Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

Any political discussion should go here. This subforum will be moderated differently than other forums.
Forum rules
1.) No personal threats.
2.) No doxxing/revealing personal information.
3.) No spam.
4.) No circumventing press restrictions.
5.) No racism, sexism, homophobia, or derogatory posts.
Message
Author
Jamiet99uk
Posts: 22463
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:42 pm
Location: Durham, UK
Karma: 14606
Contact:

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#21 Post by Jamiet99uk » Wed May 04, 2022 12:53 am

Octavious:
Just to be clear, you are opposed to women having agency over their own bodies, yes?

You are in favour of forced pregnancies, yes?

You think that if a woman is raped, she should be forced, by state force, to give birth?

Because that's the side you're currently taking. So let's just be clear.

Octavious
Posts: 3059
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:16 pm
Location: The Five Valleys, Gloucestershire
Karma: 2246
Contact:

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#22 Post by Octavious » Wed May 04, 2022 8:00 am

No. My position is, and has always been, in favour of legal abortions in line with the current UK system. I have said nothing whatsoever here to suggest otherwise. If I recall correctly I think the largest difference between our positions is that you believe the pro life side in the US is motivated by some evil determination to subjugate women, whereas I see them as being primarily motivated by a laudable desire to defend the rights of human life in all its forms.

The question I am asking is a simple one and asked as clearly as I think it is possible to make it, and it is whether you value human lives differently depending on the circumstances of that life, with the age highlighted in particular.
1
I eat cookies to improve my snacking experience

Jamiet99uk
Posts: 22463
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:42 pm
Location: Durham, UK
Karma: 14606
Contact:

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#23 Post by Jamiet99uk » Wed May 04, 2022 12:31 pm

Octavious wrote:
Wed May 04, 2022 8:00 am
No. My position is, and has always been, in favour of legal abortions in line with the current UK system. I have said nothing whatsoever here to suggest otherwise. If I recall correctly I think the largest difference between our positions is that you believe the pro life side in the US is motivated by some evil determination to subjugate women, whereas I see them as being primarily motivated by a laudable desire to defend the rights of human life in all its forms.
Okay. Thank you for clarifying. And yes, that is an accurate depiction of my position. I do think that the "pro life" camp is motivated by a desire to subjugate women and control their bodies. Some of them are deluded into thinking that they are obeying Jesus's commands, but generally that's just an excuse for defending an outdated, disgusting, patriarchal society in which a woman's primary role is for men to breed with her.
Octavious wrote:
Wed May 04, 2022 8:00 am
The question I am asking is a simple one and asked as clearly as I think it is possible to make it, and it is whether you value human lives differently depending on the circumstances of that life, with the age highlighted in particular.
Once the humans in question are born, then no I don't specifically value them differently based on age.

However, I do not believe that a fertilised ovum has the same status as a female human (crucially, not "woman", because this definition could include children). And note that there are apparently people in the USA who strongly believe that a female rape victim in her early teens should be forced, by the Government, to have a baby. That is a fundamentally evil viewpoint, from my perspective.

Octavious
Posts: 3059
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:16 pm
Location: The Five Valleys, Gloucestershire
Karma: 2246
Contact:

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#24 Post by Octavious » Wed May 04, 2022 3:32 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote:
Wed May 04, 2022 12:31 pm
However, I do not believe that a fertilised ovum has the same status as a female human
Me neither. I am inclined to give the fertilised ovum a degree of respect, with the extent of that degree ranging from virtually nil at the point of fertilisation to fully human at the point of birth. There is also a significant difference between the right to life and the right to choose. All being equal life trumps choice, hence late term abortions should be banned outside of medical emergencies, and early term abortions are more easily justified. All abortions are inherently tragic, again with the degree of tragedy being largely a function of time.
1
I eat cookies to improve my snacking experience

Jamiet99uk
Posts: 22463
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:42 pm
Location: Durham, UK
Karma: 14606
Contact:

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#25 Post by Jamiet99uk » Wed May 04, 2022 5:44 pm

Of course there's an obvious way to prevent a lot of that tragedy. Simply stop abortion at the source. Vasectomy is reversible, so the state could simply mandate that all young men must get a vasectomy at 16. Then later, if he's deemed to be a responsible adult, fit for fatherhood, he can have it reversed.

Of course the US "pro life" nuts would never go for this option, because they're determined to police women's bodies, not men's.

Tolstoy
Posts: 69
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:56 pm
Location: FEMA Region 4
Karma: 28

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#26 Post by Tolstoy » Wed May 04, 2022 11:46 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote:
Wed May 04, 2022 5:44 pm
the state could simply mandate that all young men must get a vasectomy at 16. Then later, if he's deemed to be a responsible adult, fit for fatherhood, he can have it reversed.
Apparently the door of "gender equality" does not swing both ways where bodily autonomy is concerned.

Jamiet99uk
Posts: 22463
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:42 pm
Location: Durham, UK
Karma: 14606
Contact:

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#27 Post by Jamiet99uk » Thu May 05, 2022 12:04 am

Tolstoy wrote:
Wed May 04, 2022 11:46 pm
Jamiet99uk wrote:
Wed May 04, 2022 5:44 pm
the state could simply mandate that all young men must get a vasectomy at 16. Then later, if he's deemed to be a responsible adult, fit for fatherhood, he can have it reversed.
Apparently the door of "gender equality" does not swing both ways where bodily autonomy is concerned.
I cannot tell whether or not this remark is ironic or not.

Tolstoy
Posts: 69
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:56 pm
Location: FEMA Region 4
Karma: 28

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#28 Post by Tolstoy » Thu May 05, 2022 12:19 am

Jamiet99uk wrote:
Thu May 05, 2022 12:04 am
I cannot tell whether or not this remark is ironic or not.
Umm... okay. Let's put it this way. If someone was suggesting that girls should be forced to have Norplant at 16 which would be reversed later only if the girl/young lady/woman/birthing person proved herself responsible and worthy of parenthood, would you be okay with that? If you would, my comment was an expression of irony. If you wouldn't, it wasn't.

Jamiet99uk
Posts: 22463
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:42 pm
Location: Durham, UK
Karma: 14606
Contact:

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#29 Post by Jamiet99uk » Thu May 05, 2022 7:44 am

Tolstoy wrote:
Thu May 05, 2022 12:19 am
Jamiet99uk wrote:
Thu May 05, 2022 12:04 am
I cannot tell whether or not this remark is ironic or not.
Umm... okay. Let's put it this way. If someone was suggesting that girls should be forced to have Norplant at 16 which would be reversed later only if the girl/young lady/woman/birthing person proved herself responsible and worthy of parenthood, would you be okay with that? If you would, my comment was an expression of irony. If you wouldn't, it wasn't.
You've missed the original point of the thread.

Politicians in the USA are currently pressing for the Supreme Court to overturn the landmark Roe v Wade judgement. They want to take control of women's bodies.

I suggested an alternative which involves policing men's bodies instead. Naturally you are outraged by the idea.

Jamiet99uk
Posts: 22463
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:42 pm
Location: Durham, UK
Karma: 14606
Contact:

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#30 Post by Jamiet99uk » Thu May 05, 2022 7:48 am

To put it another way, US Republicans currently believe that if an older man rapes a young teenage girl, his urge to procreate should be given greater importance, in law, than her bodily autonomy, and she should be forced to carry his baby and give birth to it.

They are sick, evil people.

Randomizer
Posts: 739
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 1:04 am
Karma: 225

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#31 Post by Randomizer » Thu May 05, 2022 12:12 pm

This decision also overturns a lesser know Supreme Court decision from about 20 years ago, that a patient has the ultimate right to determine their own medical care. Especially since most of these new abortion law restrictions make no exemption for protecting the life of the mother. This draft would say that pregnant women no longer have the right to decide what is their best choice for medical care.
1

Jamiet99uk
Posts: 22463
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:42 pm
Location: Durham, UK
Karma: 14606
Contact:

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#32 Post by Jamiet99uk » Thu May 05, 2022 3:23 pm

Randomizer wrote:
Thu May 05, 2022 12:12 pm
This decision also overturns a lesser know Supreme Court decision from about 20 years ago, that a patient has the ultimate right to determine their own medical care. Especially since most of these new abortion law restrictions make no exemption for protecting the life of the mother. This draft would say that pregnant women no longer have the right to decide what is their best choice for medical care.
Absolutely right. They want to control women and promote their particular religious dogma, and they don't care if women suffer and die in the process.

worcej
Posts: 9228
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:39 am
Location: Washington
Karma: 5313

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#33 Post by worcej » Wed May 11, 2022 11:18 pm

flash2015 wrote:
Tue May 03, 2022 6:50 pm
I am pro freedom of choice...but I think in the longer term this will be a good thing.

Roe vs. Wade has poisoned political debate in the USA for way too long. I am tired of the Supreme Court nonsense...which ultimately all came down to trying to stack the court one way or the other on the issue.

Most people are on the middle on this. The people that want abortion to be banned even in the case of rape and incest and the people that want absolutely no restrictions AT ALL on abortion are a minority. While there will be variability between states, I am hoping over time some more maintainable middle-ground can be found on this...as has happened in most other Western countries.

For Democrats, I think this is definitely a good thing. With inflation being so bad they previously were looking down the barrel of an absolute rout in the midterms. While things are still pretty bad for them, I think this gives them a glimmer of hope for holding the Senate (the House is still gone).

When I was a kid the left and the Church were allies...as they had common purpose in helping the poor and disadvantaged. Democrats should use this as an opportunity to mend some of those bridges.
Late to the party, but this is pretty close to my take.

I'm personally torn as a right-leaning independent who values minimalistic federal involvement (AKA: Pro-state management). I am 100% pro-choice but fall in line with disliking Roe v. Wade's impact because it completely killed the political discourse and process of debating abortion and has been a part of how partisan politics and vilifying people of different opinions communicate with each other.

That, and I personally feel it violated the 10th Amendment...

worcej
Posts: 9228
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:39 am
Location: Washington
Karma: 5313

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#34 Post by worcej » Wed May 11, 2022 11:19 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote:
Thu May 05, 2022 7:48 am
To put it another way, US Republicans currently believe that if an older man rapes a young teenage girl, his urge to procreate should be given greater importance, in law, than her bodily autonomy, and she should be forced to carry his baby and give birth to it.

They are sick, evil people.
Sorry Jamie, but this is incredibly over-simplified vilification of a political party and is part of the problem with modern politics.

worcej
Posts: 9228
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:39 am
Location: Washington
Karma: 5313

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#35 Post by worcej » Wed May 11, 2022 11:26 pm

Really, in an ideal fantasy world were people could try to seek resolution, the best outcome would be for the court to hold that the Mississippi law of banning abortions past 15-weeks was acceptable and still keep Roe v. Wade in tact. This would be a better 'compromise' for this ideological battle than previous rulings which has prevented any laws that ban it before ~22-24 weeks.

worcej
Posts: 9228
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:39 am
Location: Washington
Karma: 5313

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#36 Post by worcej » Wed May 11, 2022 11:35 pm

Matticus13 wrote:
Tue May 03, 2022 4:14 pm
The silver lining for Democrats would be, this could really rile up the base just before midterms. Republicans get the W for now, though.
And going back to the original commentary here: recent polling has shown it hasn't caused a sudden shift or anything. The top issue coming into this election cycle is still the economy by a large margin.

Jamiet99uk
Posts: 22463
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:42 pm
Location: Durham, UK
Karma: 14606
Contact:

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#37 Post by Jamiet99uk » Thu May 12, 2022 2:37 pm

worcej wrote:
Wed May 11, 2022 11:19 pm
Jamiet99uk wrote:
Thu May 05, 2022 7:48 am
To put it another way, US Republicans currently believe that if an older man rapes a young teenage girl, his urge to procreate should be given greater importance, in law, than her bodily autonomy, and she should be forced to carry his baby and give birth to it.

They are sick, evil people.
Sorry Jamie, but this is incredibly over-simplified vilification of a political party and is part of the problem with modern politics.
Sorry, Worcej, but this is literally what Republican legislators in, for example, Alabama, are doing.

worcej
Posts: 9228
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:39 am
Location: Washington
Karma: 5313

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#38 Post by worcej » Thu May 12, 2022 6:42 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote:
Thu May 12, 2022 2:37 pm
worcej wrote:
Wed May 11, 2022 11:19 pm
Jamiet99uk wrote:
Thu May 05, 2022 7:48 am
To put it another way, US Republicans currently believe that if an older man rapes a young teenage girl, his urge to procreate should be given greater importance, in law, than her bodily autonomy, and she should be forced to carry his baby and give birth to it.

They are sick, evil people.
Sorry Jamie, but this is incredibly over-simplified vilification of a political party and is part of the problem with modern politics.
Sorry, Worcej, but this is literally what Republican legislators in, for example, Alabama, are doing.
Reality is though that these legislators are representing the will of their constituents.

Additionally, plenty of female politicians and voters are pro-life and engaging in the same policies you're attacking male politicians for. In the case of Alabama, the governor is a woman who readily signed the Human Life Protection Act and the state is predominately a Republican state.

Randomizer
Posts: 739
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 1:04 am
Karma: 225

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#39 Post by Randomizer » Fri May 13, 2022 12:16 am

Idaho wants to make it that a rapist's family can sue if the victim gets an abortion.

Meanwhile the laws ending or restricting abortion violate the 13th amendment of the US Constitution:

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/5 ... amendment/

The new laws forces pregnant women to be involuntary slaves that no longer have free will over the use of their own bodies. Of course rich people can afford to go to other countries that allow abortion. But these new laws end equal rights where the poorer people can't.
1

Jamiet99uk
Posts: 22463
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:42 pm
Location: Durham, UK
Karma: 14606
Contact:

Re: Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Opinion leak confirmed

#40 Post by Jamiet99uk » Fri May 13, 2022 12:24 am

worcej wrote:
Thu May 12, 2022 6:42 pm
Jamiet99uk wrote:
Thu May 12, 2022 2:37 pm
worcej wrote:
Wed May 11, 2022 11:19 pm
Sorry Jamie, but this is incredibly over-simplified vilification of a political party and is part of the problem with modern politics.
Sorry, Worcej, but this is literally what Republican legislators in, for example, Alabama, are doing.
Reality is though that these legislators are representing the will of their constituents.

Additionally, plenty of female politicians and voters are pro-life and engaging in the same policies you're attacking male politicians for. In the case of Alabama, the governor is a woman who readily signed the Human Life Protection Act and the state is predominately a Republican state.
None of that matters. Women can oppress other women. In Alabama, Republican lawmakers want to control women's bodies, and want to force rape victims to give birth. That's fucking evil. Argue otherwise.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests