Justice Thomas makes it clear decisions support our rights are next

[BergenGuy]

12 hours ago, NEDenver said:

I maintain that Lawrence will go first.

I believe that you're right.  With the overturning of Roe, Lawrence is definitely at risk because it is also built on the right to privacy.  Obergefell references equal protection, which makes it closer to Loving.

[BergenGuy]

15 hours ago, ErosWired said:

But I predict that even should that occur, it will not endure. It cannot, because there is a generation of people coming up who have been raised in the context of a society in which these rights have been normalized.

With the political system that Republicans have built, they only need a determined minority to hang onto power.  And, with their increasing histrionics about the schools, they're determined that the upcoming generations not be exposed to a diverse society. 

[BergenGuy]

On 7/15/2022 at 12:17 PM, TotalTop said:

Women also die from supposedly "safe and legal" abortions all the time

Not "all the time".  The CDC estimates that the death rate from abortions between 2013 and 2018 was 0.41 per 100,000 abortions.  Compare this to the risk from pregnancy, where the maternal death rate was 23.8 per 1000,000 live births in 2020.  It is far riskier to be pregnant than to obtain an abortion.

[think before following links] https://www.colorado.edu/today/2021/09/08/study-banning-abortion-would-boost-maternal-mortality-double-digits

 

[hntnhole]

4 hours ago, BareLover666 said:

could this not be a time to critically review the US founding documents and perhaps even redraft them?

First, thanks so much for the incisive post.  I know BootmanLA will say what he has to say in a more nuanced and refined way than I can, but, to reply to the above:

YES.  The system of amending the Constitution has become so cumbersome, so unwieldy that it does take an inordinate amount of time to refine.  In my opinion, you're spot-on.  We cannot forget that the creators of the US Constitution were mostly slave-holders, and thus their doling out of rights was obviously skewed regarding racial issues.  Reconstruction failed to achieve it's goals, mainly because Andrew Johnson was a southerner (added to the slate by Lincoln, in an effort to mollify the Southern States after their military defeat).  The point being, that refining the Constitution is only possible with a tremendous amount of effort, and with a split electorate, it can be extremely difficult.  Yes, it is long past time.  The 2nd Amendment, for instance, could well be first on the list.  And, once these weapons of tremendous death-dealing capabilities are turned against the hatemongers themselves, I would anticipate the glue on the soles of their shoes may evaporate relatively quickly.

Per the penultimate paragraph: I am more an optimist than a pessimist, but I am also a realist.  I'm not at all convinced that the stated goal can be accomplished peacefully.  I doubt that armies and be brought forth, but I recognize that the foundations of para-military groups have already been built, and are expanding.  Die Fahne Hoch may yet re-echo across this cultural divide, if in a different language. 

I don't think I have any shirts of that color, but next time a buddy comes over, I'll ask him to check the closets, just to make sure.

 

[ErosWired]

1 hour ago, BergenGuy said:

And, with their increasing histrionics about the schools, they're determined that the upcoming generations not be exposed to a diverse society. 

Too late. The Millennials and Gen-Z are already through school, and they’re going to be the ones who decide what their children learn about the world. These right-wingers are all about parental control of education - they’re going to get it. The parents aren’t all going to teach the party line.

1 hour ago, BergenGuy said:

With the political system that Republicans have built, they only need a determined minority to hang onto power. 

That assumes that the political system is impervious to a determined majority. The United States is not a nation of slaves. We’re not known for putting up with tyrants. If their system becomes too onerous, we will change it. Permanent politics is a contradiction in terms.

It might be noted that the sort of men that are attempting to cling to power and foist their will on an entire nation in this way once had considerably more unquestioned power, and had these backward laws already. Their power diminished. The laws got changed. It happened before. It will happen again. History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes.

[boy4you]

1 hour ago, BareLover666 said:

 

My sympathies and I don't envy you @boy4you.

But what do both of you think IS the way out of this?  For a real and fundamental change for the better, I don't think that a majority of 50 % + 1 would be enough. 

I moved and as soon as I could and to get my younger brother to NYC so he would be safe. To fix this problem? You can't fix stupid and these right wing christian national are the worst as they want to have us killed. I'm scared to go back home and visit my Parents and my brothers family.

[ErosWired]

23 minutes ago, hntnhole said:

I'm not at all convinced that the stated goal can be accomplished peacefully.

I too, fear that it may not be possible to achieve a state of political equilibrium without factional violence. It’s already begun at the Capitol, but as draconian laws outrage the public and raise the temperature of politics to a flashpoint, I fear the saturation of firearms will turn the population into a powderkeg. I fear that the inflection point that makes it impossible for these radicals to continue to sustain themselves politically will be the public recoil from a massacre.

My home is on the site of a Civil War battlefield that I spent 20 years helping to preserve. The historical resonance is chilling. Don’t ever think Americans won’t slaughter Americans. Don’t ever think it. I still find the spent bullets in my yard.

My great fear is that hate-driven nationalists like this are in fact like Klingons in nature, when Admiral Cromwell asked the Klingon L’Rell how to end the Klingon War:

Cromwell: How does this war end?

L’Rell: It doesn’t. Conquer us, or we will never relent.

Edited July 16, 2022 by ErosWired

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, boy4you said:

I moved and as soon as I could and to get my younger brother to NYC so he would be safe. To fix this problem? You can't fix stupid and these right wing christian national are the worst as they want to have us killed. I'm scared to go back home and visit my Parents and my brothers family.

 

6 minutes ago, ErosWired said:

The historical resonance is chilling. Don’t ever think Americans won’t slaughter Americans. Don’t ever think it. I still find the spent bullets in my yard.

As sometimes words fail me, to both of you:
💔❣️❤️

[NEDenver]

26 minutes ago, boy4you said:

I moved and as soon as I could and to get my younger brother to NYC so he would be safe. To fix this problem? You can't fix stupid and these right wing christian national are the worst as they want to have us killed. I'm scared to go back home and visit my Parents and my brothers family.

You are not required to do unsafe things.  If they want to visit, they can come to you.  If you're generous, you can help pay for plane/train tickets/gas.

[NEDenver]

1 hour ago, BergenGuy said:

I believe that you're right.  With the overturning of Roe, Lawrence is definitely at risk because it is also built on the right to privacy.  Obergefell references equal protection, which makes it closer to Loving.

They don't really care about what the basis of the previous decisions are.  All that matters is that they're ideologically opposed to the outcomes of the decision.  Lawrence is more important than Obergefell, because if they overturn Lawrence, the red states get to immediately lay felonies on 15% of the population, a population which overwhelmingly votes against Republicans.  In one step they get to punish their political "enemies", weaken the political opposition's coalition, and be cruel.  And then 3-6 months later, an expedited hearing from Texas about why they have to recognize marriages based on illegal acts.

Anyone in a red state needs to have an exit plan.  "Moving is expensive," is not a reason to not have an exit plan.  Felonies are expensive.  You lose access to most high-end jobs; you lose your vote; you'll probably have to register as a sex offender, further limiting where you can live.  I live in Colorado, and it's probably safe, but I've still got a friend in the PNW who I can bolt and live with while getting re-established.  I know what goes if all I can take is what fits in the car, and what gets packed and shipped if I need to fly out because I'm surrounded by New Mexico and a whole shitload of jackass states.  And I'm probably safe.  The red states aren't safe.

[boy4you]

11 minutes ago, NEDenver said:

You are not required to do unsafe things.  If they want to visit, they can come to you.  If you're generous, you can help pay for plane/train tickets/gas.

When my brother and I graduated from NYU, they came to NYC. We come from a large family, so around the holidays, it's hard for us. We video chat all the time, but I miss working on the farm. 

[BlindRawFucker1]

We are only a few states away from being able to call a new Constitutional Convention.

 

Considering that the legislatures would choose the delegates for that convention, we could see changes to the Constitution from which this country would see major religious gains and freedom losses.

 

As was said above, and which was demonstrated on January 6, 2021, there are those in this country who would/will and have do anything to achieve their vision of “THEIR” version of government and control over the population.  Particularly those who disagree with, or do not meet their standards.

 

As I said at the beginning of this topic, “Scary times ahead.”

[BergenGuy]

1 hour ago, ErosWired said:

That assumes that the political system is impervious to a determined majority.

If the Supreme Court rules next year that legislatures have sole authority over elections, being even an overwhelming majority won't matter.

[hntnhole]

1 hour ago, BlindRawFucker1 said:

major religious gains and freedom losses

Do you mean gains in repressions the religious foist on other irreligious people?  And thus, losses of freedom?

[BootmanLA]

On 7/15/2022 at 11:17 AM, TotalTop said:

There are many moderate pro life people who are for abortion in the case of rape, incest, or if it is medically necessary to save the woman but are against it when it is used instead of birth control or after the first trimester. 

That is true. However, the Supreme Court's decision leaves it up to states, and there are some states where abortion is now absolutely illegal under state law; and quite a few more where rape and incest exceptions do not exist. NOT, I would note, because a majority of people in those states have indicated such a preference, but because antiquated laws from the days when women had zero agency over their own bodies and it was considered legally impossible for a husband to rape his wife, from days when married women could not transact commercial business without the consent and approval of their husbands, and so forth. Or because a male-dominated GOP-led legislature rammed those laws through and there's no provision for undoing them unless the legislature repeals them.

 

On 7/15/2022 at 11:17 AM, TotalTop said:

It is actually less expensive and safer to use condoms with other types of birth control than it is to have an abortion or multiple abortions. Women also die from supposedly "safe and legal" abortions all the time.

The first is only true in part. A surgical abortion is certainly more expensive than, say, a box of condoms. But condoms plus another form of birth control can STILL fail. Also - again, thanks to the GOP - companies (which are on paper simply legal fictions, but thanks to the Supreme Court can have "religious convictions" somehow) can opt out of providing birth control coverage for their employees on company health plans - even if there's no workaround like requiring the plan to provide it at no cost. Here in Louisiana, I remember that for more than a decade, the legislature refused to authorize the state employee health plans to cover prescription birth control - even though the plans' own actuaries testified that the costs of unwanted pregnancy care far, far outweighed the nominal cost of the prescriptions.

As for the second part, that's just bullshit. Absolute bullshit. A study done covering 1998-2010 showed that for the 16.1 million abortions during that period, there were 108 women who died, for a rate of 0.7 per 100,000 abortions. 

By contrast, the mortality rate for live births was over 20 per 100,000. Carrying a pregnancy to term is FAR more hazardous to a woman's life than an early term abortion - by a factor of 30.