U.S.: Verified leak says Roe vs. Wade to be struck down, is marriage equality next?

[Jingthing]

Blockbuster U S. supreme court news.

 

https://www.advocate.com/law/2022/5/02/supreme-court-poised-overturn-roe-v-wade-other-rights-risk

 

 

Supreme Court Poised to Overturn Roe v. Wade; Other Rights at Risk

 

 

That's about abortion, but refer to the article where cases about sodomy laws and marriage equality are mentioned.

 

Both abortion rights and marriage equality enjoy solid popular majority support but the overwhelming right wing majority on the court has different ideas.

 

This is historic.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/03/politics/abortion-politics-analysis/index.html

 

Supreme Court abortion bombshell suggests a staggering change in American life

Edited May 3, 2022 by Jingthing

[jvs]

Yes this could happen,at the federal level.

States can still decide how to handle this.

More division in the country will be the result.

Not good at all.

Abortion should not be up to the law,it should only be a decision made by the people

involved.

Of the people,by the people,for the people.

That should say it all,in many instances.

 

 

[Boomer6969]

Jeezuss intercoursing Krist !! ????????????

Edited May 3, 2022 by Boomer6969

[MrJ2U]

Definitely going to make an already separated country more so.

 

 

[HaoleBoy]

The US becoming ruled by the minority is not good at all.

The majority of people are just left of center or just right of center, but extremism (left and right) is winning out.  Possibly due to their loud voices.

Very sad day in the US ... 

[BangkokReady]

1 hour ago, jvs said:

it should only be a decision made by the people involved.

So the father and the baby, they have a say?

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, BangkokReady said:

So the father and the baby, they have a say?

no.

[Hummin]

1 hour ago, MrJ2U said:

Definitely going to make an already separated country more so.

 

 

The first civil war was about?

Human rights!

The second civil war will be about? humans rights!

[gargamon]

Why are so few capable of seeing the forest instead of just seeing the trees?

 

This will totally change the expected outlook for the next election or two. The expected gains the Republicans were expecting may not materialize because of the groundswell of opposition to this ruling.

[Jingthing]

17 minutes ago, gargamon said:

Why are so few capable of seeing the forest instead of just seeing the trees?

 

This will totally change the expected outlook for the next election or two. The expected gains the Republicans were expecting may not materialize because of the groundswell of opposition to this ruling.

I doubt it.

Why?

Massive gerrymandering giving a massive advantage to the trump party.

Massive voter restrictions targeting minorities and cities.

Massive numbers of younger trump judges at all levels.

Mechanics in place for the party of trump to do a successful violent coup next time.

2020 was a test run.

The US is well on the way to being a theocratic one party rule white nationalist autocracy with play act elections like Russia.

The constitution has failed us.

Edited May 3, 2022 by Jingthing

[Sparktrader]

Doctors should decide abortions.

[ozimoron]

Mothers alone should decide abortions.

[Hummin]

15 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Mothers alone should decide abortions.

In a limited timeframe mothers, but after 12 weeks, it should be dr deciding. 

[ozimoron]

12 minutes ago, Hummin said:

In a limited timeframe mothers, but after 12 weeks, it should be dr deciding. 

Nope, up until the baby is born it is the mother's right to decide. Doctors aren't infallible and the mother's mental health is at issue as well. She may well only find out that the baby has a severe genetic defect or down's syndrome the day before birth. It's absolutely her right to terminate the birth at her own volition.

 

Forcing a woman to give birth against her own will is barbaric. On the religious right could imagine such a thing is justifiable.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/abortion-rights-march/

Edited May 3, 2022 by ozimoron

[ozimoron]

“If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office,” Collins said. “Obviously, we won’t know each Justice’s decision and reasoning until the Supreme Court officially announces its opinion in this case.”

 

https://www.politico.com/minutes/congress/05-3-2022/capitol-police-accident/

[Hummin]

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

Nope, up until the baby is born it is the mother's right to decide. Doctors aren't infallible and the mother's mental health is at issue as well. She may well only find out that the baby has a severe genetic defect or down's syndrome the day before birth. It's absolutely her right to terminate the birth at her own volition.

 

Forcing a woman to give birth against her own will is barbaric. On the religious right could imagine such a thing is justifiable.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/abortion-rights-march/

So, the day before now? Are you somehow intoxicated when you wrote that, or you really mean that? 

 

I let the main expertise decide that and most of them agree on 12 weeks to 18, and in special cases it can and should be performed later due to mother's health. 

 

So, I leave it up to experts, not people's opinion, neither politicians.

Edited May 3, 2022 by Hummin

[ozimoron]

23 minutes ago, Hummin said:

So, the day before now? Are you somehow intoxicated when you wrote that, or you really mean that? 

 

I let the main expertise decide that and most of them agree on 12 weeks to 18, and in special cases it can and should be performed later due to mother's health. 

 

So, I leave it up to experts, not people's opinion, neither politicians.

That is my opinion, yes. In Australia, the restriction is almost 23 weeks and even after that 2 doctors can determine that it is "medically appropriate" and allow the abortion.

 

https://www.mariestopes.org.au/your-choices/abortion-laws-australia/

Edited May 3, 2022 by ozimoron

[Jingthing]

Not the place to debate abortion minutia.

 

The point here as this a GAY topic is that Roe vs. Wade had much longer established legal precedent than marriage equality and disallowing sodomy laws. The very same extremist "Christian" right ringers who have succeeded with Roe vs. Wade also want to trash LGBT rights. Their agenda includes reversing marriage equality and even criminalizing homosexuality.

Edited May 3, 2022 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

To wit

____

TheTaskForce

@TheTaskForce

·

14h

There is more to come: Alito's draft opinion criticizes Lawrence v. Texas and Obergefell v. Hodges saying that these decisions protect phony rights, not "deeply rooted in history." Roe is the foundational underpinning of the bodily autonomy rights we have fought for #RoeVWade

[Captain Monday]

Not just marriage equality the GOP  Red State's legislators will go after even birth control then interracial marriage. MAGA means complete return to 1950s social norms and ol' Dixie laws. 

 

 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/03/republican-sen-mike-braun-says-supreme-court-should-not-have-struck-down-state-laws-banning-interracial-marriage-then-backtracks-unconvincingly.html

 

Edited May 3, 2022 by Captain Monday

[Jingthing]

5 minutes ago, Captain Monday said:

Not just marriage equality the GOP state legislators will go after even birth control then interracial marriage. MAGA means complete return to 1950s social norms and ol' Dixie laws. 

 

Yes, exactly, RADICAL right wing extremist minority rule for perhaps generations.

It's one thing  for the supreme court to be somewhat behind the people, but this is ridiculous.

Because of what the trump party did -- STEALING TWO SCOTUS PICKS -- the credibility of the court is now totally in the trash. Without trust and respect for vital institutions particularly the Supreme Court, democracy is barely on life support.

Credibility was already thin on the ground since Bush vs. Gore. 

 

Supreme Court: Roe outcome could undermine gay marriage, contraception (usatoday.com)

Quote

 

Abortion draft opinion fallout: Could rights to same-sex marriage, contraception be next?

The legal principles that the Supreme Court said in 1973 are the basis for the right to abortion are the same ones it relied on to recognize other rights not explicitly noted in the Constitution.

 

 

Edited May 3, 2022 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

In case anyone thinks this leak is a big hoax, Chief Justice Roberts has confirmed its authenticity. 

[Captain Monday]

I got off the plane in BKK on election day 2016 to learn from a TV monitor that Trump had pulled off his shocking upset. This vulgar man who has probably paid for many abortions had been initially reviled by mainstream GOP and evangelicals. Ends up thanks Senate obstruction with 3 hand-groomed extreme right-wing judicial activist SCOTUS selections.

 

They have been planning this for decades and will run with it.  The US is doomed !

"Earlier this year, the New York Times’ Maureen Dowd asked Trump whether he’d ever been “involved with anyone who had an abortion.” “Such an interesting question,” he replied. “So what’s your next question?”

 

https://slate.com/human-interest/2016/11/do-you-have-information-about-abortions-trump-may-have-paid-for-let-us-know.html

[Sambotte]

If this goes, it may end in civil war. Are those guys that stupid ?

USA is becoming the absolut shame of the world, with this barbarian crusade back in the past.

I can not even say of the civilised world. That's definitely not civilisation, but prehistoric obscurantism.

And it's not just about abortion, witch is a not arguable right of women. Same with sex. What's next ? Put in prison adulterians ? gays ? No condom sex (in the name of health) ?...

Total shame. 

[Jingthing]

13 hours ago, Sambotte said:

If this goes, it may end in civil war. Are those guys that stupid ?

USA is becoming the absolut shame of the world, with this barbarian crusade back in the past.

I can not even say of the civilised world. That's definitely not civilisation, but prehistoric obscurantism.

And it's not just about abortion, witch is a not arguable right of women. Same with sex. What's next ? Put in prison adulterians ? gays ? No condom sex (in the name of health) ?...

Total shame. 

Yes, these right wing extremists are on a roll and more than likely set to hold on to their power for generations. Is there a chance/hope to stop them? Sure but I wouldn't bet on that.

 

LGBTQ rights next? If abortion rights go, Supreme Court has new path (usatoday.com)

Quote

Are LGBTQ rights next? How Supreme Court abortion ruling could threaten gay marriage, contraception

I don't see how civil war in the U.S. works geographically though. There are large red areas even in California. Big cities like Atlanta are usually blue areas in red states. Even deeper very damaging internal divisions which almost didn't even seem possible, yes, most definitely. The USA has very powerful external enemies now. They wouldn't be stupid to just watch and wait for us to defeat ourselves. 

 

[ozimoron]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Yes, these right wing extremists are on a roll and more than likely set to hold on to their power for generations. Is there a chance/hope to stop them? Sure but I wouldn't bet on that.

 

LGBTQ rights next? If abortion rights go, Supreme Court has new path (usatoday.com)

I don't see how civil war in the U.S. works geographically though. There are large red areas even in California. Big cities like Atlanta are usually blue areas in red states. Even deeper very damaging internal divisions which almost didn't even seem possible, yes, most definitely. The USA has very powerful external enemies now. They wouldn't be stupid to just watch and wait for us to defeat ourselves. 

 

The danger now is that the whole world descends into fascism and the unthinkable finally happens - 1984.

[Jingthing]

With abortions, you either get the abortion or you don't.

If it's illegal it's more likely to be a dangerous back alley version.

 

What if you're ALREADY married and the Handmaid's Tale Supreme Court rules you're suddenly not married anymore?

Honey, the government made us divorce!

 

I heard a comment today. The extremist right wing wants to take us back to the 50's, but not 19 ones. Earlier.

 

 

[ozimoron]

The Lafayette Daily Advertiser reports that the Louisiana House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday voted to advance new legislation that would classify abortion as murder.

Louisiana State Rep. Danny McCormick said that the Republicans were advancing the legislation despite the fact that such a law would be deemed unconstitutional under the precedent set by Roe v. Wade.

The Rev. Brian Gunter of First Baptist Church in Livingston, Louisiana, who helped author the bill, said there could be no compromise in issues of abortion.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/louisiana-abortion-law/

[Jingthing]

President Biden pipes in:

First Thing: Joe Biden says ‘Maga crowd’ could target LGBTQ+ children next | US news | The Guardian

Quote

 

Joe Biden has warned of new attacks on civil rights as the supreme court prepares to strike down the right to abortion, telling reporters at the White House that LGBTQ+ children could be the next targets of a Trump-dominated Republican party he called “this Maga crowd” and “the most extreme political organisation … in recent American history”.

“What happens,” the president said, if “a state changes the law saying that children who are LGBTQ can’t be in classrooms with other children? Is that legit under the way the decision is written?” There are also fears contraception could come under fire next.

 

BTW, for those that don't know, Joe Biden led Obama on the gay marriage issue so LGBT Americans definitely have a friend in the white house -- FOR NOW. 

[ozimoron]

Just now, mikebike said:

Do you even understand how the U.S. government works? Lawmakers cannot "vote to overturn" a SCOTUS decision. They can introduce legislation to address the issue referred to in a SCOTUS decision, but there is NO mechanism for legislators to "overturn" decisions.

They can "reverse" the effect of the decision with legislation.