It's Official: SCOTUS Overturns Roe v. Wade

[bsjkki]

9 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I agree that as long as sane and reasonably educated people write the laws we won’t have hell stories of women dying from pregnancies.

Looks like the “she wouldn’t be pregnant if she didn’t secretly like it” viewpoint will be represented.

The nice thing is one dumb person won’t get it passed and they immediately get called out for it. 

[bsjkki]

47 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Calling reasoned concern scare tactics is dismissive and will in itself appear less reasonable, less credible, and less comforting.

A much better approach would acknowledge the legitimate distrust and then go on with, "here's what we know so far." And then be ready to adjust as new information appears and as facts change.

I have presented you facts. So, while people may distrust, (based on a lot of fear mongering articles and posts)  I do think when presented with the facts people should adjust their fears armed with the accurate information.

[Calm]

22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I agree that as long as sane and reasonably educated people write the laws we won’t have hell stories of women dying from pregnancies.

Looks like the “she wouldn’t be pregnant if she didn’t secretly like it” viewpoint will be represented.

Wasn’t this a thing a few years ago?

Ah yes…https://theweek.com/articles/472972/rape-cant-cause-pregnancy-brief-history-todd-akins-bogus-theory

[bsjkki]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

Wasn’t this a thing a few years ago?

Ah yes…https://theweek.com/articles/472972/rape-cant-cause-pregnancy-brief-history-todd-akins-bogus-theory

It tends to be career ending.

[Meadowchik]

6 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

I have presented you facts. So, while people may distrust, (based on a lot of fear mongering articles and posts)  I do think when presented with the facts people should adjust their fears armed with the accurate information.

The facts you claim don't alleviate the problem that the federal protections of women's reproductive rights have been removed.

And they don't alleviate the fact that interference in medical care will impact care. If the past is an indication the impact will be harmful.

[Calm]

21 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

The nice thing is one dumb person won’t get it passed and they immediately get called out for it. 

As happened with Todd Akins, I believe. Pity it has to be repeated, hopefully this time it might stick.

If I was ever in a seat of power, I would instruct that a big picture book be made containing basic medical facts relevant to lawmaking, paying special attention to misinformation spoken as truth by government people in the past.  Well, maybe not a big picture book, something fitting for a 5th grader with lots of pictures and infographics though.  It would be required reading and they would be quizzed and would not start to get paid until they passed.

Edited June 29, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

3 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

It tends to be career ending.

Showing a lack of interest in putting in the hours to be properly informed in areas relevant to their work in a government official should be career ending unless they do a dramatic turnaround and start researching the real world.

[bsjkki]

1 minute ago, Meadowchik said:

women's reproductive rights

I’m only discussing the exceptions for life of the mother care, miscarriages and ectopic pregnancy. 
 

This is a broader topic that we disagree on. 
 

 

[bsjkki]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

Showing a lack of interest in putting in the hours to be properly informed in areas relevant to their work in a government official should be career ending unless they do a dramatic turnaround and start researching the real world.

I agree.

[The Nehor]

19 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

The nice thing is one dumb person won’t get it passed and they immediately get called out for it. 

This isn’t the first member of a legislature to say this and for everyone that is saying it many more are thinking it.

Indiana made laws that criminalized not having a funeral or cremation for miscarriages. In essence it criminalized spontaneous and probably unnoticed miscarriages. That was the majority of the legislature and the governor and no one said it was an insane law? Actually plenty of people did and those people were ignored.

These aren’t isolated incidents. It is going to get bad.

I really hope I have to eat crow over saying that.

[Calm]

11 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

It tends to be career ending.

And thank goodness he lost. 

Quote

In a book published in July 2014, Akin defended his original comments and said he regretted having apologized.^[3]

He regretted saying this below.  What a jerk.

Quote

Rape was an evil act. I used the wrong words in the wrong way and for that I apologize. As the father of two daughters, I want tough justice for predators. I have a compassionate heart for the victims of sexual assault. I pray for them. The fact is, rape can lead to pregnancy. The truth is, rape has many victims. The mistake I made was in the words I said, not in the heart I hold. I ask for your forgiveness.^[76]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Akin

Edited June 29, 2022 by Calm

[bsjkki]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

This isn’t the first member of a legislature to say this and for everyone that is saying it many more are thinking it.

Indiana made laws that criminalized not having a funeral or cremation for miscarriages. In essence it criminalized spontaneous and probably unnoticed miscarriages. That was the majority of the legislature and the governor and no one said it was an insane law? Actually plenty of people did and those people were ignored.

These aren’t isolated incidents. It is going to get bad.

I really hope I have to eat crow over saying that.

Me too. 

[Meadowchik]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

This isn’t the first member of a legislature to say this and for everyone that is saying it many more are thinking it.

Indiana made laws that criminalized not having a funeral or cremation for miscarriages. In essence it criminalized spontaneous and probably unnoticed miscarriages. That was the majority of the legislature and the governor and no one said it was an insane law? Actually plenty of people did and those people were ignored.

These aren’t isolated incidents. It is going to get bad.

I really hope I have to eat crow over saying that.

I lived in Indiana for a few years and still have friends there. Unfortunately I can't disagree you. Hope you will have to hunt sauce for crow.

[Calm]

23 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Indiana made laws that criminalized not having a funeral or cremation for miscarriages. In essence it criminalized spontaneous and probably unnoticed miscarriages. That was the majority of the legislature and the governor and no one said it was an insane law? Actually plenty of people did and those people were ignored.

I still think the law should have assigned a gestation age or specified miscarriages that took place at medical facilities, but it talks about those who are in possession of fetal remains and fetal remains from miscarriages that happened in medical facilities….and a spontaneous, unnoticed miscarriage would not have fetal remains to be concerned about.  Would someone argue not noticing and assuming it was a heavy period or whatever was criminal?  How would they know if a woman was pregnant when she didn’t know and thus the unnoticed miscarriage.

http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1337#digest-heading

Quote

 Provides that a person who knowingly transports an aborted fetus into, or out of, Indiana commits a Class A misdemeanor, unless the aborted fetus is transported for the sole purpose of final disposition. Provides that a miscarried or aborted fetus must be interred or cremated by a facility having possession of the remains. Requires a person or facility having possession of a miscarried or aborted fetus to ensure that the miscarried fetus or aborted fetus is preserved until final disposition occurs. Specifies that: (1) a person is not required to designated a name for the miscarried or aborted fetus; and (2) information submitted with respect to the disposition of a miscarried or aborted fetus that may be used to identify the parent or parents of a miscarried fetus or a pregnant who had an abortion is confidential and must be redacted from any public records maintained under the burial permit law. Specifies that miscarried and aborted fetuses may be cremated by simultaneous cremation. Excludes the final disposition of a miscarried or aborted fetus from the law governing the treatment of infectious or pathological waste.

 

Edited June 29, 2022 by Calm

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

I still think the law should have assigned a gestation age or specified miscarriages that took place at medical facilities, but it talks about those who are in possession of fetal remains and fetal remains from miscarriages that happened in medical facilities….and a spontaneous, unnoticed miscarriage would not have fetal remains to be concerned about.  Would someone argue not noticing and assuming it was a heavy period or whatever was criminal?  How would they know if a woman was pregnant when she didn’t know and thus the unnoticed miscarriage.

http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1337#digest-heading

 

I am worried that laws like this creep up and people start reporting suspicious possibly pregnant people who suddenly stop. It sounds stupid (and it is) but add how many men seem to have no idea how the female body and pregnancy works.

[Danzo]

50 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I am worried that laws like this creep up and people start reporting suspicious possibly pregnant people who suddenly stop. It sounds stupid (and it is) but add how many men seem to have no idea how the female body and pregnancy works.

I am also worried that people like you don't really understand how law works.

 

As an experiment, why don't you call the police in Indiana to report someone having a miscarriage? Then you can report on how interested the law actually is in monitoring miscarriages. 

 

 

[The Nehor]

12 minutes ago, Danzo said:

I am also worried that people like you don't really understand how law works.

 

As an experiment, why don't you call the police in Indiana to report someone having a miscarriage? Then you can report on how interested the law actually is in monitoring miscarriages. 

 

 

Of course they weren’t. In fact women protested the law by calling the governor’s office and reported on their period blood in graphic detail as a form of protest.

We aren’t there yet.

I am saying that if we continue on this controlling course we might well get there. One thing that is often hard to understand is when you read the stories of slavery or oppressed people and you question why the people in power do the things they do. There has to be a motive right? All this cruelty has to serve them in some way or they wouldn’t do it right? Then you start to realize that the cruelty is the point. Armed with laws that criminalize the natural processes of the human body is cruel because it makes everyone a criminal. You target those you want to control. It will never target all women. It can and probably will be used to target some. That is why only some people are afraid of anti-sodomy laws coming back. No one is going to go after the nice heterosexual couple because of the way they have sex (even if it is technically illegal). They are going to go after gay people.

Most people skate by but the state and the people with a privileged place use the law to punish deviancy and keep the underclass in their place. And every so often you use the law against a person who wouldn’t normally be targeted because they did something the people in power find noxious. This is how police states get started. To those in a position not to have to worry it seems nice. Everything is all orderly. No one seems to be causing problems. Wow, this new structure doesn’t seem so bad. Then your daughter comes home scared because a kid he knew was hauled away. You find out your son is gay and beg him to hide it. Then your daughter is pregnant. She was raped by the son of someone high up in government. Going to the police would be foolhardy. There is no way to hide the pregnancy. Can we bribe a doctor and have her fake a long-term illness? What do we do with the child? Can we sneak over the border to Canada to get an abortion? Safe harbor for infant laws would let us drop off the child at a hospital but everyone knows they DNA test the infant. When was the last time anyone of us got their DNA on file. Oh no. Your brother applied for that job. That might be a close enough match for them to come knocking.

[Danzo]

8 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Armed with laws that criminalize the natural processes of the human body is cruel because it makes everyone a criminal

That ship already sailed a long time ago. 

I don't think there is anyone that could honestly say that they have not done something that a creative prosecutor could charge as a crime.  

[The Nehor]

21 minutes ago, Danzo said:

That ship already sailed a long time ago. 

I don't think there is anyone that could honestly say that they have not done something that a creative prosecutor could charge as a crime.  

When it is specifically a way to oppress women or a minority group though it makes me even more nervous. 

[Durangout]

On 6/28/2022 at 12:27 PM, The Nehor said:

The thing that annoys me is the Pro-Life protestors holding up signs offering to adopt “unwanted babies”. There are kids these good samaritans could adopt now. In most states you can do it for free and even have full health care until they become adults.

No? THEN SHUT UP!

I’m pro Life and I adopted one of these “unwanted babies” some years ago.  I would literally go through Hell for her.  It is not done “for free” nor do they “have full health care until they become adults”

I suggest you take your own advice.

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, Durangout said:

I’m pro Life and I adopted one of these “unwanted babies” some years ago.  I would literally go through Hell for her.  It is not done “for free” nor do they “have full health care until they become adults”

I suggest you take your own advice.

You adopted a baby. Babies are in high demand. You pay a ton unless you get them through foster care which is dicey and may not work. I was referring to children, the unwanted older ones ‘stuck in the system’. White healthy babies don’t spend much time, if any, in the system. It is the older kids you can get for free with benefits that I am suggesting these weirdo samaritans go rescue. They won’t. Many wouldn’t adopt a baby either. It is a stunt. I HATE people who are supposedly advocating on behalf of kids but don’t really give a damn about them. I am working on that hatred.

[Danzo]

24 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

When it is specifically a way to oppress women or a minority group though it makes me even more nervous. 

Minority groups already have a tough time with the law, can't see how this will make it worse.

If a prosecutor or police wants to target a minority group, they already have plenty of tools.

 

I can't imagine a situation where some officer of the law or prosecutor is thinking "Finally I have something I can use to go after minorities.  Good thing the supreme court made this decision or I would be out of luck"

After all, Minorities minority groups were never oppressed before this decision. 

 

[The Nehor]

8 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Minority groups already have a tough time with the law, can't see how this will make it worse.

If a prosecutor or police wants to target a minority group, they already have plenty of tools.

 

I can't imagine a situation where some officer of the law or prosecutor is thinking "Finally I have something I can use to go after minorities.  Good thing the supreme court made this decision or I would be out of luck"

After all, Minorities minority groups were never oppressed before this decision. 

 

It is more that it gives Stan the Jerk the ability to call the police when he figures out that two same sex coworkers are going on a date. One of them got the promotion that Stan should have gotten. Or Zeke the Evil noticed that Andrea looked like she was in the early stages of pregnancy and now the baby bump is gone. Better tip the law off just in case. After all that whore turned him down when he asked her on a date last year.

It opens the possibility of personally weaponizing the police state against the undesireables. This already happens but these changes could make it easier.

[Danzo]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

It is more that it gives Stan the Jerk the ability to call the police when he figures out that two same sex coworkers are going on a date. One of them got the promotion that Stan should have gotten. Or Zeke the Evil noticed that Andrea looked like she was in the early stages of pregnancy and now the baby bump is gone. Better tip the law off just in case. After all that whore turned him down when he asked her on a date last year.

It opens the possibility of personally weaponizing the police state against the undesireables. This already happens but these changes could make it easier.

 If Stan the Jerk wants to make life miserable for someone, he already has plenty of tools. Minorities have been having the cops called on them for a long time, before Roe v Wade, during Roe v Wade, and I am sure after Dodds.  This isn't going to make it different.  The problem has more to do with Stan being a jerk.

I feel genuine pity for the fool who dares going around trying to call woman pregnant.   It's never safe to assume a woman is pregnant unless they are in labor in front of you (even then, I would ask first).

[ttribe]

This just happened. 

https://www.azfamily.com/2022/06/29/arizona-attorney-general-says-territorial-area-law-banning-abortion-is-effect/