Roe V. Wade overturned!

[Kimby]

Jun 25, 2022 8:57:02 GMT cheerypeabrain said:

There is a lot of coverage on the news here about the Supreme Court decision and everybody is very shocked. 6 people have made a decision about the the rights of millions. Is here any chance that there could be a public referendum? How would that go?

My heart goes out to the moderate, educated millions of Americans. We respect, admire and LOVE you and feel your horror at the way Trump and other crazies have far too much power.

This topic deserves its own thread, don’t you think?

63 percent of voting age Americans did NOT support overturning Roe v. Wade, yet Trump’s SCOTUS overturned it anyway.

AND are on the verge of using the same rationale for eliminating gay marriage, contraceptives, and other freedoms we have taken for granted.

Is America becoming Gilead? Will women be jailed for having a miscarriage?

[Kimby]

Full disclosure. I have never had an abortion.

I don’t know if I would have had one had I experienced an unintended pregnancy (from consensual sex), but I’m happy that I would have had the CHOICE.

For me, abortion is sort of like Alaska. I may never go there, but it’s good to know that it is there….

[kerouac2]

I actually know quite a few women who have had abortions, and it always seems to have been the right decision for them. Most of the incidents were mistakes of youth, sometimes concerning not-very-consensual sex but other times the pregnancy just happening at the wrong time of life.

I cannot imagine the right of abortion just being snatched away. At the same time, I know that some of the women involved in the debate (not the ones that I know/knew) at times abused the situation and just used it instead of contraception, which was a rather irresponsible thing to do.

It is clearly an extremely complex issue, as this post from the World Health Organisation makes clear. The solution should absolutely not be decided by ignorant old men who are not even doctors.

[bjd]

Jun 26, 2022 15:50:06 GMT kerouac2 said:

he solution should absolutely not be decided by ignorant old men who are not even doctors.

Well, one of those ignorant old men is a woman.

I don't understand how the Supreme Court can rule on contraception. Surely it has nothing to do with federal or state law? Only the FDA which approves medicines.

Meanwhile, the French parliament plans to write the right to abortion into the constitution.

[kerouac2]

Yes, I know that one of them is a woman, but she is an honorary man in this case. And it is not something of which to be proud.

[kerouac2]

Freudian slip?

U.S. Rep. Mary Miller immediately drew fierce backlash on social media and elsewhere at a Saturday night rally with former President Donald Trump when she credited him for the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade calling it a “victory for white life.”

“I want to thank you for the historic victory for white life in the Supreme Court yesterday,” Miller said, then raised her arms in an animated clap amid cheers from the crowd, which numbered in the thousands on a sweltering day in West Central Illinois.

But Miller’s campaign said Saturday night that the congresswoman misread prepared remarks at a rally that Trump held for her in the village of Mendon.

"You can clearly see she is reading off a piece of paper, she meant to say ‘right to life,'" Miller spokesman Isaiah Wartman said.

Miller, R-Illinois, later tweeted: “I will always defend the RIGHT TO LIFE!”

[cheerypeabrain]

The utter hypocracy is impossible to understand...especially when the judgement followed the reluctance to effectively reform the gun laws. Mad. I feel bad criticising American politics because we have nothing to brag about.

[bjd]

Not just hypocrisy but the outright lying during their Senate confirmation hearings, both Kavanagh and Gorsuch promising that they wouldn't touch Roe v Wade.

[whatagain]

My wife had an abortion or kind of. The foetus stopped fevrloping (we call it a clear egg) and had to be temoved (curetage).
No fun.

But one thing i don't get is the basic : for me abortion is a personal choice.

Onecday because 51 pc of xxx will decide we mustvbe vegan, it will be unlawful to eat meat ?
(Sorry for the analogy, but i mean, let the women decide when confronted...).
Why make laws ? Why decide for others ?

[Kimby]

Maybe it’s time for American women to exercise their 2nd Amendment right on men who restrict women’s reproductive rights!

(Posted this Friday on my Facebook page, hoping it wouldn’t draw the attention of the FB police. So far so good.)

[lugg]

It is really quite shocking. Help me understand what it means in practice - is it now impossible for a woman to get an abortion in any state for any reason ?

[kerouac2]

There is suddenly a big debate in France about putting abortion rights in the French constitution so that it cannot ever be changed.

I find this a bit ridiculous (as do a certain number of French politicians, even though they do not seem to be the majority).

1. This was made a law in France in 1975 and laws are not attacked by any court once they have been validated.
2. Actually putting it in the constitution is not a permanent protection since we are on our 5th constitution already with many people clamorning for a 6th constitution. Of course it should be mentioned that each constitution in France increases rights and protections and goes farther left and there is no plan of ever going backwards.
3. It is ridiculous to have a kneejerk reaction to American legal affairs when they do not concern us. This is my own point of view.

It should be pointed out that only the religious right in France ever complains about such matters, and everybody ignores them because they are a tiny minority. (Stamping out religion during the Revolution was clearly not a bad idea.)  Even our far right wing (Le Pen etc.) sees nothing wrong with abortion or LGBT matters. 

[lugg]

PS I also meant is there now a route of appeal ?

[bixaorellana]

Lugg, at this moment, abortions can be performed in some states. The reasoning behind overturning Roe vs. Wade comes from the "originalists" on the Supreme Court. They maintain that since abortion is not mentioned in the constitution, it is not a federal matter & each state should decide on the laws regulating it. This begs the question of other things -- air travel, for instance -- which are not mentioned in the constitution, but upon which the Supreme Court has pronounced.

Because of the psycho "conservative" -- read right-wing, White-wing, pretense-of-Christianity -- bullshit that has taken over the US, states are becoming more and more restrictive as regards abortion. Their "moral high ground" closing of family planning clinics means much more than lack of access to abortion. It means that low income women or women in more isolated areas are effectively cut off from medical checkups, from compassionate counseling, etc.

abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/text-supreme-court-ruling-overturning-roe-wade-85660719

www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-overturns-roe-v-wade-eliminates-constitutional-right-to-abortion-11656080124

edited to add re: route of appeal:

lugg, I think that an appeal can be made directly to the Supreme Court. What I suspect will happen will be a campaign of lawsuits in many states, in order that cases will travel up the ladder to reach the Supreme Court. I think (could be totally wrong) that was how Roe vs Wade got to the Supreme Court when it was ultimately decided the first time.

[kerouac2]

Lugg, about half of the states still will permit abortion. And a number of the big corporations have announced that they will finance travel and expenses for employees living in an anti-abortion state to go elsewhere to get an abortion.

And then we have all of the ultra poor black and latino women (and not just them) who don't know what to do and will have their unwanted babies.

[mickthecactus]

There was a time when America led the world.

It’s now going further and further backwards.

[lugg]

Thank you Bixa and K2 - I think I understand it better now.

So - is this correct ? Essentially those states that do not immediately introduce law against / or for abortion , policy will become determined in elections etc. And the likelihood of achieving a national consensus is pretty much nil ( and has long been maybe?)
And the implications for other policies re women reproductive health, LGBTQ etc and all parts of this vast area are threatened.

[whatagain]

Since or because of Trump US get more and more divided.
Black vs whites
Rep vs dem
Religious vs non religious
Abortion vs interdiction
Etc.

I heard the term 'balkanization' of the US...

[Kimby]

The US House of Representatives (currently controlled by Democrats) immediately passed a bill that would “codify” abortion across the whole nation. The Senate with its arcane rules that allow minority rule by allowing the minority to obstruct anything that doesn’t have 60 of 100 votes, did not follow suit. Until midterm elections anyway Democrats control the Senate by the barest of margins. It’s 50-50 but the VP (Democrat Kamala Harris) is the tie-breaking vote. Unfortunately, 2 very conservative Democrats often break with their party, so Dems would need to secure 10-12 Republican votes to pass anything through the Senate. I’m not sure if the House bill was for a “pre-viability” standard or something else.

At least 63% of American adults approve of abortion being legal but our “representatives” (or their corporate sponsors) are apparently more conservative than the people they purport to represent. Some people think all abortions should be legal; others think there should be limits. Many Republican voters think some abortions should be legal, but want it decided by the states, not the federal government.

People are demonstrating all over the country. Today’s young American women have FEWER rights than their mothers and grandmothers did!

It’s a travesty.

[bixaorellana]

More like the Facistization of the US, Whatagain.

Kimby, thanks for the explanation of Congress's bill. As far as getting it through the Senate ~ maybe the Democrats should wring their hands some more instead of getting rid of the ^&*@#$%! filibuster.

Jun 27, 2022 20:14:40 GMT lugg said:

So - is this correct ? Essentially those states that do not immediately introduce law against / or for abortion , policy will become determined in elections etc. And the likelihood of achieving a national consensus is pretty much nil ( and has long been maybe?)

Without the landmark precedent in place, access to abortion began to change quickly. First, 13 states with “trigger bans,” designed to take effect if Roe were struck down, will prohibit abortion within 30 days. At least eight states banned the procedure the day the ruling was released. Several others with antiabortion laws blocked by the courts are expected to act, with lawmakers moving to activate their dormant legislation. A handful of states also have pre-Roe abortion bans that could be reactivated, and others moved immediately to introduce new legislation. <-- click for full article

[bixaorellana]

And here is what is happening in one state with a "trigger ban" ~

Louisiana clinics to resume abortions after New Orleans judge temporarily blocks state ban

[lugg]

Thank you Bixa for giving me access to that article which I read earlier. Whats quite scary to see is the map which shows how vast swathes of the US that women will have to travel to get the care they require, out of reach for many and I felt chilled when I read that some laws ban women in some states from travelling for abortion - have I understood that correctly? )

Jun 28, 2022 6:48:34 GMT bixaorellana said:

Louisiana clinics to resume abortions after New Orleans judge temporarily blocks state ban

Heartening news .

Also meant to say - The Kansas referendum is going to very interesting.

[cheerypeabrain]

I'm glad to hear that common sense and humanity prevail

[bixaorellana]

Every single woman in the US (& any men who wish to join in) should go on general strike on July 4.

[biddy]

Abortion will still be available in California.

[lagatta]

www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/05/15/1098347992/a-landmark-study-tracks-the-lasting-effect-of-having-an-abortion-or-being-denied

(demographer Diana Greene Foster).

By the way, many "late-stage" abortions also involve a non-viable foetus. A DVM friend (also mother of two boys who are now at university) reminds us that pregnancy and delivery are the greatest natural health crisis for ANY female mammal, not just us human ones.

[kerouac2]

They will just have to build more facilities for handicapped children.

[lagatta]

Many die not long after "birth".

Of course I keep thinking of all the school kids slaughtered by the gun nut in Uvalde...

[bixaorellana]

Jul 6, 2022 13:21:33 GMT lagatta said:

By the way, many "late-stage" abortions also involve a non-viable foetus. A DVM friend (also mother of two boys who are now at university) reminds us that pregnancy and delivery are the greatest natural health crisis for ANY female mammal, not just us human ones.

From today's NYTimes:

I’m a High-Risk Obstetrician, and I’m Terrified for My Patients

[Kimby]

Surprisingly, abortion in red state Montana is still protected because we have a forward-looking state constitution, rewritten in 1972 (near the height of liberal ascendence in America) that specifically provides a privacy clause. Until the GOP legislature and Governor can scramble to pass new laws further restricting abortion. Gov is talking about calling a special session to do just this. (Our legislature meets every other year.)

Our state constitution also guarantees Montanans a "clean and healthy environment". It is the envy of many other states, and countries, so of course the current crop of Republican politicians are trying their hardest to get it overturned or re-re-written.