legitimacy of Thomas' marriage is determined by which state he lives in?
I agree that the state has no right to exert control over anyone's body. I also think it is possible to be pro-choice and anti-abortion at the same time. Your last question about Thomas is a good question. Miscegenation was illegal not that long ago. I remember an old guy telling me that blacks and whites could not marry because the Bible says, "Light cannot have fellowship with darkness." On the other hand, for those who believe abortion is murder, Thomas' marriage is irrelevant because no one died.
Appeals to the Bible fail on two grounds 1) Separation of church and state. Legislation cannot promote religious beliefs. If abortion is to be a crime, it must be based on a rationale that [people can accept outside of religion. For example, theft is illegal in every country, even those without the Bible. 2) The only two Biblical passages that touch on abortion both treat it as a property crime against the father. Even pro-lifers do not accept the idea that a fetus is the property of the father.
"The reversal of ROE wouldn't take the right to an abortion away from anyone." - oh, come now, don't play dumb. You and everyone else is well aware of the GOP goals here.
If you fancy yourself a traditional conservative, aren't you the least bit concerned about the fate of other unenumerated rights? Or are you confident that only the "bad" unenumerated rights will disappear and the ones you happen to like at the moment will stick around?
You're right. It should be understood as a right to privacy and a right to freedom over your own body. But for some reason other peoples' pregnancy is something a lot if people feel they have a right to control.
Except you completely overlook the fact that abortion involves another human being. Simply ignoring the fact of prenatal life is a bit disingenuous.
You are being disingenious and kind of ignoring the larger picture--which is exactly the response the people who want to take rights away are hoping for...
And as pointed out elsewhere, the basis for abortion and privacy rights exists in the 9th Amendment. The error in Roe V Wade was in not basing it in the 9th.
Lots of rights have been created over time (like corporate personhood rights) or have been changed (like 2nd amendment rights). The reality, if you want to be all constitutional about it is that the government ONLY has the powers enumerated to it with the other rights reserved either to the states or the people. In the case of something like having to give birth to a child and raise it, perhaps that right and decision should be left to the person most affected by it? Meaning NOT the government.
Heh, speaking of non-sequiturs, I see you are desperately trying to avoid the important points here. Pretending that ROE exists in a vacuum is just that: playing pretend. Overturning it is a step in a process. Nothing paranoid about it: it's been broadcast from Conservative Inc for decades. Where have you been?
Ignoring Alito's words is also playing pretend. It's not hard to see how his thinking applies to lots of unenumerated rights. I get that you don't see privacy covering abortion. Swell. Maybe you don't feel privacy should exist as an unenumerated right at all. But *you* aren't necessarily the problem here. It's what others on the authoritarian right don't find as "believable arguments" that should concern you.
I'm trying to be sympathetic to your perspective, but it seems you are operating in a context-free idealized world.
You don't think it's an "emotional argument" to try to equate slavery to a woman's right to choose regarding her own body and health? As to returning it to the States, do a little reading. The first item on their agenda if they retake power is to pass a federal law banning abortion throughout the entire US. The leaked SCOTUS opinion spells that out for them.
Or Congress dominated by one party. A federal law banning abortion is the next step.
These sorts of personal attacks are unbecoming. It is bad enough that other comment sections are full of them. Let's not pollute the Bulwark's comment section.
Hear, hear!
We kind of have a nice thing going here at the Bulwark. Can we please not Breitbart it?
Did Robert personally attack anyone?
Wrong. I was pointing the tweet to show how the politics will play out. And the GOP candidate has been caught taking a bizarrely extreme position.