Many are protesting the SCOTUS ruling as “Women’s Rights”, I do not believe that. No woman in the history of Homo sapiens has ever created a child without the biology of a man. A woman has full control and “the right to privacy” over her body up to the point she decides not to use birth control during relations with a man (except in rape). There are medical reasons for abortion as well. What is at issue here is the Constitutional right to privacy and rather a fetus has Constitutional Neo Natal rights. This issue has been politicized by many,… Read more »
“In the realm of totalitarian kitsch, all answers are given in advance and preclude any questions.”
-Milan Kundera
Roe v wade had other implications for medical privacy that should concern everyone, no matter their position on abortion. Qui bono? What a perfect wedge issue to redirect the growing resentment among the plebs, while the encroaching biosecurity regime dehumanizes us all.
What privacy has been imposed upon? If where I live doesn’t allow me to have an abortion at a point in the pregnancy that I want, I can simply travel to a state that does. Moreover, these are decisions that I could have prevented. Not one single state has an abortion law that prevents all abortions in entirety.
I am pro-choice out of personal opinion. On that note, any state that holds tight abortion restrictions should also hold tight felony convictions for men that create children without certifiable responsibility.
Scott Sigman
2 years ago
Sorry no twitter account Musk/THIEL has enough with paypal and Venmo
Gimmeabreak
2 years ago
No rights for women have been overturned! The “right” to an abortion is simply not found in the Constitution and it is being returned to the states where it rightly can be found. No one who wants a legal abortion is going to be denied one.
At the time the Constitution was drafted and adopted, it was clear to the founders and the people, that the Constitution was never meant to be an exhaustive inventory of our “rights” as Americans and as human beings. That is why Jefferson and others insisted that the Bill of Rights be adopted. But even then, there is virtually no language in the Constitution that states it contains every right that Americans can or should enjoy. But on a more practical level, mixing religion with law is a dangerous precedent and the notion that a modern country should be limited by… Read more »
We’re talking about federal vs. state’s rights here. All that happened this week was that SCOTUS said this is not a federal issue but is instead up to the states. That’s it! All this drama is for people who just have too much time on their hands.
All true. Most states allow abortions up to a certain number of weeks. In Kansas for example it’s 20-22 weeks (between 5 and 6 months)!
Ian
2 years ago
I am pro-choice. The lunatic reaction to this ruling is pure Far Left anarchy. Roe vs. Wade was NEVER proven to be a constitutional right, therein lies the legal issue. The SCOTUS did not declare abortion illegal, it simply returned it to the States (which, by the way is elected by the majority of voters). What should have been taking place since R vs. W, is the a legal push for a constitutional amendment. Too much hard work for the lazy, “I want the easy way”. I have news for you, you either work with the system or there will… Read more »
We are adults. We’ve had 50 years of precedent on this and the impact is broader than the right to abortion. This restricts where people may be able to live in our country and was decided largely by men who have 1 to 2 children. They’ve likely used contraception and Clarence Thomas, who only has one child, has signaled that that right to privately use contraception in your home is also fair game to be eliminated as a national right. This is not an overreaction and I would suspect by your name and gimmeabreak’s constant mansplaining that neither of you… Read more »
What do you call it when a man who does not have a uterus explains that you don’t understand the constitutional liberties and freedoms and/or tells you that you want easy solutions? Sounds like someone without experience telling me what to think. Furthermore, the very way these two lovely people have made their argument indicates that they don’t take women seriously and need to explain things to them. Sounds like you do as well by indicating that my comments are juvenile. Funny thing is that immature thinkers usually attack the person vs. the argument.
Get your head out of your uterus. You can’t make a baby without a biological part of a man. You don’t own nor rule this issue. I suspect the real issues that you struggle with are far beyond abortion.
Perhaps when it was known that Justice Ginsberg questioned the ruling that should have been an opportunity to start working on a better solution. This decision was bound to fail yet folks did little and now think that screaming and marching in the streets is the most effective course of action. This occasion also strangely gave individuals like Marquita Thomas and Chelsea Byers an on screen opportunity to vent their claims free of charge. They were both too long winded and not particularly smart. Marquita Thomas is all for show and never any substance. She is good at her PR… Read more »
When you have the self grandiose audacity to tell another to “be quiet” because they don’t agree with you, well, you know exactly where you can stick your opinion. Basically, all you have pointed out is personal high drama with little based in law. Good luck with that in whatever Third World country you think you can rule.
Many are protesting the SCOTUS ruling as “Women’s Rights”, I do not believe that. No woman in the history of Homo sapiens has ever created a child without the biology of a man. A woman has full control and “the right to privacy” over her body up to the point she decides not to use birth control during relations with a man (except in rape). There are medical reasons for abortion as well. What is at issue here is the Constitutional right to privacy and rather a fetus has Constitutional Neo Natal rights. This issue has been politicized by many,… Read more »
“In the realm of totalitarian kitsch, all answers are given in advance and preclude any questions.”
-Milan Kundera
Roe v wade had other implications for medical privacy that should concern everyone, no matter their position on abortion. Qui bono? What a perfect wedge issue to redirect the growing resentment among the plebs, while the encroaching biosecurity regime dehumanizes us all.
What privacy has been imposed upon? If where I live doesn’t allow me to have an abortion at a point in the pregnancy that I want, I can simply travel to a state that does. Moreover, these are decisions that I could have prevented. Not one single state has an abortion law that prevents all abortions in entirety.
I am pro-choice out of personal opinion. On that note, any state that holds tight abortion restrictions should also hold tight felony convictions for men that create children without certifiable responsibility.
Sorry no twitter account Musk/THIEL has enough with paypal and Venmo
No rights for women have been overturned! The “right” to an abortion is simply not found in the Constitution and it is being returned to the states where it rightly can be found. No one who wants a legal abortion is going to be denied one.
This is all much ado about nothing.
At the time the Constitution was drafted and adopted, it was clear to the founders and the people, that the Constitution was never meant to be an exhaustive inventory of our “rights” as Americans and as human beings. That is why Jefferson and others insisted that the Bill of Rights be adopted. But even then, there is virtually no language in the Constitution that states it contains every right that Americans can or should enjoy. But on a more practical level, mixing religion with law is a dangerous precedent and the notion that a modern country should be limited by… Read more »
One of the very few realistic statements made. So much deliberate ignorance in this country by undeserving citizens.
We’re talking about federal vs. state’s rights here. All that happened this week was that SCOTUS said this is not a federal issue but is instead up to the states. That’s it! All this drama is for people who just have too much time on their hands.
I notice the rebuttals allowed to Steve are highly censored.
Nor media censorship when respondents disagree.
All true. Most states allow abortions up to a certain number of weeks. In Kansas for example it’s 20-22 weeks (between 5 and 6 months)!
I am pro-choice. The lunatic reaction to this ruling is pure Far Left anarchy. Roe vs. Wade was NEVER proven to be a constitutional right, therein lies the legal issue. The SCOTUS did not declare abortion illegal, it simply returned it to the States (which, by the way is elected by the majority of voters). What should have been taking place since R vs. W, is the a legal push for a constitutional amendment. Too much hard work for the lazy, “I want the easy way”. I have news for you, you either work with the system or there will… Read more »
Keen perception. Idiots are neither planned not planted, they simply pop up on their own……and preen for the camera.
We are adults. We’ve had 50 years of precedent on this and the impact is broader than the right to abortion. This restricts where people may be able to live in our country and was decided largely by men who have 1 to 2 children. They’ve likely used contraception and Clarence Thomas, who only has one child, has signaled that that right to privately use contraception in your home is also fair game to be eliminated as a national right. This is not an overreaction and I would suspect by your name and gimmeabreak’s constant mansplaining that neither of you… Read more »
You can’t honestly expect to be taken seriously when you use a juvenile term like “mansplaining.”
What do you call it when a man who does not have a uterus explains that you don’t understand the constitutional liberties and freedoms and/or tells you that you want easy solutions? Sounds like someone without experience telling me what to think. Furthermore, the very way these two lovely people have made their argument indicates that they don’t take women seriously and need to explain things to them. Sounds like you do as well by indicating that my comments are juvenile. Funny thing is that immature thinkers usually attack the person vs. the argument.
Get your head out of your uterus. You can’t make a baby without a biological part of a man. You don’t own nor rule this issue. I suspect the real issues that you struggle with are far beyond abortion.
Perhaps when it was known that Justice Ginsberg questioned the ruling that should have been an opportunity to start working on a better solution. This decision was bound to fail yet folks did little and now think that screaming and marching in the streets is the most effective course of action. This occasion also strangely gave individuals like Marquita Thomas and Chelsea Byers an on screen opportunity to vent their claims free of charge. They were both too long winded and not particularly smart. Marquita Thomas is all for show and never any substance. She is good at her PR… Read more »
West Hollywood is short on leadership and high on individual self promotion.
When you have the self grandiose audacity to tell another to “be quiet” because they don’t agree with you, well, you know exactly where you can stick your opinion. Basically, all you have pointed out is personal high drama with little based in law. Good luck with that in whatever Third World country you think you can rule.