Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Roe was garbage. This is an opportunity.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Roe was garbage. This is an opportunity.

    https://reason.com/2022/05/10/there-...its-reasoning/

    There Is a Reason Why Roe v. Wade's Defenders Focus on Its Results Rather Than Its Logic

    The abortion precedent has faced withering criticism, including damning appraisals by pro-choice legal scholars, for half a century.

    But as Alito emphasizes, Roe has faced withering criticism, including damning appraisals by pro-choice legal scholars, for half a century. Roe's supporters tend to ignore that fact, instead emphasizing the practical impact of freeing states to set their own abortion policies. While Whitmer accuses Alito of motivated reasoning, that charge better fits Roe author Harry Blackmun and the decision's contemporary defenders.

    ...

    Prior to joining the Court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg criticized Roe's reasoning and its scope. Ginsburg, who argued that abortion bans amounted to unconstitutional sex discrimination, thought the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection would have provided a firmer foundation for the right announced in Roe. She also faulted the Court for deciding more than was required to resolve the case, which involved a Texas law that banned abortion except when it was deemed necessary to save the mother's life.

    "Doctrinal limbs too swiftly shaped, experience teaches, may prove unstable," Ginsburg, then an appeals court judge, said in a 1992 lecture. "Suppose the Court had stopped [after] rightly declaring unconstitutional the most extreme brand of law in the nation, and had not gone on, as the Court did in Roe, to fashion a regime blanketing the subject, a set of rules that displaced virtually every state law then in force. Would there have been the 20-year controversy we have witnessed, reflected most recently in the Supreme Court's splintered decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey? A less encompassing Roe, one that merely struck down the extreme Texas law and went no further on that day…might have served to reduce rather than to fuel controversy."

    ...

    "What is frightening about Roe is that this super-protected right is not inferable from the language of the Constitution, the framers' thinking respecting the specific problem in issue, any general value derivable from the provisions they included, or the nation's governmental structure," Yale law professor John Hart Ely wrote in a 1973 Yale Law Journal article. "At times the inferences the Court has drawn from the values the Constitution marks for special protection have been controversial, even shaky, but never before has its sense of an obligation to draw one been so obviously lacking." In short, Ely said, Roe "is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be."

    Harvard law professor Lawrence Tribe offered a similar assessment around the same time. "One of the most curious things about Roe is that, behind its own verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgment on which it rests is nowhere to be found," Tribe wrote in the Harvard Law Review.

    "As a matter of constitutional interpretation and judicial method, Roe borders on the indefensible," former Blackmun clerk Edward Lazarus wrote in 2002. "I say this as someone utterly committed to the right to choose, as someone who believes such a right has grounding elsewhere in the Constitution instead of where Roe placed it, and as someone who loved Roe's author like a grandfather." Lazarus argued that "a constitutional right to privacy broad enough to include abortion has no meaningful foundation in constitutional text, history, or precedent—at least, it does not if those sources are fairly described and reasonably faithfully followed."


    Roe was an illegitimate, anti-democratic means to establish abortion in the United States. Now it's up to the states to craft a more credible, more moderate way forward.

  • #2
    What's "moderate" about forcing 12 year old girls to have Daddy's child?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by W*GS View Post
      What's "moderate" about forcing 12 year old girls to have Daddy's child?
      Yep.

      Moreover, is there anything about the federal government neo-confederates like Beaver don't regard as "garbage?"

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by W*GS View Post
        What's "moderate" about forcing 12 year old girls to have Daddy's child?
        Well that's where if people can settle down and allow processes to work outside of mob rage, some of this stuff could get worked out.

        Instead, you support the world where "Momma needs a 3rd trimester cleanse because she's got a new boyfriend" is just peachy because a tiny fraction of a percent of abortions involve incest.

        You don't fight one brand of extremism by embracing another.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN View Post

          Yep.

          Moreover, is there anything about the federal government neo-confederates like Beaver don't regard as "garbage?"
          So RBG was a neo-confederate now? I can see you being a little bitter since her hanging on too long brought you Barrett. But still, a little over the top, no?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by BroncoBeavis View Post

            Well that's where if people can settle down and allow processes to work outside of mob rage, some of this stuff could get worked out.

            Instead, you support the world where "Momma needs a 3rd trimester cleanse because she's got a new boyfriend" is just peachy because a tiny fraction of a percent of abortions involve incest.

            You don't fight one brand of extremism by embracing another.
            Click image for larger version

Name:	EUcyY-RU0AADJiA.jpg
Views:	43
Size:	56.0 KB
ID:	90682
            .

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by BroncoBeavis View Post

              So RBG was a neo-confederate now? I can see you being a little bitter since her hanging on too long brought you Barrett. But still, a little over the top, no?
              LOL, what?

              Need a pretzel logic to English translator for this one. 😂

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN View Post

                Click image for larger version

Name:	EUcyY-RU0AADJiA.jpg
Views:	43
Size:	56.0 KB
ID:	90682
                .
                Sorry, Labron. Late elective abortions are much, much more common than any based on incest.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by BroncoBeavis View Post

                  Sorry, Labron. Late elective abortions are much, much more common than any based on incest.
                  False.

                  But, even this claim were true, your "you support the world where "Momma needs a 3rd trimester cleanse because she's got a new boyfriend" argument is a straw man large enough to be seen from space.

                  The truth about late-term abortions in the US: they're very rare

                  https://www.theguardian.com/news/dat...regnancy-stage

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN View Post

                    False.

                    But, even this claim were true, your "you support the world where "Momma needs a 3rd trimester cleanse because she's got a new boyfriend" argument is a straw man large enough to be seen from space.

                    The truth about late-term abortions in the US: they're very rare

                    https://www.theguardian.com/news/dat...regnancy-stage
                    Heh. That argument doesn't even discuss incest. So no points.

                    And also 5,500 deaths represents 'very rare'.

                    Thanks for that. You'll be hearing it again in the future.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by BroncoBeavis View Post

                      Heh. That argument doesn't even discuss incest. So no points.

                      And also 5,500 deaths represents 'very rare'.

                      Thanks for that. You'll be hearing it again in the future.
                      What does introducing incest as a variable do to support your "mama's got a new BF" straw man?

                      And 5,500 "deaths?"

                      And I'm sure you know the circumstances in all of them. 🙄

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN View Post

                        What does introducing incest as a variable do to support your "mama's got a new BF" straw man?

                        And 5,500 "deaths?"

                        And I'm sure you know the circumstances in all of them. 🙄
                        More fail upon fail...

                        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6457018/

                        However, while the occasional politician or news reporter will still indicate that late-term abortions are most often performed in the case of “severe fetal anomalies” or to “save the woman’s life,” the trajectory of the peer-reviewed research literature has been obvious for decades: most late-term abortions are elective, done on healthy women with healthy fetuses, and for the same reasons given by women experiencing first trimester abortions
                        Get your nose out of the propaganda, Labron, and think for yourself.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
                          Well that's where if people can settle down and allow processes to work outside of mob rage, some of this stuff could get worked out.

                          Instead, you support the world where "Momma needs a 3rd trimester cleanse because she's got a new boyfriend" is just peachy because a tiny fraction of a percent of abortions involve incest.

                          You don't fight one brand of extremism by embracing another.
                          You don't make 12 year old girls give birth to Daddy's new child. Nor do you make rapists proud Poppas.

                          Where's the woman in all of Alito's ramblings?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Ruth Ginsberg even said the case was flawed. Yet they ignore that.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by W*GS View Post

                              You don't make 12 year old girls give birth to Daddy's new child. Nor do you make rapists proud Poppas.

                              Where's the woman in all of Alito's ramblings?
                              Another point in how this whole cult vs cult devolution has made all of these issues more difficult than they would have been had the Roe court restrained itself...

                              https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...ptions/629747/

                              The GOP’s Strange Turn Against Rape Exceptions

                              Not so long ago, such exceptions were regularly included in proposed abortion bans, in part because they’re popular: For decades, about 75 percent of Americans have consistently told pollsters that abortion should be legal in cases of rape and incest. But many of the measures now set to take effect do away with such exceptions.

                              President Ronald Reagan detested abortion but endorsed exceptions for rape in the 1980s; George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, and Donald Trump all also indicated their support for the measures. The National Right to Life Committee supported legislation that included exceptions in the 1990s. Even the Hyde Amendment, the federal law that prohibits federal funds from being used to pay for abortions, has long contained these exceptions.

                              In the past few years, though, the anti-abortion movement has moved in a different direction.

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                Originally posted by BroncoBeavis View Post

                                Another point in how this whole cult vs cult devolution has made all of these issues more difficult than they would have been had the Roe court restrained itself...

                                https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...ptions/629747/

                                The GOP’s Strange Turn Against Rape Exceptions
                                What "strange turn"? The GOP is following the natural progression of regressivism.

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  Originally posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
                                  Roe was an illegitimate, anti-democratic means to establish abortion in the United States. Now it's up to the states to craft a more credible, more moderate way forward.

                                  If I had even a little bit of confidence this could happen I’d tend to agree. But you know it won’t.

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    Originally posted by Mozzafiato View Post


                                    If I had even a little bit of confidence this could happen I’d tend to agree. But you know it won’t.
                                    I suspect not. But that's part of a larger problem that's racing us to the brink. Not just on abortion.

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      Always bringing up incest and rape when it’s less than 2% is clearly just throwing up impediments for political reasons.

                                      The bottom line is this is to be decided by the people at the state level.

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        Originally posted by BroncoBeavis View Post

                                        Well that's where if people can settle down and allow processes to work outside of mob rage, some of this stuff could get worked out.

                                        Instead, you support the world where "Momma needs a 3rd trimester cleanse because she's got a new boyfriend" is just peachy because a tiny fraction of a percent of abortions involve incest.

                                        You don't fight one brand of extremism by embracing another.
                                        More abortions happen due to incest than women simply deciding in the 3rd trimester that they don't want to be pregnant anymore. You've posted that "momma needs a 3rd trimester cleanse because she's got a new boyfriend" canard too many times for it to remain unchallenged. The vast, vast majority of 3rd trimester abortions happen because women receive the devastating news at a late-term ultrasound -- that there is something horribly wrong with the pregnancy. You do women in general a huge disservice via the claim that they just change partners and capriciously decide to abort a perfectly-healthy pregnancy for no valid health reason. This claim is actually a textbook example of hyperbole that results in "mob rage".

                                        Comment


                                        • #21
                                          Originally posted by Blueflame View Post

                                          More abortions happen due to incest than women simply deciding in the 3rd trimester that they don't want to be pregnant anymore.
                                          Again... False..

                                          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6457018/

                                          However, while the occasional politician or news reporter will still indicate that late-term abortions are most often performed in the case of “severe fetal anomalies” or to “save the woman’s life,” the trajectory of the peer-reviewed research literature has been obvious for decades: most late-term abortions are elective, done on healthy women with healthy fetuses, and for the same reasons given by women experiencing first trimester abortions

                                          Comment


                                          • #22
                                            /Click image for larger version

Name:	6fe1qx0hcqy81.jpg
Views:	41
Size:	71.2 KB
ID:	90777

                                            Comment


                                            • #23
                                              Originally posted by BroncoBeavis View Post

                                              Again... False..
                                              Ok, but, at the same time…

                                              The majority of abortions in 2019 took place early in gestation: 92.7% of abortions were performed at ≤13 weeks’ gestation; a smaller number of abortions (6.2%) were performed at 14–20 weeks’ gestation, and even fewer (<1.0%) were performed at ≥21 weeks’ gestation.
                                              https://www.cdc.gov/reproductiveheal...s/abortion.htm

                                              Comment


                                              • #24
                                                Originally posted by Mozzafiato View Post


                                                If I had even a little bit of confidence this could happen I’d tend to agree. But you know it won’t.
                                                I disagree, if Roe goes down the abortion rights advocates should shift their focus to getting the issue on the ballot. The majority even down here in Texas would leave the choice up to the woman.

                                                Comment


                                                • #25
                                                  Originally posted by Mozzafiato View Post
                                                  Sadly, there was a day where there could've been a lot of compromise around that largest 92% group that might have helped defuse where we are.

                                                  Now the fringes controlling either party are so entrenched, you can't even speak that language anymore.

                                                  Comment

                                                  Working...
                                                  X