ozimoron

I don't think Homo Sapiens is intellectually capable in sufficient numbers of preserving itself.

Tech companies including Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, Apple and Google will cover or reimburse employees for travel expenses related to medical procedures, including abortions. The Alphabet Workers Union, which represents some workers at Google's parent company, Alphabet, called on the company Friday to end financial support for conservative politicians who are "anti-reproductive justice & anti-worker." The leaders of Amazon Labor Union, the first union at an Amazon warehouse in the U.S., echoed the sentiment. https://nordot.app/913260698073759744?c=592622757532812385

Of course not, why are you even asking that? It's not a person until it's born.

Correct, I was just repeating his terminology, however incorrect that might be. The right like to use loaded and emotive language instead of rational argument.

He's a Prime Minister, not a President. The parliament does whatever it wants.

Yes it does. It's HER baby. Not some else's baby, Nobody.

It's her decision not some religious nut case. 50 years and nine justices established that.

Most women do but they should still have the choice when all else fails.

you're opposed even in cases of rape and incest?

no, if the shoe was on the other foot would you want to spend all your life supporting a child by a mother who wanted nothing to do with you or you her?

It's not states rights issue. The supreme court cited the constitution in its ruling. It is a human rights issue. They know full well the states dominated by the religious right will take full advantage of this decision.

It likely made to difference, the original decision did not limit abortion to rape. Furthermore, if she lied then the court has had ample opportunity to reverse the decision and did not until now. In doing so it tossed stare decisis out the window. The US is now a laughing stock again, as it was during the trump era.

For 50 years the Supreme court hasn't seen it that way. Now the US has the most extreme radical activist court in modern history.

And blatantly SBC in its ideology.

It would never happen because they wouldn't invoke religion in every decision they make. It's the church that's making these decisions, not the individuals and the public will. This ruling is widely unpopular in the US and always has been. It's no coincidence that the US is the most religious developed nation on Earth and it's mostly concentrated in the south and that the predominant religion there has a history of racism.

A survey of Latino voters in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Texas released by the group just before the Supreme Court handed down its rulings found 64 percent of Latinos are “more motivated to vote” in the upcoming November midterm elections as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision on Roe, with 52 percent saying they are “much more motivated.” The poll found 68 percent of Latinos believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases, with just 10 percent saying they think abortion should be banned. Sixty five percent of respondents said they would support a law to protect abortion access nationally. https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/equality/3536285-latino-voters-in-battleground-states-back-gun-reform-abortion-access-poll-says/

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Attorney General Merrick Garland released a statement saying that states cannot ban mifepristone, a medication that induces an abortion, Axios reports. "In particular, the FDA has approved the use of the medication Mifepristone. States may not ban Mifepristone based on disagreement with the FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy," he continued. https://www.rawstory.com/2657559458/

Paypal won't let me use the service outside my own country.

Should women who get abortions in defiance of the law be punished? Should state laws outlawing abortion carry a punishment as all laws do?

President Biden: "This is not over".

I commend your first point. I think the lesser of two evils would have been to respect stare decisis and leave the previous 50 year old decision intact. At least two of those justices stated under oath that would be their inclination.

Every one of those women should have the choice, whether they choose to exercise that right is irrelevant to the right to make that choice. Is that not true? You agreed previously that they should have that right.

Even if it's ONE pregnancy due to rape or incest, surely the mother should be able to have an abortion?

The national rape-related pregnancy rate is 5.0% per rape among victims of reproductive age (aged 12 to 45); among adult women an estimated 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year. Among 34 cases of rape-related pregnancy, the majority occurred among adolescents and resulted from assault by a known, often related perpetrator https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8765248/ Would you agree that that's 32,000 abortions a year which should be allowed. This figure doesn't include incest. Almost 3 million women in the U.S. experienced RRP during their lifetime. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/understanding-RRP-inUS.html

It's not relevant how many there are right? I would disagree that rape induced pregnancies are that few but ALL of them should have the right to an abortion.