Leaked/breaking:Roe v. Wade expected to be overturned

[jamil]

Maybe the fbi should be dissolved.

I think the next Republican POTUS needs to gut the DoJ and reorganize it. Do it in a way that allows you to shitcan the management who aren't political appointees. CIA needs to be reorganized too.

 

[Libertarian01]

I disagree with the former. The left repeatedly insists on violating our constitutional rights, especially the 2nd, because of the feels. Not facts, but feelings*. Anyone wishing to infringe on my rights IS my enemy. And yours too. You just dont realize it.

The latter I agree with. It too is an enemy.

*Just look at the dissent in the NY 2A case. The entire dissent was disconnected from reality and was easily debunked by Alito in his unusual reply to the dissent.

And there was a VERY controversial study discussed by the Freakanomics guys. They correllated a drop in crime roughly 15 years after Roe was passed. The theory was that thanks to the reduction in unwanted kids there were less underprivileged, abused, unwanted kids to go get into trouble and live a life of crime because their parents didnt really care about them and let them do whatever. According to the study, Roe actually decreased crime over time. (in theory) It will be interesting to see what happens starting in 2037 and see if crime spikes up again.

Yes, the Freakanomics is the main one I was referring to, but I believe there were others.

What probably happened with crime isn't 100% Roe, but isn't 0% either.

The reality is that the majority of Americans support abortion rights, depending upon circumstances. Only about 10 - 15% want an outright ban. So as the reality of SCOTUS's decision sinks in, many states will move toward the middle. A few extremely liberal states will make it available to all. A few extremely conservative states will ban it for most, or all.

Even Mississippi's law allows for abortion if the mothers life is at risk. It will be interesting to see where this goes, for what mother's life is NOT at risk giving birth? Over 50 countries have a lower maternal mortality rate than the USA. Belarus, Poland, Italy and Norway have only about 10% what we do. So how hard will it be to prove that the mothers life is not at risk for any birth? Now I know people will reasonably ask, "Well, how much extra risk is there, really?" A fair question. What does the current law say? Whether Mississippi likes it or not they may(?) have opened a Pandora's box of potential litigation. And even if they didn't how long until companies or groups fund travel to more abortion tolerant states?

To my thinking a very good way to reduce the need for abortions falls into three (3) basic categories:

#1) In depth sex education starting in elementary school. Every child show know how babies are made. With knowledge comes the power to control their own destinies.

#2) Extremely easy access to contraceptives. Once young people understand from early on how babies are made and how contraceptives work they need to have the means to make responsible choices.

#3) Revamp adoption laws to make it extremely fast to adopt. Add to this virtually absolute protection for the anonymity of the birth mother so that she knows putting up her child for adoption will NEVER EVER come back on her. This will then make the adoption "choice" an easier one to make.

I might also throw in a law or two that drains massive financial amounts from the father. A young man (or older) that may be feeling frisky will be more likely to aggressively use contraception if he knows he will pay a LOT over many years by not using it. No money and willing to blow of your responsibility? Welcome to the state work house where you can contribute for 18 years on behalf of your child. Three hots and a cot a day for your lack of planning. I believe we look to much at the females for their lack of planning and ignore the other FIFTY PERCENT of the problem! It should be made as painful for the potential father as it is for the potential mother.

Regards,

Doug

 

[churchmouse]

6-3

The dissenting members is a given.

Not kept up on this one. Did they ever figure out who leaked this out and has that person been held to task.

 

[KLB]

The dissenting members is a given.

Not kept up on this one. Did they ever figure out who leaked this out and has that person been held to task.

Not that they have said.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Killing things you can’t hear screaming as their arms and legs are yanked off their little bodies is a cowardly and abhorrent alternative to “what are we going to do with all these unwanted children”. The latter is a far better problem to have than allowing the former to continue. We’ll figure it out. Maybe some of those unaborted children will someday discover answers to many of the problems that plague our society. We’ll never know how the 60 or so million dead children would have blessed us.

40 years of fighting payed off. Persistence is key. Stick your neck out for what you know is right and the results will come. What are we fighting for?... | By Justin Hart | Facebook

40 years of fighting payed off. Persistence is key. Stick your neck out for what you know is right and the results will come. What are we fighting for?...

fb.watch

 

[ancjr]

Another reality is plastic baptists, outwardly anti-abortion, but secretly arranging abortions for their daughters to save their family repute. Obviously they aren't confident in their belief about abortion.

Btw, Baptists shouldn't get too hung up about the term plastic baptist. I've used it for years to mean any religious person regardless of religion who pretends to be pious.

...and Cracker Barrel has a fried chicken special on Sundays.

As to such claims against a true Christian, Jesus set the example as the scorners taunted him to come off the cross and prove who he was, and in doing so would have become the very hypocrite they were claiming him to be.

 

[jamil]

...and Cracker Barrel has a fried chicken special on Sundays.

As to such claims against a true Christian, Jesus set the example as the scorners taunted him to come off the cross and prove who he was, and in doing so would have become the very hypocrite they were claiming him to be.

What claim was there against true Christians? A plastic Baptist is a fake one.

 

[AndreusMaximus]

All the people are against abortion, but the children they saved have always been some else's problem, not yours.

If you're talking about keyboard warriors online, this is true.

If you're talking about the actual people on the streets in front of abortion clinics, the workers at crisis pregnancy centers, or virtually anyone else involved in the pro-life movement in any way that involves doing more that talking/typing about it, than that is a horrible, bald-faced lie.

How in the world are all these people on here, on both sides of the debate, talking like there's this huge queue of children out there who have no one to adopt them? My wife and I looked into adoption for years, what we found is that it's virtually impossible without first paying tens of thousands to an adoption agency to set up a profile for you, do a home visit, etc, etc, and then, even after the field has been culled of anyone who can't afford that, for every baby that comes up for adoption in this country there are, on average, 20-30 couples in line waiting to adopt the baby.

Even if the baby isn't put up for adoption, crisis pregnancy centers offer women thousands of dollar worth of free help, from diapers to cribs to bottles to free medical care, you name it. And I have personally seen many pro-life counselors give thousands of dollars of their own money to help women they've met going into abortion clinics with anything from rent money to food.

I myself have stood outside of abortion clinics for over a decade; both myself and many other people I have personally witnessed have offered thousands of women information on adoption, pre-natal and post-natal care, free diapers and baby supplies, and if they didn't want the red tape of going through an adoption agency, we had many people, myself included, who would be overjoyed to be able to adopt an unwanted child personally. While we helped countless women with material assistance, in all these years we've only had ONE woman who took us up on the offer of adoption. My wife and I were over the moon thinking we might finally be able to adopt, but unfortunately the woman ended up miscarrying, so it never happened.

I haven't read all the posts on here yet, but I've seen some people conflating adoption with foster care. Foster care is NOT adoption, and kids in foster care are typically not unwanted by their parents, but rather are in state custody due to abusive parents, or due do being orphans. Being a foster parent doesn't mean adopting children, it means playing nanny for the state, and taking care of a child who you have no custody of, absolutely no rights to raise as you see fit, and who can be taken away again at any point. Sometimes you can adopt a child from the foster care system, but this is relatively rare, so it's a much harder sell to get people to foster children. Plus this whole thing isn't really related to the question of outlawing abortion; unwanted newborns don't go in the foster system (except maybe under unusual circumstances that I'm not aware of) they go up for adoption.

TLDR: YES! I will personally adopt any child who is unwanted by the mother, especially if she is/was considering abortion, and if my life circumstances change to where I can't, I know many other couples who can. I'm NOT JOKING, if you know a woman in these circumstances, who is afraid of the red tape and bureaucracy of an adoption agency, please PM me, and I will give you my cell number; I am happy to talk to her personally, or connect her with even more experienced pro-life counselors who can help her with adoption.

 

[AndreusMaximus]

I don’t think that’s practical either. What great new government bureaucracy will be needed to handle that?

Many churches run pregnancy centers to help mothers who are unexpectedly pregnant. They offer help in placing these kids with parents who will hopefully offer these kids a better life. I think if we’re going to say we believe in the sanctity of life, that means a lot more than just birth and then forget it.

The people who fought hard to get RvW overturned play a part in the responsibility of what happens to these kids now that the parents can’t just easily end the pregnancy. If life is sacred maybe being confident in that belief means helping these kids once they’ve survived birth.

I don’t think that should have to be up to government to enforce responsibility. Private charities seems like the best place to handle it. Though I’m not a believer I think churches could serve communities in this way. Help people learn to be responsible. And for those who just can’t be, at least help the child grow up with parents who care.

AMEN!

 

[wagyu52]

Crazy thought,
maybe if we stop killing societies unwanted children and start wanting them, the unwanted children will stop killing our wanted children.

 

[ancjr]

What claim was there against true Christians? A plastic Baptist is a fake one.

Exactly. Let's stay on topic.

 

[jamil]

Exactly. Let's stay on topic.

I think it’s relevant to the topic.

 

[ljk]

So the answer to onerous government imposed regulations is to kill babies?

You are not providing solutions to the problem or help to these babies.

 

[AndreusMaximus]

Legally speaking, yes, I think the human rights of a fetus are irrelevant until birth.

I hate to come back to this, but I have to ask, what is the difference to you between saying that and saying that you are okay with murder under some circumstances? It sounds to me like you're saying that you're okay with abortion, even if a fetus has full human rights. Well, if the fetus has full human rights, doesn't that make killing it murder, unless it has committed a crime worthy of death? I don't see how this changes based on the rights of the woman. Saying that the woman has the right to do whatever she wants within her own body, period, if accepted as true might provide justification for killing the fetus, but I don't see how that changes the nature of what that act of killing constitutes?

 

[jamil]

I disagree with the former. The left repeatedly insists on violating our constitutional rights, especially the 2nd, because of the feels. Not facts, but feelings*. Anyone wishing to infringe on my rights IS my enemy. And yours too. You just dont realize it.

The latter I agree with. It too is an enemy.

*Just look at the dissent in the NY 2A case. The entire dissent was disconnected from reality and was easily debunked by Alito in his unusual reply to the dissent.

And there was a VERY controversial study discussed by the Freakanomics guys. They correllated a drop in crime roughly 15 years after Roe was passed. The theory was that thanks to the reduction in unwanted kids there were less underprivileged, abused, unwanted kids to go get into trouble and live a life of crime because their parents didnt really care about them and let them do whatever. According to the study, Roe actually decreased crime over time. (in theory) It will be interesting to see what happens starting in 2037 and see if crime spikes up again.

Crime has so many causes. How can we tell crime has gone up or down because of things like overturning RvW, or other public policies? How much has crime increased lately because progressive prosecutors won’t charge criminals? Or because of the culture war? If we stop the drug war before 2037, how much will that affect the crime rate at the same time?

Everyone wants to say their social favorite reduced crime. Removing lead from gasoline reduced crime. Less strict gun laws reduced crime. Legalization of abortions reduced crime. Easing poverty reduced crime. Lots of simultaneous claims of causes for the same stats. I’m sure it has multivariate causes. I’m just skeptical that everyone is right who has a pet social cause to claim.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Crime has so many causes. How can we tell crime has gone up or down because of things like overturning RvW, or other public policies? How much has crime increased lately because progressive prosecutors won’t charge criminals? Or because of the culture war? If we stop the drug war before 2037, how much will that affect the crime rate at the same time?

Everyone wants to say their social favorite reduced crime. Removing lead from gasoline reduced crime. Less strict gun laws reduced crime. Legalization of abortions reduced crime. Easing poverty reduced crime. Lots of simultaneous claims of causes for the same stats. I’m sure it has multivariate causes. I’m just skeptical that everyone is right who has a pet social cause to claim.

I never claimed it was settled science. Just that it was an interesting theory.

Now we may have a chance to retry the experiment (in reverse) and see what happens. Time will tell. (or not)

 

[actaeon277]

If Row was so important, them maybe they should have MADE A LAW.

 

[jamil]

I never claimed it was settled science. Just that it was an interesting theory.

Now we may have a chance to retry the experiment (in reverse) and see what happens. Time will tell. (or not)

I wasn’t saying that. I’m just saying I’m skeptical of any of the claims when everyone attaches their pet cause for the same thing. Undoubtedly some of those claims are correct. I think it’s probably true that not having parents that care about you would result in a higher likelihood of being a criminal. But it’s a difficult thing to prove the cause.

 

[ljk]

TLDR: YES! I will personally adopt any child who is unwanted by the mother, especially if she is/was considering abortion, and if my life circumstances change to where I can't, I know many other couples who can. I'm NOT JOKING, if you know a woman in these circumstances, who is afraid of the red tape and bureaucracy of an adoption agency, please PM me, and I will give you my cell number; I am happy to talk to her personally, or connect her with even more experienced pro-life counselors who can help her with adoption.

Adoption is a business, lucrative business.

The situation is already bad back 20-30 years ago, it is worse not and it will get absolutely crisis in the near future.

There are plenty of kids needing a home right now, and they can't find any, what are you gonna do when the numbers blowing up down the road.

The solution is more people needed to step up as parents to go through the trouble, but there aren't enough of them, hasn't been for decades.

For me, it seems there are far more keyboard pro-lifers than the actual foster/adopting parents out there.

 

[Creedmoor]

What would you like to be done?

For starters, I have a different opinion with abortion than most here, And with that opinion of being a pro abortion conservative, buts me in a tough place here.

Should one be banned for a differing opinion? Its difficult also to moderate when one has a differing opinion.

I believe we have no business making laws that involve a womans medical choice with her body.

Personally, I would have left roe-wade stand. Its a sad day now for lower economic class women who live in States that abortions have and will be outlawed.
A women with no means without local access to clinics has a narrow choice of options.
Most here are not old enough to have seen 50 years ago here.
A few short years from now, they will see.
I might respond to a few of those bells in the top corner, I might not.
I most likely will step away from this thread.