569
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] DirkMcCallahan@lemmy.world 194 points 1 month ago

Conservatives did this. Trump was the tool they used, but this would have happened under Jeb! or any other Republican president as well.

Don't let the rest of the party off the hook. They all own this.

[-] SpaceBishop@lemmy.zip 154 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Democrats did this by not codifying

This kind of gaslighting should not be tolerated. Everyone take a moment and block that troll.

That's like saying that the burgler that bypassed your locks by smashing a window is fully justified because you didn't put cages over the glass. Reproductive rights were protected by 50 years of precedent. Roe was established case law for decades and was overturned by a court that rejected how the judicial branch was working and has worked for centuries by ignoring precedent, accepting a case on weak standing to challenge it, and arguing that the established case law was wrong on shakey arguments.

Don't let right-wing nuts lie to you about objective reality.

[-] Ferrous@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 month ago

How can you simultaneously claim that abortion was protected only by precedent, yet the democrats did everything in their power to preserve it?

[-] SpaceBishop@lemmy.zip 76 points 1 month ago

Oh you're trying so hard to build a strawman! How adorable.

Roe was established case law. Reproductive rights were settled. Blaming Democrats when the actions of Republicans baselessly dismissed it is moronic.

[-] Ferrous@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago

Okay.... so why haven't dems baselessy reinstated it?

[-] baronvonj@lemmy.world 56 points 1 month ago

You may wish to observe that the Republicans have a majority in the House of Representatives, meaning the Democratic Caucus lacks the votes to reinstate it.

[-] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 47 points 1 month ago

And, in states with Democratic majorities, they are codifying it at the state level. Sucks for the rest of us, though. I'm moving out of one of them for many reasons, but one important one is for my children.

[-] kofe@lemmy.world 23 points 1 month ago

Lots of red states are pushing for a vote on it and passing, too. It's wild seeing "vote no on amendment 3" signs here in Missouri as if it's not just advertising for the majority of us to show up and shut these chucklefucks up. I'm hoping that's how it'll go anyway 😓

[-] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

Crossing my fingers for you! I'm hoping that Harris and certain single issue referenda (like marijuana) will bring people to the polls and while they're there, they'll vote for women's rights.

[-] kofe@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Same! There's some interesting measures on our ballot that I'm making videos on to raise awareness for like rank choice voting. If you know anyone from Missouri have them check out my YouTube or TikTok! Links are in my profile:)

[-] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

That's amazing! I will save this comment so that I can trace it back. I wish you (and the collective us) much success!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] rsuri@lemmy.world 23 points 1 month ago

Logically, the answer would have to be that Democrats lack the power to preserve it. Which happens to be true because:

  1. Ordinary legislation would not be sufficient to overturn state laws regarding abortion due to the 10th Amendment, and even if it was the 2/3 Republican court would overturn it anyway.
  2. A constitutional amendment would require a 2/3 majority that Democrats will not have in this lifetime.
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

That’s like saying that the burgler that bypassed your locks by smashing a window is fully justified because you didn’t put cages over the glass.

There is no lock. There is no broken window. There is no burglar, because this person was invited inside the house. The Democratic Party has been rife with "Pro-Life" candidates for decades. The Dems on the judiciary committee going back 40 years have rubber stamped Pro-Life candidates in the Judiciary Committee.

Dems will put the GOP in their fucking cabinet. The GOP isn't breaking in, its being invited in.

Don’t let right-wing nuts lie to you about objective reality.

If you wait on Federal Dems to save you, you're going to be left extremely disappointed.

[-] SpaceBishop@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 month ago

Cool story, bro (or sis, or comrade, or whatever, idk you). Was it the Democrats 40 years ago that discarded ages-old decorum, stared down stare decicis, and said "nah, that ain't for me," to then threw out established case law, casting doubt on the legitimacy of 1/3 of the co-equal branches of government? Oh, no? It wasn't? It was a group of far-right so-called "Christians" put on the SCOTUS by Republicans?

Yeah, that's certainly how I remember it happening, and, you know, objectively true, so thanks anyway.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] negativenull@lemmy.world 125 points 1 month ago
[-] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 46 points 1 month ago

We can help make that happen

Canvass, Phone bank, Textbank, etc. for Texas Democrats:

https://www.mobilize.us/texasdemocrats/

Write letters to likely dem voters in Texas to make sure they turnout!

https://votefwd.org/campaigns

[-] Myxomatosis@lemmy.world 73 points 1 month ago

I’m a nurse and there is no amount of money you could possibly pay me to work in Texas again. That entire state is hostile towards healthcare workers.

[-] just_another_person@lemmy.world 38 points 1 month ago

...and women, and LGBTQ folks, and logic, and laws...

[-] _bcron_@lemmy.world 60 points 1 month ago

Amber Thurmond should still be alive. And there are a lot of people who should still be alive, and I certainly wish that she was. - JD Vance at the debate

We've got to do so much better of a job at earning the American People's trust back on this issue where they frankly just don't trust us. - Also JD Vance at the debate

Not hard to connect these dots JD

[-] Kalkaline@leminal.space 38 points 1 month ago

Today is the last day to register to vote in the Nov 2024 election in Texas. Vote.gov

[-] banshee@lemmy.world 36 points 1 month ago

I'd like to take this opportunity to blame Citizens United and the lack of regulation on the advertising industry.

Social media companies seek greater engagement to increase their main source of revenue: advertising. Extremist opinions on topics like abortion receive greater engagement, so algorithms optimize accordingly.

[-] JPAKx4 28 points 1 month ago

I think a lot of people forget the automatic abortion bans specifically set up for the overturning of Roe v Wade. Republicans have wanted this for over 50 years. It's like pointing a remote control rocket launcher at your neighbor's house and then lobbying to get rocket launcher related domestic terrorisms legalized. Okay, maybe a bit extreme, but still your pregnant neighbor dies with an unborn child in either case, so...

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] DancingBear@midwest.social 21 points 1 month ago

We need to post birth abort some of these Supreme Court justices

[-] KinglyWeevil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 month ago

Won't someone rid us of these meddlesome justices?

[-] anticolonialist@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

Democrats did this by refusing to codify decades ago.

[-] almar_quigley@lemmy.world 47 points 1 month ago

I agree both major parties had a hand in this directly or indirectly. But only one has any chance of changing this for the better.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] BajaTacos@lemm.ee 41 points 1 month ago

As if these zealots wouldn't have ruled it unconstitutional or slowly weakend it with a series of cases anyway. See recent decisions gutting Voting Rights Act, weakening the Clean Water Act, Campaign Reform Act of 2002, Dodd-Frank and other federal laws.

[-] crusa187@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 month ago

Look, republicans suck ass, it’s true. But if Dems had codified Roe into law either time they had the supermajority (two chances in the last 20 years), then the corrupt SC wouldn’t have been able to do jack shit. If dems had any integrity, they would shoulder a significant amount of the blame for this issue, because they had their chance and deemed it “not a priority.”

[-] BajaTacos@lemm.ee 24 points 1 month ago

Sure, Dems absolutely should have codified it. However, a federal law protecting abortion rights as health care against the religious freedom of a regional Catholic hospital's beliefs not to save a mother's life with an abortion would be the test case and I'm pretty sure I know how 5 of the Justices would vote. This SCOTUS know they have unchecked power and are no longer afraid to wield it.

[-] crusa187@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 month ago

Would be interesting to see that play out fully. Here’s hoping we get the chance to do so in the next few years. Its so heartbreaking that so many women are suffering/dying because of these regressive policy positions.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

I'll never, ever forget the very first thing Democrats did when Republicans successfully overturned Roe.

They sent out a mass text asking for $15 donations because of what had just happened.

They had that shit ready to go immediately. Maybe if they had put a fraction of that preparation into having legislation ready to go, they wouldn't have wasted their opportunities to protect Americans' rights.

But at least they did for the only thing that matters. Fundraising.

[-] BajaTacos@lemm.ee 15 points 1 month ago

Well yeah, the decision was leaked early.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[-] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 37 points 1 month ago

"The guy who did the arson isn't to blame, it's the firefighters for getting there too late"

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 month ago

You really do make a habit of being on the bottom with your terrible takes don't you

[-] dcpDarkMatter@kbin.earth 21 points 1 month ago

Decades ago, the parties were much different than today. There were pro-choice Republicans and pro-life Democrats. Only one time in recent (2000+) memory did the Dems ever have the 60 votes necessary for codifying Roe. They used that two-ish week window to pass the ACA.

And that's not even touching on the differing public approval of abortion.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

The ACA which should be noted was desperately needed at the time unlike Roe which was known to be at risk but not nearly as immediate.

I’m not happy Roe is dead. The fact is though that without a constitutional amendment Roe was always on borrowed time with the constant attacks on it, and I don’t believe that there is any time after the issuance of the bill of rights that an amendment protecting abortion would work, and in the form of the bill of rights it would’ve had to be a robust privacy amendment that just happened to protect abortion.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 month ago

Up until the court decided to start ignoring centuries of legal tradition that is the bedrock of our legal system and threw out stare decisis the decision was actually more secure than a specific law.

Any law codifying it can be challenged on many grounds, especially the 10th amendment. It could easily have been struck down as unconstitutional because the federal government has no power to pass a law affecting this issue, since the constitution doesn't grant it.

Only a constitutional amendment would have been likely to survive a court willing to do what this one has done, and there is zero possibility the Democrats could have passed one.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2024
569 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19126 readers
2057 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS