RvW Overturned - Abortions Now Illegal

[Jersey Girl]

Annnnnnnd here we go again... Hope it was all worth it. No chance in hell of preventing a single abortion, but at least you get to go back to your pastors who've been playing you like a fiddle and tell them you did good.

Who are you talking to?

[honorentheos]

I miss the days when we discussed personhood in relation to the topic.

I miss the days when bigotry was called out. When was that exactly?

Eloquent and insightful. Always a sure banger. Thanks for taking the time.

[Kukulkan]

Annnnnnnd here we go again... Hope it was all worth it. No chance in hell of preventing a single abortion, but at least you get to go back to your pastors who've been playing you like a fiddle and tell them you did good.

Fun watching all these "Pro-Life" folks show their true colors.

Truck Driver Rams Into Abortion Rights Demonstrators At Roe Rally In Iowa

Pro-Choice Protesters Attacked And Threatened As Roe Demonstrations Continue Into Day 2

Police Use Tear Gas On Abortion Rights Protesters Outside Arizona Capitol

Rhode Island Cop Appears To Punch State Senate Opponent At Abortion Rally

I'm curious. Would you also condemn calls to violence and actual violence from pro-choice advocates?

For example: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... attacks-us

An 161,000 liked tweet with an explicit call to violence in reaction to ruling:

Pro-choice protestors assaulting pro-life protesters: https://Twitter.com/KatieDaviscourt/sta ... 3935997953
Spraying someone unjustly with pepper spray constitutes assault or battery in nearly almost every jurisdiction. You can also see the gentleman in the t-shirt clearly throw a punch at them.

I get it. The ruling is upsetting and people are clearly having unhinged reactions to it. But to sit here and try to show only one side of the story is clearly disingenuous. There are violent radicals on both sides. I disavow violence from both sides. To showcase only one side showcases your clear bias and inability to see this issue in a balanced way. You aren't helping the situation, you are just pouring more gasoline on the already out of control fire.

[Jersey Girl]

Clarence Thomas writes, in a concurring opinion excerpted on Twitter, that the Supreme Court should reconsider Griswold v. Connecticut, Lawrence V. Texas, and Obergefell v. Hodge — the rulings that currently protect the right to buy and use contraceptives without government restriction, the right to a same-sex relationship, and the right to same-sex marriage.

Just wait till they overturn Brown v Little Rock Board of Education.

Just wait until Clarence Thomas addresses interracial marriage laws. That ought to be good.

[Vēritās]

Annnnnnnd here we go again... Hope it was all worth it. No chance in hell of preventing a single abortion, but at least you get to go back to your pastors who've been playing you like a fiddle and tell them you did good.

Fun watching all these "Pro-Life" folks show their true colors.

Truck Driver Rams Into Abortion Rights Demonstrators At Roe Rally In Iowa

Pro-Choice Protesters Attacked And Threatened As Roe Demonstrations Continue Into Day 2

Police Use Tear Gas On Abortion Rights Protesters Outside Arizona Capitol

Rhode Island Cop Appears To Punch State Senate Opponent At Abortion Rally

I'm curious. Would you also condemn calls to violence and actual violence from pro-choice advocates?

For example: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... attacks-us

An 161,000 liked tweet with an explicit call to violence in reaction to ruling:

Pro-choice protestors assaulting pro-life protesters: https://Twitter.com/KatieDaviscourt/sta ... 3935997953
Spraying someone unjustly with pepper spray constitutes assault or battery in nearly almost every jurisdiction. You can also see the gentleman in the t-shirt clearly throw a punch at them.

I get it. The ruling is upsetting and people are clearly having unhinged reactions to it. But to sit here and try to show only one side of the story is clearly disingenuous. There are violent radicals on both sides. I disavow violence from both sides. To showcase only one side showcases your clear bias and inability to see this issue in a balanced way. You aren't helping the situation, you are just pouring more gasoline on the already out of control fire.

I can tell already you're one of those useful idiots who can't comprehend well. This is the second time you've intentionally misrepresented what I've said, all in the name of.... what, exactly? You're literally equating both sides as if throwing a brick into a window, which, for all you know, was done by some pro-lifer, is on par with trying to mow down a crowd of people in a truck. The Supreme Court ruling just happened and so far most of the violence is coming from "pro-life" counter-protesters, very much as was the case during the BLM protests.

I'm pointing out that the 5 idiots on the Supreme Court who decided they would, in the name of their idiotic religious "principles," oppress millions of Americans on an issue in which 70% of the Country disagrees with them on is naturally going to result in all kinds of violence. Yes, from both sides, and justifiably so from women who now understand that their own government treats them like public property.

Which begs the question, just how much oppression should be tolerated before violence is justified? I don't have the answer to that question and because I'm not a woman I cannot even begin to understand the emotions that are running through the 52% of our country who are. I do know that if the government told me that I would be forced to undergo an invasive surgical procedure because I had sex, I would likely be going full Leonidas on any law enforcement who tried to enforce that on me.

But what in the hell is the justification of driving a truck into a crowd of peaceful protesters? It isn't enough that these religious morons got their way with Supreme Court and are able to now enforce their religious views on the rest of the country. No, they're literally trying to kill people for fighting for their Constitutional rights.

But hey, you keep doing you. Keep defending these lying justices, keep being obtuse as all get out, and for God sakes don't let anyone like me sneak a fact across the table without countering it with some BS "see both sides do it" rhetoric.

[canpakes]

What happened yesterday makes it not only completely reasonable, but practically necessary to be anti-religion. This idiotic fight is due entirely to people believing religious BS. Take religion out of the picture and all this nonsense goes away.

It’s a bit weird this way given that the Bible posts no rules against abortion, and actually contains within it a recipe + procedure for inducing an abortion … to be performed by priests, no less.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... erface=amp

[Binger]

I'm curious. Would you also condemn calls to violence and actual violence from pro-choice advocates?

For example: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... attacks-us

An 161,000 liked tweet with an explicit call to violence in reaction to ruling:

Pro-choice protestors assaulting pro-life protesters: https://Twitter.com/KatieDaviscourt/sta ... 3935997953
Spraying someone unjustly with pepper spray constitutes assault or battery in nearly almost every jurisdiction. You can also see the gentleman in the t-shirt clearly throw a punch at them.

I get it. The ruling is upsetting and people are clearly having unhinged reactions to it. But to sit here and try to show only one side of the story is clearly disingenuous. There are violent radicals on both sides. I disavow violence from both sides. To showcase only one side showcases your clear bias and inability to see this issue in a balanced way. You aren't helping the situation, you are just pouring more gasoline on the already out of control fire.

I can tell already you're one of those useful idiots who can't comprehend well. This is the second time you've intentionally misrepresented what I've said, all in the name of.... what, exactly? You're literally equating both sides as if throwing a brick into a window, which, for all you know, was done by some pro-lifer, is on par with trying to mow down a crowd of people in a truck. The Supreme Court ruling just happened and so far most of the violence is coming from "pro-life" counter-protesters, very much as was the case during the BLM protests.

I'm pointing out that the 5 idiots on the Supreme Court who decided they would, in the name of their idiotic religious "principles," oppress millions of Americans on an issue in which 70% of the Country disagrees with them on is naturally going to result in all kinds of violence. Yes, from both sides, and justifiably so from women who now understand that their own government treats them like public property.

Which begs the question, just how much oppression should be tolerated before violence is justified? I don't have the answer to that question and because I'm not a woman I cannot even begin to understand the emotions that are running through the 52% of our country who are. I do know that if the government told me that I would be forced to undergo an invasive surgical procedure because I had sex, I would likely be going full Leonidas on any law enforcement who tried to enforce that on me.

But what in the hell is the justification of driving a truck into a crowd of peaceful protesters? It isn't enough that these religious morons got their way with Supreme Court and are able to now enforce their religious views on the rest of the country. No, they're literally trying to kill people for fighting for their Constitutional rights.

But hey, you keep doing you. Keep defending these lying justices, keep being obtuse as all get out, and for God sakes don't let anyone like me sneak a fact across the table without countering it with some BS "see both sides do it" rhetoric.

Calm down, Francis. Abortions are still legal. States are in charge. You can move to Chicago if that makes you feel better. Abortion was never a constitutional right, and now the States can make it a right, by law. No problemo Francisco.

[canpakes]

Another has children via IVF, that is more at risk, the egg has been fertilized and we can’t have that.

After the successful implantation, were they left with any spare fertilized eggs that were not implanted? What did they do with them?

[Dr. Shades]

RvW Overturned - Abortions Now Illegal

I thought it was now up to the individual states to determine legal vs. illegal. In other words, abortion is still legal in every state that wishes it to remain so. Are abortions now illegal across the board?

As if we needed additional proof that the GOP and their voters are damned assholes, Roe v Wade has now been overturned.

I thought it was overturned by the Supreme Court, not the GOP and their voters.

[Kukulkan]

I can tell already you're one of those useful idiots who can't comprehend well. This is the second time you've intentionally misrepresented what I've said, all in the name of.... what, exactly? You're literally equating both sides as if throwing a brick into a window, which, for all you know, was done by some pro-lifer, is on par with trying to mow down a crowd of people in a truck. The Supreme Court ruling just happened and so far most of the violence is coming from "pro-life" counter-protesters, very much as was the case during the BLM protests.

Did we watch the same video? The car was rolling at MAX 10mph while people were running TO the car. Maybe I am just crazy but if you are in a road and running towards a moving vehicle and banging on it and throwing stuff at it, you are asking to have your foot ran over. Yes, the most serious injury from this event resulted in a ran over ankle. Your emotionally charged description of this truck "mowing" down a crowd of protesters is so far from reality it is actually laughable.

You have no evidence to support that the majority of violence is on the side of "pro-life" protesters. It is just a biased observation on your behalf. I can go Twitter and find a plethora of videos showing pro-choice protesters perpetuating violence. Despite this, I don't jump to conclusions and castigate the whole movement because of their actions.

I'm pointing out that the 5 idiots on the Supreme Court who decided they would, in the name of their idiotic religious "principles," oppress millions of Americans on an issue in which 70% of the Country disagrees with them on is naturally going to result in all kinds of violence. Yes, from both sides, and justifiably so from women who now understand that their own government treats them like public property.

I seem to have missed the part where the justices referenced religious principles as reasoning for their legal arguments. Do you mind pointing me to those parts since you seem to have such a good grip on what they said. Those justices provided arguments that have been circulating ever since Roe existed. Arguments that RUTH BADER GINSBURG herself agreed with! Last I checked she wasn't a religious nutcase. You seem to think that the only reason to oppose Roe is religious reasons. This is so far from reality it is disturbing you keep pushing that point.

Which begs the question, just how much oppression should be tolerated before violence is justified? I don't have the answer to that question and because I'm not a woman I cannot even begin to understand the emotions that are running through the 52% of our country who are. I do know that if the government told me that I would be forced to undergo an invasive surgical procedure because I had sex, I would likely be going full Leonidas on any law enforcement who tried to enforce that on me.

My question is then, by going down this road of using violence as a way to combat political defeat, what stops the other side wielding the same weapon you desire? Your logic dictates that January 6 was justified. From their perspective, they TRULY felt they were being oppressed. That the democratic system had failed them, just as maybe pro-choice people feel today, and that they needed to act with violence in order to achieve their means. I hate support of violence in politics because it becomes so easily used and justified by the other side. Where does that lead? The death of the country. Despite my departure from religion in general we truly must embrace the ideal of turning the other cheek. I am not saying violence is NEVER warranted. But violence here will only serve to give the other side more reason to act even more radically.

But what in the hell is the justification of driving a truck into a crowd of peaceful protesters? It isn't enough that these religious morons got their way with Supreme Court and are able to now enforce their religious views on the rest of the country. No, they're literally trying to kill people for fighting for their Constitutional rights.

From the article you shared the individual in the truck was attempting to get through because the protesters had blocked traffic. Could the driver had sat there for however much longer till they cleared out and went about his/her day? Absolutely. Could the protesters have just gotten out of the way instead of attempting to stop a multi thousand pound piece of moving metal? Absolutely. The desire of the protesters to disallow a car seeking to drive down a ROAD is just as egregious as the individual who can't sit for 30 minutes while people protest. Both behaviors are unhinged.

But hey, you keep doing you. Keep defending these lying justices, keep being obtuse as all get out, and for God sakes don't let anyone like me sneak a fact across the table without countering it with some BS "see both sides do it" rhetoric.

So when DHS releases a memo warning that there is most likely going to be violence perpetrated by BOTH sides, we should just ignore that? It's just propaganda?