USA Roe, the evangelicals and the war on choice

[O Grobbecker]

Does Candace Owens do all of your thinking for you?

Not at all but I'm happy to bow to her greater familiarity with US issues.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Roe v Wade is a determination of the Supreme Court of the United States, the equivalent of our High Court, it's a Court of Appeal,. It was not overturned by Christian Churches. Why not google and read the circumstances whence it came to be over ruled ?

More bullshit.

It’s stacked with evangelicals. Once RBG died Trump almost fell over himself swinging it to the Christian right with the appointment of that Christian fundamentalist shitbag Amy Coney Barrett. She is a known part of the Christian right wing.

Amy Coney Barrett - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

And she was the card that allowed you shitcampaigners to chop up RvW.

 

[O Grobbecker]

Pathetic waste of words.

You surely are not that thick? Deflecting 101 is about the best one could say.

You cannot come up with this dribble if you had followed any amount of how these 'Justices' were appointed, when, & what they said/lied about to the US Senate during their confirmation hearings.

At least argue with some honesty.

It's drivel. It isn't for me to guess what you are talking about. If you have specific allegations against particular US Justices, it's up to you to name them and justify your allegations. Some of whom lied in their nomination hearings about their views on the decision. Some of whom lied in their majority opinion, about their justifications for the overturn. One of whom was purely an ideological placement, with little experience as an actual judge. One of whom was illegally placed on the court after the right of a previous president was ignored by conservative Christian senators, just doesn't cut it. Be specific, how do you expect to get a reasonable answer to that ?

 

[O Grobbecker]

More bullshit.

It’s stacked with evangelicals. Once RBG died Trump almost fell over himself swinging it to the Christian right with the appointment of that Christian fundamentalist shitbag Amy Coney Barrett. She is a known part of the Christian right wing.

Amy Coney Barrett - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

And she was the card that allowed you shitcampaigners to chop up RvW.

What's your source of "stacked with evangelicals" ? That looks like something you've plucked from some political piece. "christian Shitbag Amy Cooney Barrett" Leaving aside your disgusting language, have you even read your own reference ? It describes her as what we in Australia call a Black Letter Law Judge, i e a judge who applies the law rather than personal views, just the opposite of what you are trying to suggest. Do you know something that bios and even wikipedia don't ?

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Another grub going onto ignore.

 

[Bloods86]

You claim to be remarkably well (?) informed about the circumstances of appointments to the US Supreme Court. I don't know where you get your categorising of the various Justices according to their placement of the Zero to Conservative Christian continuum along with your obscure account of appointments then backflips. Most people look at which Government appointed them. Is your obscure account something you've read, in which case, credit or footnote it, or is it something you've just made up ? Whatever, it's the decision of the Supreme Court of America that pushes the issue back to the 50 States, it doesn't even deny abortion rights.

The decision literally denied an abortion right which had previously existed. It doesn't matter what the states did with the decision.

It's fairly common knowledge (obscure, lol) among those who pay attention to US Politics, SCOTUS and the debate over Roe vs Wade that:

- the 6 Republican appointed SCOTUS judges are conservative Christians, they profess to be themselves

- the 3 most recent Republican appointed SCOTUS judges, at least, were selected from lists given by the conservative Christian Heritage Foundation to Trump

- Republican presidential and senatorial candidates, including Trump, had campaigned on the promise of putting conservative Christian judges on courts, including the Supreme Court, to overturn Roe vs Wade, regardless of other qualifications

- Obama was denied his right in 2016 to have nomination hearings and a vote on his nominee (Garland) because Republicans claimed since it was due to the death of a judge (Scalia) and it was less than a year out from a presidential election, they should wait for the next administration

- Trump then filled that stolen position with Gorsuch

- When another judge died (RBG), with a much shorter timeframe until the next presidential election (2020), Trump and Republicans abandoned the principle they'd set earlier, nominating and placing Barrett on the court, despite having been a judge (at any level) for 3 years

- Kavanaugh (Trump - 2018) said he would follow precedent during his nomination (turned out to be a lie), and Barrett, Gorsuch hedged around direct questions to give the impression that they didn't desire to overturn Roe vs Wade

- the majority opinion made several false claims including that abortion was not part of American history or tradition, which would have been untrue by itself, though founding father Benjamin Franklin himself included instructions to induce abortions in a book published in the 1700s

I'd argue that the makeup of the current SCOTUS is designed to be conservatively Christian, only challenged by the nature of it being intensely pro corporate interests, over individual citizens.

Don't come boldly into a discussion, making grand claims, and then say we're making stuff up, when we're just better informed.

 

[O Grobbecker]

Another grub going onto ignore.

I'm sorry that you want to do that, you started off with what I took to be genuine points. As you ride off into the sunset consider that ideology has to be based on facts. Always go to the facts, who knows, you might even end up a worshipper at an Anglican Church.

 

[Bloods86]

I'm sorry that you want to do that, you started off with what I took to be genuine points. As you ride off into the sunset consider that ideology has to be based on facts. Always go to the facts, who knows, you might even end up a worshipper at an Anglican Church.

Been there, done that.

 

[O Grobbecker]

The decision literally denied an abortion right which had previously existed. It doesn't matter what the states did with the decision.

It's fairly common knowledge (obscure, lol) among those who pay attention to US Politics, SCOTUS and the debate over Roe vs Wade that:

- the 6 Republican appointed SCOTUS judges are conservative Christians, they profess to be themselves

- the 3 recent Republican appointed SCOTUS judges were selected from lists given by the conservative Christian Heritage Foundation to Trump

- Republican presidential and senatorial candidates, including Trump, had campaigned on the promise of putting conservative Christian judges on courts, including the Supreme Court, to overturn Roe vs Wade, regardless of other qualifications

- Obama was denied his right in 2016 to have nomination hearings and a vote on his nominee (Garland) because Republicans claimed since it was due to the death of a judge (Scalia) and it was less than a year out from a presidential election, they should wait for the next administration

- Trump then filled that stolen position with Gorsuch

- When another judge died (RBG), with a much shorter timeframe until the next presidential election (2020), Trump and Republicans abandoned the principle they'd set earlier, nominating and placing Barrett on the court, despite having been a judge (at any level) for 3 years

- Kavanaugh (Trump - 2018) said he would follow precedent during his nomination (turned out to be a lie), and Barrett, Gorsuch hedged around direct questions to give the impression that they didn't desire to overturn Roe vs Wade

- the majority opinion made several false claims including that abortion was not part of American history or tradition, which would have been untrue by itself, though founding father Benjamin Franklin himself included instructions to induce abortions in a book published in the 1700s

I'd argue that the makeup of the current SCOTUS is designed to be conservatively Christian, only challenged by the nature of it being intensely pro corporate interests, over individual citizens.

Don't come boldly into a discussion, making grand claims, and then say we're making stuff up, when we're just better informed.

Source ? The US justice system is inferior to ours, selection of judges more political. However look at Murphy's appointment in the 70's which led to the Family Law Act, despite his Irish catholic Conservative background. Have faith in the Highest Courts in the Land of the Anglosphere, there are none better in the World. By the way, Roe v Wade is authority for the proposition that US Federal Law approves Abortion in circumstances, overtaking State Laws. We have the same problems here, as a Federation. We have it much cleaner and clearer, no wonder, at Federation, we learned from other Federations, Switzerland, but essentially the US. Even in the US, it doesn't work the way you suggest. Barrett, for example (I had to look her up for another poster) is black letter rather than reformist (our High Court is traditionally black letter). Black letter isn't activist.

 

[O Grobbecker]

Been there, done that.

It can come back and haunt you in later life.

 

[Bloods86]

Source ? The US justice system is inferior to ours, selection of judges more political. However look at Murphy's appointment in the 70's which led to the Family Law Act, despite his Irish catholic Conservative background. Have faith in the Highest Courts in the Land of the Anglosphere, there are none better in the World. By the way, Roe v Wade is authority for the proposition that US Federal Law approves Abortion in circumstances, overtaking State Laws. We have the same problems here, as a Federation. We have it much cleaner and clearer, no wonder, at Federation, we learned from other Federations, Switzerland, but essentially the US. Even in the US, it doesn't work the way you suggest. Barrett, for example (I had to look her up for another poster) is black letter rather than reformist (our High Court is traditionally black letter). Black letter isn't activist.

You've given no sources of your own (borrowing personal opinions from a journalism drop-out aside). If you're unaware of the things in that list, that's not my fault, especially when you claimed to have such a good knowledge of SCOTUS and I had the obscure view.

 

[O Grobbecker]

It

You've given no sources of your own (borrowing personal opinions from a journalism drop-out aside). If you're unaware of the things in that list, that's not my fault, especially when you claimed to have such a good knowledge of SCOTUS and I had the obscure view.

It wasn't your knowledge of SCOTUS (that tells me you've looked up Wikipedia) but that you expressed it obscurely. Be careful purporting to know the backgrounds of the various justices and assuming that they will determine in a certain way, how they determined in earlier, similar, cases, and why; that drives Law Academics, who have nothing better to do than write treateses on the topic. Just because a Judge is appointed by, say, a Democrat Government, doesn't mean that he/she'll go reformist.

 

[madmug]

You've run me ragged, madmug, consider changing your posting name to something like "dog with a bone"

Maybe yours could be a Synonym of Gobbledygook. (Gibberish, Claptrap etc)

 

[O Grobbecker]

Maybe yours could be a Synonym of Gobbledygook. (Gibberish, Claptrap etc)

Fair suggestion, mate. Sometimes I don't even understand myself.

 

[Maggie5]

The decision literally denied an abortion right which had previously existed. It doesn't matter what the states did with the decision.

It's fairly common knowledge (obscure, lol) among those who pay attention to US Politics, SCOTUS and the debate over Roe vs Wade that:

- the 6 Republican appointed SCOTUS judges are conservative Christians, they profess to be themselves

- the 3 most recent Republican appointed SCOTUS judges, at least, were selected from lists given by the conservative Christian Heritage Foundation to Trump

- Republican presidential and senatorial candidates, including Trump, had campaigned on the promise of putting conservative Christian judges on courts, including the Supreme Court, to overturn Roe vs Wade, regardless of other qualifications

- Obama was denied his right in 2016 to have nomination hearings and a vote on his nominee (Garland) because Republicans claimed since it was due to the death of a judge (Scalia) and it was less than a year out from a presidential election, they should wait for the next administration

- Trump then filled that stolen position with Gorsuch

- When another judge died (RBG), with a much shorter timeframe until the next presidential election (2020), Trump and Republicans abandoned the principle they'd set earlier, nominating and placing Barrett on the court, despite having been a judge (at any level) for 3 years

- Kavanaugh (Trump - 2018) said he would follow precedent during his nomination (turned out to be a lie), and Barrett, Gorsuch hedged around direct questions to give the impression that they didn't desire to overturn Roe vs Wade

- the majority opinion made several false claims including that abortion was not part of American history or tradition, which would have been untrue by itself, though founding father Benjamin Franklin himself included instructions to induce abortions in a book published in the 1700s

I'd argue that the makeup of the current SCOTUS is designed to be conservatively Christian, only challenged by the nature of it being intensely pro corporate interests, over individual citizens.

Don't come boldly into a discussion, making grand claims, and then say we're making stuff up, when we're just better informed.

Well put but you left out the Federalist Society who are one of the prime architects of conservatives’ efforts to reshape the American judicial system, including the Supreme Court. More about them here.

They just received a nice $1.6B from Leonard Leo who just happened to be Donald Trump’s adviser on judicial nominations, Leo helped build the Supreme Court’s conservative super majority, which recently eliminated Constitutional protections for abortion rights and has made a series of sweeping pro-business decisions. Leo, a conservative Catholic, has both helped select judges to nominate to the Supreme Court and directed multi million dollar media campaigns to confirm them.

 

[Evolved1]

I'm sorry that you want to do that, you started off with what I took to be genuine points. As you ride off into the sunset consider that ideology has to be based on facts. Always go to the facts, who knows, you might even end up a worshipper at an Anglican Church.

Religious people who conflate fact with faith fascinate me. If you have facts, do you even need faith?

 

[O Grobbecker]

Religious people who conflate fact with faith fascinate me. If you have facts, do you even need faith?

Good night and God bless you.

 

[Evolved1]

Good night and God bless you.

There's a lot of gods. Which one are you invoking?

Godchecker.com - Your Guide To The Gods

The legendary mythology encyclopedia, poking gods with a stick since 1999! Meet weird and wonderful gods from around the world with Godchecker's amazing Holy Database of All Known Gods

www.godchecker.com

 

[MC Bad Genius]

It

It wasn't your knowledge of SCOTUS (that tells me you've looked up Wikipedia) but that you expressed it obscurely. Be careful purporting to know the backgrounds of the various justices and assuming that they will determine in a certain way, how they determined in earlier, similar, cases, and why; that drives Law Academics, who have nothing better to do than write treateses on the topic. Just because a Judge is appointed by, say, a Democrat Government, doesn't mean that he/she'll go reformist.

You did ask for something to back up the assertions about the Supreme Court Justices:

You claim to be remarkably well (?) informed about the circumstances of appointments to the US Supreme Court. I don't know where you get your categorising of the various Justices according to their placement of the Zero to Conservative Christian continuum along with your obscure account of appointments then backflips. Most people look at which Government appointed them. Is your obscure account something you've read, in which case, credit or footnote it, or is it something you've just made up ? Whatever, it's the decision of the Supreme Court of America that pushes the issue back to the 50 States, it doesn't even deny abortion rights.

And now you're moving the goalposts. You're not really arguing your points in good faith, so you shouldn't really be surprised if people put you on ignore.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Quite right. Nobody is obliged to adhere to conservative Christian values than the baptised or adherents. Thankyou for reading my psots.

Except when due to hijacking of the Republican Party I the USA who itself gerrymander the s**t out of electoral districts, the conservative Christians impose their values on the secular.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Hints at what will happen in future elections if enough of these #)#$&)#&s get into office. The upcoming midterms will really tell the tale. Are Americans really that stupid or is the quiet rational majority waking up?

The thing is until they have compulsory voting we’ll never know.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

This interview should be mandatory reading for anyone that's invested in the debate around abortion:

Interview With a Woman Who Had an Abortion at 32 Weeks

Elizabeth* is 35. She grew up in the South, currently lives in Brooklyn, and has been married for two years. After a previous miscarriage at 10 weeks, she was overjoyed to find herself pregnant for a second time. At 31 weeks, she found out that the baby boy she was carrying wouldn’t be able to...

jezebel.com

I remember reading it a few years ago not long after my wife had an abortion (that I've shared earlier in this thread) and it had me in tears. I'm not brave enough to read it again today, but I strongly recommend it to everyone posting in this thread.

Oh my god that is one of the saddest, most horrifying reads I have ever had. Horrifying not just in terms of the repeated sheer physical trauma she had to go through, but the realisation that hers is a story of an abortion that was still entirely legal. God knows the unspeakable horrors awaiting anyone getting a backyard termination.

Other thing that jumped out at me was that after all she’d been through, she still wanted to have a kid. I would never try again after that. I’d say “well, it’s clear that on every single level, the universe does not want me to have kids. I’m done. I will do other things with my life.” I’ll just never understand some of my fellow humans.

 

[bourbons]

that comes across as confused, bourbon. I focussed on illegitimacy rates among Afro-americans (Candace says, there are no black-americans, just Americans). That's not to suggest that it's only the Afro-americans, Owen's message is the same, you are not victims, you have control of your own lives.

lol

Yes, I'm well aware you'd rather steer the conversation in that direction rather than examine the consistency of Christian value infused, supposedly pro-life positions.

 

[bourbons]

You claim to be remarkably well (?) informed about the circumstances of appointments to the US Supreme Court. I don't know where you get your categorising of the various Justices according to their placement of the Zero to Conservative Christian continuum along with your obscure account of appointments then backflips. Most people look at which Government appointed them. Is your obscure account something you've read, in which case, credit or footnote it, or is it something you've just made up ? Whatever, it's the decision of the Supreme Court of America that pushes the issue back to the 50 States, it doesn't even deny abortion rights.

Ok, so you have no idea about the current make-up of the US Supreme Court and the mechanics of how they got to where they are now.

I not going to bother mapping everything out for you, but just on one aspect you seem to be questioning or wanting a source for... here's several Christian conservatives SC judges flat out lying in their confirmation hearings;

The bible says a few things about lying doesn't it?

 

[madmug]

Oh my god that is one of the saddest, most horrifying reads I have ever had. Horrifying not just in terms of the repeated sheer physical trauma she had to go through, but the realisation that hers is a story of an abortion that was still entirely legal. God knows the unspeakable horrors awaiting anyone getting a backyard termination.

Other thing that jumped out at me was that after all she’d been through, she still wanted to have a kid. I would never try again after that. I’d say “well, it’s clear that on every single level, the universe does not want me to have kids. I’m done. I will do other things with my life.” I’ll just never understand some of my fellow humans.

Like the idiotic 'war on drugs'. Its the Conservative RW of politics & Religion making rules on that & abortion which are ineffective, unenforceable & create 'unforeseen' circumstances.

Circumstances which mainly vilify the poorest sectors of society, whilst the richest get away with anything.