Moral people can now protect life

[Syne]

Roe v Wade is no more. Moral people once again have the right to decide, through their state legislatures, it they want to protect or victimize human life in the womb.

If you don't like it, get the fuck out of red states, moron. It's easy. I've moved all over the country several times, with little more than the gas money to get there, even taking the bus once.

[Magical Realist]

Roe v Wade is no more. Moral people once again have the right to decide, through their state legislatures, it they want to protect or victimize human life in the womb.

If you don't like it, get the fuck out of red states, moron. It's easy. I've moved all over the country several times, with little more than the gas money to get there, even taking the bus once.

Doesn't effect my state of Oregon at all. They're actually expanding their abortion services to accomodate all the women traveling from other states. And many corporations are offering to pay all traveling expenses for them:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/24/tech/comp...index.html

[Syne]

Exactly, so why protest when you can just move to live with others who share your morality, or complete lack thereof. Simple.

[Yazata]

Abortion isn't really my issue. It's a feminist issue and I'm most emphatically not a feminist. I can see valid arguments both ways on abortion.

What interests me more is the possibility that the Supreme Court is actually going to take the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution seriously. If it ever did, then the United States might become a very different (and arguably better) place.

Certainly more diverse, as the voters of each state would be free to manage most matters as they see fit, as opposed to having one-size-fits-all national policies imposed on everyone from Washington. (It's ironic how "diversity" always means race and gender and never means diversity of ideas.)

We might end up with different states having very different policies on all sorts of presently divisive social issues, provided only that they all adhere to the basic principles of the US Constitution. One result of that might be to dial back the appalling divisiveness in contemporary America, since the question of who rules in Washington would no longer be a life-or-death issue for people's fundamental values and ways of life. California could do its own things in most areas of social life without fearing domination by Middle America, and Middle America could follow its own paths without fearing domination by California. So national elections would no longer be the kind of life-or-death cultural struggles that they are today. There would be 50 different options in America and people would be free to vote with their feet regarding which one seems the most comfortable in which to live.

I mean, why is there a federal Department of Education? Education isn't in the Constitution. There are virtually no federal schools, whether K-12 or university level. The department simply exists to harvest vast sums of federal tax dollars, then redistribute the money to states and localities with thousands of federal regulations attached. Thus giving the federal government precisely that control over education that the 10th Amendment forbids it from having. So why not obey the Constitution and give those taxation powers back to the states and let the various states manage education as each sees fit?

Abortion seems to me to be another example of that. It's a hugely divisive issue in which both sides have appealing cases: Halting the mass-murder of unborn babies on one side, women's right to control their own bodies on the other. So instead of having each side trying to control the abortion policies of the whole continent-sized country, let the 50 states decide what's best for them and what their own people want. If minorities in those states feel that they can't live with their state's policy, there will always be an adjoining state with a more attractive approach.

[Syne]

The 10th Amendment is taken seriously. The states are exercising their reserved powers...by freely choosing to sell them to the federal government.

Just like Congress should do after ceding it's power to the Executive branch and bureaucratic departments, states just need to reclaim their own authority. It would help, though, if Congress could rein in federal taxation, which would curtail it's ability to bribe the states, with their own money, in exchange for ceding their reserved powers. This is one of the downsides from electing Senators by citizen vote, as they're no longer beholden to the states themselves.

What this ruling more directly means is that the validity of the legal contrivance of substantive due process is in question, as this is the basis for the ruling in Roe and Casey...as well as Griswold, Obergefell and Lawrence. This is where the court legislates from the bench by magically coming up with new rights, nowhere found in the Constitution, precedent, or historical common law...making these rulings, themselves, bad precedents.


The great thing about this ruling is that you are no longer forced to live under a law you find morally reprehensible. You can move to a state that acts on your values, and you can refuse to do business with any company that tries to undermine your values in a like-minded state. If only businesses could go back to being all about making a profit, but moron leftists spend their money with companies that make them feel vicariously virtuous. Imagine that. Paying someone so you can feel virtuous. Not too far removed from buying indulgences from Catholic priests. Just another reason why politics is a religion to the left, and abortion is a sacrament.

[C C]

That "discredited provocateur" Andy Ngo is predicting another violent summer (like 2020) from far-left groups lumped under the "antifa" label (Jane's Revenge, Youth Liberation Front, Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement, etc).

Pro-life centers and churches have been attacked long before the official "rage in the streets" started today, so it's perhaps already pointless to wonder if the Portland journalist's forecast of frenzy and destruction will materialize...

But you can still keep updated on the activity of those "peaceful anarchist and communist clubs" here[1], from the "disreputable" horse's mouth:

https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/154...3235064833

- - - footnote - - -

[1] "A majority of adherents are anarchists, communists, and other socialists who describe themselves as revolutionaries, although some social democrats and others on the American Left, among them environmentalists, LGBT and indigenous rights advocates, also adhere to the antifa movement." ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifa_(Un...d_ideology

[Syne]

Luckily, SCOTUS also struck down New York's law (and similar in other states) that allowed them to arbitrarily decide whether your reason to carry a gun for self-defense was "good enough" for them to allow you your 2nd Amendment rights. These states had what was called "may issue" conceal carry permits. The "may" being if they deemed you deserving, at their subjective whim. Now all states will be "shall issue," which means that unless you are legally barred from owning a firearm (due to things like domestic violence/felony conviction, substance abuse, etc.), you must be allowed a concealed carry permit.

This means once helpless people in blue states will now be able to protect themselves (again, protecting life) from violent protesters and catch-and-release (cashless bail) career criminals.

[Kornee]

While nice to think this ruling is a victory for US state's rights over Federal Central Control mandates, suspicion is the behind-the-scenes actual and intended outcome is furthering of societal fracture, leading perhaps to all out civil war. Then requiring 'drastic measures' to 'reign in anarchy'. Problem-reaction-solution time tested formula for seizing power. Final outcome - an enhanced oligarchy controlled oppressive police state.
Hope to be proved wrong. Time will tell.

[Syne]

Conspiratorial nonsense aside, Roe v Wade furthered cultural division*, by keeping one side from doing what they believe is moral. Now, leftists are free to keep killing babies with abandon. They just can't dictate that red states must do so as well. It actually castrates the left's authoritarianism on the subject. Now, their authoritarian tendencies may be so strong that they resort to violence, but red states have the lion's share of the guns and law and order. Any anarchy will come from the left, in blue states...neer to clash with actual adults.
You cannot have nor need a police state with well-armed citizens.



*Casey, the other abortion ruling struck down, was meant to ease division, but obviously failed. This kind of divisive ruling being crammed down by the federal government is precisely how we got to this degree of division in the first place. Pretending that allowing it to continue would somehow magically ameliorate such division is delusion.

---

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/EqBxjcO3nF0

[Kornee]

Conspiratorial nonsense aside,...

How about....'redneck misogynist oppression' as counter invective. Want to continue along those lines? It's an easy but foolish game to play.