I've been thinking about this a bit.

Suffering: That's what it comes down to for me. I listened to the "Life!" line while in the Church but their inability to see or acknowledge the unnecessary suffering they are causing is disturbing to some folks who read the Jesus story.

Theocracy: This ruling, if it comes down the way it seems to be coming down, imposes the religious belief of a few on the many. We get criticized for slippery slope arguments but this is one camel you don't want in your tent.
 

Undertoad wrote:

This ruling, if it comes down the way it seems to be coming down, imposes the religious belief of a few on the many.

acktually it makes it states' rights so more majorities of beliefs will apply

under current law we are imposing our beliefs on Arkansas

No, under current law, nobody's religious beliefs are imposed on anyone.  The new ruling will allow states to impose on individuals.
 

Undertoad wrote:

i am non-religious but believe that abortion should only be allowed to the point of neo-cortical brain activity. past that point i would grant the fetus rights and so the folks who want abortions up to birth are an offense to me
 

Here's the thing: I agree with you conceptually. There is a line past which a healthy, viable fetus should--morally--not be aborted. The problem is that the vast majority of late-term abortions are cases where it has been discovered, too late, that the fetus has a brutal, unsurvivable abnormality. Say, for example, it has no skull. That's a real thing that happens and doesn't always get discovered early on. So the baby is going to die within hours if not minutes of its birth either way, but now the mother has to continue being pregnant for some number of months, feeling a death row baby kicking around inside her--and the psychological scarring of those months is real and lasting--and then she has to go through the trauma and risk of a full-term delivery when a simple D&C could have ended everyone's suffering long ago. And that doesn't even get into the likelihood that the delivery itself will be of higher-than-average risk, due to those same abnormalities, and may very well kill the mother--all for a baby everyone knew was going to be dead no matter what.

These are the cases where late-term abortion happens. Not because Slutty McSlutsalot couldn't get her act together in time and then somehow found a doctor who would abort a nearly-deliverable baby. I can't say for sure that it never, ever happens, but I absolutely can say for sure that plenty of women have died because the laws in their country wouldn't allow her doctor to abort a malformed, non-viable fetus.
 

baba booey hoaward stern's penis

These conservatives said they do not want the Supreme Court to make laws.  To only cast judgement based upon existing laws and the Constitution.

The Mississippi case only asked if 15 weeks was too short.  Instead this Supreme Court (in an Alito brief) would be making laws beyond the scope of what is asked by that Mississippi case.   The Mississippi case does not ask if Roe v Wade is unconstitutional.  It is only about a 15 week limit on abortion.  The court, instead, wants to address issues beyond that Mississippi case.  To make new laws - that conservatives say a court should not do.

Two Republican Senators now bluntly say two justices lied to them about this issue.  Lied to them in those Senator's offices.

Both PBS and The Economist note that a majority oppose this possible Supreme Court decision.  Especially atheists and Jews.  Only right wing evangicals, whose agenda is to impose their relgiion on all others, are strong supporters of this new law.  That also moves towards another objective: that nobody has a constitutional right to privacy.

Twnety years ago, I watched people in a Christian college being trained in political manipulation.  The course was about how to present oneself to become believable.   They were even training in how to manipulate facial expressions to appear more honest.  This same college had and still has no courses in science or anything more advanced that what they called business math.  Which was really only remedial math - for what should have been known in high school.  

One of their more advanced students was (surprisingly) making angry expressions when I mentioned some gay friends.  He clearly knew gays were evil.  Is that really a religious person?  Or someone being trained in political manipulation? To impose religioius beliefs on all others?

 

Last edited by tw (5/10/2022 9:17 am)

TheNeverWas wrote:

That was a bit of a long post, and I did not see the words 'emotional', 'children', or 'extremist'.
 

Long after one only reads a first 140 characters.  Then knows everything necessary. 


 

Last edited by tw (5/10/2022 7:33 pm)

tw wrote:

Long after one only reads a first 140 characters.  Then knows everything necessary.

Is that a Google translation?
 

Flint wrote:

... or if they just threw a dart at a carnival wheel of random policy choices?

I've overlooked another option, that proponents of Roe v Wade simply HATE BABIES and want to kill them. This is likely a product of hating freedom // America.

eta: they're probably also wOkE, a sOciAliSt, and teach cRiTiCaL rACE tHeOrY
 

Last edited by Flint (5/12/2022 1:15 pm)

Forget all that, look over here! --Joe Biden is personally responsible for a baby formula shortage

Sentences were reduced to less than 140 characters.  So that you might read them.

Apparently it was still too long.

Even Trump, with his 30 second attention span, could have read it.
 

Last edited by tw (5/13/2022 7:12 pm)

A message for the Supremes...


 

AOC calls for the impeachment of those four.  Yep!