Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS News)   And so it begins. Under His eye   (cbsnews.com) divider line
135
    More: News  
•       •       •

10635 clicks; posted to Politics » on 23 Oct 2020 at 2:17 AM (25 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



135 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
jst3p
2020-10-23 3:13:29 AM  
I am not OK with Roe being overturned. That being said, if you live in a right wing shiat-hole, farking move. I hear people say "Not everyone has the funds to move" and to that I say bullshiat. When I was 18 I moved from Cali (not a shiathole) to Washington state (again not a shiathole). I was broke as fark, that made it easy to move, everything I owned was liquidated in a garage sale or fit in my car.


When I was in my late 20's I had a fiance and a kid and I was living in Florida (long story but Florida is a shiathole) to the Denver metro area. We were still living paycheck to paycheck but we found a way to do it.

Now that I am doing much better financially it would actually be more difficult to uproot and move.

Tell these right wing shiatholes that they can go fark themselves by moving to a sane blue state.
 
Albino Squid [BareFark]
2020-10-23 3:16:32 AM  

puffy999: Our nation needs to consider changing what it charges for legal fees.

Abortion being legal CANNOT HARM YOU. A legal challenge to an issue which CANNOT CAUSE PERSONAL HARM should receive a higher cost, to file and ESPECIALLY to lose.

Nobody except child rapist loving Republicans (in the US) believe a clump of cells is a baby.


I'm sorry, but this is a profoundly silly take. Almost all cases that reach SCOTUS are being funded by either a state or a well-heeled interest group (including the good ones!). The costs associated are totally meaningless. Also, there is no cost to lose in the Supreme Court. That would be utterly insane.
 
jst3p
2020-10-23 3:17:09 AM  

dark brew: 91% of abortions occur by the 13th week.  By 15 weeks, the vast majority of pregnant women are looking forward to having their child.  They have come up with a list of names, starting thinking about nursery colors, and are excited about seeing their little bundle of joy for the first time.  I know that the dumb Mississippi law contains some language for fetal abnormalities and emergencies, but such a law doesn't need to exist in the first place.  Women aren't carrying their babies for 4 months and then saying "nah, rather not be pregnant."  My wife had to undergo an abortion at 18 weeks.  It was the worst day of my life and one that I will never, ever, fully get over. We had a name, first baby outfit.  Those went into a grave.


To add to what you say (and so sorry for what you went through) there is a ballot initiative here in Colorado to ban abortion after 24 weeks. I am pro-choice but after reading it I ignorantly said out loud "By 24 weeks shouldn't she know though?"

To which my very anti-abortion but pro-choice SO said "Who the fark are you or the government to tell me what I can do with my body?!?!?"

I will be voting no on that initiative.
 
puffy999 [TotalFark]
2020-10-23 3:23:15 AM  

Albino Squid: Almost all cases that reach SCOTUS are being funded by either a state or a well-heeled interest group (including the good ones!). The costs associated are totally meaningless


Good point. I'm going on a lack of sleep so I'll change my post:

We need to fine and disbar every lawyer who tries to DDoS the legal system with the same frivolous lawsuits over things like abortion, which are now on the table because Federalist Society judges are being groomed, if not outright bribed, to destroy American law.
 
Palined Parenthood
2020-10-23 3:23:37 AM  

Smirky the Wonder Chimp: Squid_for_Brains: This is what happens when you don't vote.

Look, man, how many times do I have to explain this?  I. WAS. NOT. INSPIRED.


Bernie lost and endorsed the nominee. Twice. Most of us have gotten over that.
 
LordJiro [OhFark]
2020-10-23 3:37:50 AM  
If Biden wins and Democrats take the Senate, they need to go balls-to-the-wall to fix this shiat. Expand the court by at least double (preferably more), have Congress pass a law explicitly making abortion legal, and if it's challenged, send it right to the newly-rebalanced SCOTUS.

Republicans have been shiatting all over precedent and playing every dirty political trick they can think of to haul America backwards for decades. It's time to use their own tricks against them to push America into the 21st century. And in the meantime, arrest and prosecute Republican leaders for corruption, espionage, violations of every ethics law in the book, crimes against humanity, etc.; it varies, of course, from Republican to Republican.

We need to treat the GOP like post-war Germany treated the Nazis, and how America SHOULD have treated the Confederates. As I'm anti-death penalty, I'd prefer them to be locked up for years/life (again, depending on the Republican) rather than being executed; plus, making them watch America recover without them would be worse than death for those scumbags.
 
CNichols [TotalFark]
2020-10-23 3:49:29 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


And that future is incredibly farking nigh.
 
Birnone
2020-10-23 3:53:35 AM  

FlashHarry: Roe will be overturned. It's all but guaranteed. So wealthy women will still have abortions, but poor ones will wind up in one of hundreds of Kermit Gosnell butcher shops around the country to die of sepsis.


I believe it will turn out to be a strategic mistake for the Republicans to ban abortions. I think it would cause people who otherwise don't care about politics to get upset enough to get involved. I'd compare it to Prohibition. People got alcohol banned but that got changed back and I don't think another ban is ever going to happen again because of it. The downside is that things will be worse before they get better.
 
BafflerMeal
2020-10-23 4:02:23 AM  

CNichols: [Fark user image 425x344]

And that future is incredibly farking nigh.


But a *terrible* show, so y'know, whatever.
 
englaja
2020-10-23 4:11:54 AM  

Original: Original Tweet:

byKateSmith: NEW Within hours of the Senate Judiciary advancing Amy Coney Barrett, Mississippi asked SCOTUS to review its 15-week abortion ban. It's a case that could reverse Roe v Wade, & it looks like Barrett will decide whether to hear it. Now on @CBSNews: https://t.co/FncEEkKycX


The minute they reverse Roe then the gloves are off and there will be another 4 justices appointed to reaffirm it.
 
Commander Lysdexic
2020-10-23 4:12:40 AM  

jst3p: I am not OK with Roe being overturned. That being said, if you live in a right wing shiat-hole, farking move. I hear people say "Not everyone has the funds to move" and to that I say bullshiat. When I was 18 I moved from Cali (not a shiathole) to Washington state (again not a shiathole). I was broke as fark, that made it easy to move, everything I owned was liquidated in a garage sale or fit in my car.


When I was in my late 20's I had a fiance and a kid and I was living in Florida (long story but Florida is a shiathole) to the Denver metro area. We were still living paycheck to paycheck but we found a way to do it.

Now that I am doing much better financially it would actually be more difficult to uproot and move.

Tell these right wing shiatholes that they can go fark themselves by moving to a sane blue state.


From what I understand many of the right wing red herp-a-derp states have tiny islands of blue in them called 'cities'.
It's hard to move an entire city.
 
voodoolady
2020-10-23 4:13:12 AM  

puffy999: Albino Squid: Almost all cases that reach SCOTUS are being funded by either a state or a well-heeled interest group (including the good ones!). The costs associated are totally meaningless

Good point. I'm going on a lack of sleep so I'll change my post:

We need to fine and disbar every lawyer who tries to DDoS the legal system with the same frivolous lawsuits over things like abortion, which are now on the table because Federalist Society judges are being groomed, if not outright bribed, to destroy American law.


It's not someone suing to make abortion illegal. It's the legislatures writing these laws then individuals or groups like Planned Parenthood suing to get them overturned.

Or are you saying the suit to get them overturned is frivolous?
 
englaja
2020-10-23 4:15:05 AM  

ChrisDe: Can we just reduce SCOTUS justices to 7? And remove the last two?


That requires a House majority and a Senate 2/3 majority.

Fortunately, adding new states only requires a House and Senate majority and Presidential approval.

So, an extra 25 states it is, all heavily Democratic. Give the Republicoonts a taste of their own medicine.
 
MegaLib
2020-10-23 4:21:38 AM  
Access to Abortion needs to be free and complete during every stage of pregnancy for any reason.  It is a right.  We will pack the SCOTUS with Progressives to enshrine this right
 
LordJiro [OhFark]
2020-10-23 4:21:50 AM  

englaja: ChrisDe: Can we just reduce SCOTUS justices to 7? And remove the last two?

That requires a House majority and a Senate 2/3 majority.

Fortunately, adding new states only requires a House and Senate majority and Presidential approval.

So, an extra 25 states it is, all heavily Democratic. Give the Republicoonts a taste of their own medicine.


Don't need to add that many states. Could definitely do a lot of state-merging (as well as adding DC and Puerto Rico, at minimum). There is no reason we need two Dakotas, and Wyoming sure as hell doesn't need to be its own state either, just for starters.

Hell, the primary reason there are two Dakotas in the first place was because Republicans wanted extra power in the Senate.

And if the Democrats take the Senate, the first order of business should be to nuke the filibuster. The second should be to start prosecuting Republicans for abuse of power, general corruption, and a laundry list of other shiat they don't even bother to hide. Just enforce existing laws, and the entire GOP could be in jail before 2022.
 
puffy999 [TotalFark]
2020-10-23 4:45:01 AM  

voodoolady: puffy999: Albino Squid: Almost all cases that reach SCOTUS are being funded by either a state or a well-heeled interest group (including the good ones!). The costs associated are totally meaningless

Good point. I'm going on a lack of sleep so I'll change my post:

We need to fine and disbar every lawyer who tries to DDoS the legal system with the same frivolous lawsuits over things like abortion, which are now on the table because Federalist Society judges are being groomed, if not outright bribed, to destroy American law.

It's not someone suing to make abortion illegal. It's the legislatures writing these laws then individuals or groups like Planned Parenthood suing to get them overturned.

Or are you saying the suit to get them overturned is frivolous?


Well, no. The legislature is NOT paid to write these laws.

Lawyers, private and public, are the ones allowing this to continuously happen.
 
puffy999 [TotalFark]
2020-10-23 4:49:59 AM  
So if one part of government continuously tries to hammer a square peg into a round hole, then one branch keeps allowing the definition of "round" to come into question, imagine when said part gets control of ALL branches.

Then imagine that many law schools, and law classes,teach people to take advantage of these loopholes.... and that Square Peggism is not only acceptable, but advised.
 
voodoolady
2020-10-23 4:55:26 AM  

puffy999: voodoolady: puffy999: Albino Squid: Almost all cases that reach SCOTUS are being funded by either a state or a well-heeled interest group (including the good ones!). The costs associated are totally meaningless

Good point. I'm going on a lack of sleep so I'll change my post:

We need to fine and disbar every lawyer who tries to DDoS the legal system with the same frivolous lawsuits over things like abortion, which are now on the table because Federalist Society judges are being groomed, if not outright bribed, to destroy American law.

It's not someone suing to make abortion illegal. It's the legislatures writing these laws then individuals or groups like Planned Parenthood suing to get them overturned.

Or are you saying the suit to get them overturned is frivolous?

Well, no. The legislature is NOT paid to write these laws.

Lawyers, private and public, are the ones allowing this to continuously happen.


Wait....what?

I didn't say the legislature is paid to write the laws..... Though your second sentence suggests that's correct....that they are being paid by lobbyists.

Lawyers, private and public who are lobbyists, are trying to overturn these laws.

I'm sorry I jumped into this debate with you. I didn't realize you were pro-forced birth and anti-reality.
 
voodoolady
2020-10-23 4:56:43 AM  

voodoolady: puffy999: voodoolady: puffy999: Albino Squid: Almost all cases that reach SCOTUS are being funded by either a state or a well-heeled interest group (including the good ones!). The costs associated are totally meaningless

Good point. I'm going on a lack of sleep so I'll change my post:

We need to fine and disbar every lawyer who tries to DDoS the legal system with the same frivolous lawsuits over things like abortion, which are now on the table because Federalist Society judges are being groomed, if not outright bribed, to destroy American law.

It's not someone suing to make abortion illegal. It's the legislatures writing these laws then individuals or groups like Planned Parenthood suing to get them overturned.

Or are you saying the suit to get them overturned is frivolous?

Well, no. The legislature is NOT paid to write these laws.

Lawyers, private and public, are the ones allowing this to continuously happen.

Wait....what?

I didn't say the legislature is paid to write the laws..... Though your second sentence suggests that's correct....that they are being paid by lobbyists.

Lawyers, private and public who are NOT lobbyists, are trying to overturn these laws.

I'm sorry I jumped into this debate with you. I didn't realize you were pro-forced birth and anti-reality.


FTFM.
 
entitygm
2020-10-23 4:58:54 AM  

englaja: ChrisDe: Can we just reduce SCOTUS justices to 7? And remove the last two?

That requires a House majority and a Senate 2/3 majority.

Fortunately, adding new states only requires a House and Senate majority and Presidential approval.

So, an extra 25 states it is, all heavily Democratic. Give the Republicoonts a taste of their own medicine.

Actually the size is entirely up to Congress, they can both enlarge and shrink it. Wall of text below.

Article III of the Constitution sets neither the size of the Supreme Court nor any specific positions on it (though the existence of the office of the chief justice is tacitly acknowledged in Article I, Section 3, Clause 6). Instead, these powers are entrusted to Congress, which initially established a six-member Supreme Court composed of a chief justice and five associate justices through the Judiciary Act of 1789. The size of the Court was first altered by an 1801 act which would have reduced the size of the court to five members upon its next vacancy, but an 1802 act promptly negated the 1801 act, legally restoring the court's size to six members before any such vacancy occurred. As the nation's boundaries grew, Congress added justices to correspond with the growing number of judicial circuits: seven in 1807, nine in 1837, and ten in 1863.[76]

In 1866, at the behest of Chief Justice Chase and in an attempt to limit the power of Andrew Johnson, Congress passed an act providing that the next three justices to retire would not be replaced
 
Socrofece
2020-10-23 5:04:20 AM  
The Proud Boys and Junior Trumpers will cheer, and then realize that without the option of flushing any accidental spawn, women will want to fark them even less.
 
ViolentEastCoastCity [recently expired TotalFark]
2020-10-23 5:20:44 AM  

MegaLib: Access to Abortion needs to be free and complete during every stage of pregnancy for any reason.  It is a right.  We will pack the SCOTUS with Progressives to enshrine this right


This.

We need a f*cking amendment.
 
LurkLongAndProsper [TotalFark]
2020-10-23 5:26:19 AM  

Smirky the Wonder Chimp: Squid_for_Brains: This is what happens when you don't vote.

Look, man, how many times do I have to explain this?  I. WAS. NOT. INSPIRED.


Hillary would've been exactly the same anyway, or possibly even worse. You could tell because of how shrill she was and also how she never visited Michigan. It's just not your fault. Never your fault. No. The voters are not to be blamed! The candidate wasn't perfect so there was nothing you could do. If Hillary had really wanted to earn your vote she'd have come to your state and made a personal connection with you. She didn't and now bortion is illegal, sorry centrists, guess you should've picked a candidate who was more inspirational. This is why I'm voting for Hudson Hawk, the Green Party is clearly the only way out of this disgusting 2 party system.
 
bluejeansonfire
2020-10-23 5:31:35 AM  

discotaco: Squid_for_Brains: This is what happens when you don't vote.

Or when you do a cute little "protest" vote and vote third party or vote for Bernie.


Didn't happen above the expected rate that happens with every general election.

Do you also blame the outcome on Venus being in retrograde? Because that's as credible as the Mythical Protest Voter Who Decided the Whole Election.
 
LurkLongAndProsper [TotalFark]
2020-10-23 5:33:08 AM  

quatchi: Hey look. The thing everyone jumped up and down 4 years ago and warned people was going to happen if Trump got elected is going to happen.

itshappening.jpg


You're just fear mongering over the court. The real issue here is Hunter Biden's laptop.
 
bluejeansonfire
2020-10-23 5:36:01 AM  

Smirky the Wonder Chimp: Squid_for_Brains: This is what happens when you don't vote.

Look, man, how many times do I have to explain this?  I. WAS. NOT. INSPIRED.


Sounds like the Democratic Party should do a better job at earning votes, then. That is a politician's job, after all. Who would be so stupid as to neglect to do their most important job in an election for president?
 
bluejeansonfire
2020-10-23 5:38:35 AM  

Squid_for_Brains: This is what happens when you don't vote.


This is also what happens when you've so utterly abandoned the average American citizen that not many average American citizens see the point in voting for you.
 
buravirgil
2020-10-23 5:40:35 AM  
ViolentEastCoastCity: We need a f*cking amendment.


That's what abortion is, no?
 
buravirgil
2020-10-23 6:00:56 AM  
entitygm: Article III of the Constitution sets neither the size...As the nation's boundaries grew, Congress added justices to correspond with the growing number of judicial circuits: seven in 1807, nine in 1837, and ten in 1863.[76]

In 1866, at the behest of Chief Justice Chase and in an attempt to limit the power of Andrew Johnson, Congress passed an act providing that the next three justices to retire would not be replaced

Howdy Pardner

You seem to know a lot about this stuff.

That's an interesting story. Did you make all that up? I thought 9 was the number because of the Greeks, or something. Aren't America's institutions rooted the history of Greeks? Or is that Rome? Rome was second, right? Because Greeks wore fewer garments than Romans. They do now, at least.

I think I know what you're trying to say...You're saying after the Civil Warm and America got to steamin' again, by 1900 we were set pretty good compared to Mother England, no?

America was doing fine across the board compared to ANY nation with our industries and assembly line cars and making electricity before anybody else. I see why nobody would see much sense in fiddling with the number of Justices on the Supreme Court-- why fix it if it ain't broke?

And that's how it would have stayed... If Hitler hadn't started two wars and a God Emperor hadn't possessed Japan. You can't blame the Supreme Court for that, can ya'?

But these days are different. We're blaming ourselves. I don't think judges ought to allow it. I object!

How Many Judges did America have before the New Deal and now...after? And not only the top dogs. All Them Judges?  How many? Do we really need 'em?

Maybe we ought to cut out all the unnecessary judges since they're making so many mistakes and we're to blame. Slack up the deluuuuuge before we drown ourselves.

Thank ye'
 
Murkanen [TotalFark]
2020-10-23 6:05:25 AM  

fusillade762: FlashHarry: Roe will be overturned. It's all but guaranteed. So wealthy women will still have abortions, but poor ones will wind up in one of hundreds of Kermit Gosnell butcher shops around the country to die of sepsis.

I still think Republicans are making a tactical mistake by getting Roe repealed.  A lot of single-issue abortion voters may simply stop voting.


Since the abortion issue was only invented to replace segregation, Justice "14th amendment is unconstitutional" invites them to go back to rolling back what little progress has been made on protecting minorities from discrimination.
 
fzumrk [TotalFark]
2020-10-23 6:25:27 AM  
fark Mississippi.  Yeah, that's right fark the whole state in general.  What net positive have they ever contributed to the country?  We'd be better off making Puerto Rico a state and demoting Mississippi to a territory.
 
Marcos P
2020-10-23 6:38:35 AM  
Why do people want to control women?
 
Cythraul
2020-10-23 6:42:38 AM  

fusillade762: FlashHarry: Roe will be overturned. It's all but guaranteed. So wealthy women will still have abortions, but poor ones will wind up in one of hundreds of Kermit Gosnell butcher shops around the country to die of sepsis.

I still think Republicans are making a tactical mistake by getting Roe repealed.  A lot of single-issue abortion voters may simply stop voting.


As I've said before, the wedge issue will change from make abortion illegal, to keep abortion illegal.  I see no reason why the latter tactic would draw less enthusiasm from conservative voters than the former tactic.
 
ViolentEastCoastCity [recently expired TotalFark]
2020-10-23 6:48:49 AM  

buravirgil: ViolentEastCoastCity: We need a f*cking amendment.


That's what abortion is, no?


I lol'd.
 
makerofbadjokes
2020-10-23 6:50:43 AM  

buravirgil: ViolentEastCoastCity: We need a f*cking amendment.


That's what abortion is, no?


I see what you did there...


//username relevant.
 
havocmike
2020-10-23 6:53:01 AM  
I've always kind of toyed with the idea of "what would happen to politics if Democrats just conceded on abortion?" A mental exercise. Would the evangelicals shift to the democratic economic message now that it's off the table? Would the democratic party suffer at the polls if they were forced to campaign on "let's bring back abortions, gang!"

We're about to find out.
 
qorkfiend [TotalFark]
2020-10-23 6:53:02 AM  

LordJiro: englaja: ChrisDe: Can we just reduce SCOTUS justices to 7? And remove the last two?

That requires a House majority and a Senate 2/3 majority.

Fortunately, adding new states only requires a House and Senate majority and Presidential approval.

So, an extra 25 states it is, all heavily Democratic. Give the Republicoonts a taste of their own medicine.

Don't need to add that many states. Could definitely do a lot of state-merging (as well as adding DC and Puerto Rico, at minimum). There is no reason we need two Dakotas, and Wyoming sure as hell doesn't need to be its own state either, just for starters.

Hell, the primary reason there are two Dakotas in the first place was because Republicans wanted extra power in the Senate.

And if the Democrats take the Senate, the first order of business should be to nuke the filibuster. The second should be to start prosecuting Republicans for abuse of power, general corruption, and a laundry list of other shiat they don't even bother to hide. Just enforce existing laws, and the entire GOP could be in jail before 2022.


Why should DC (population 705,000) be a state while the Dakotas (combined population 1.5 million) shouldn't?
 
texanjeff
2020-10-23 7:07:24 AM  

Driver: The abortion issue is going to be a never ending battle.


Only because right wingers are morons...

All of their arguments, if used in good faith fail in the perfectly acceptable Roe V Wade decison.

But they don't care what is good for america or good for normal women.
 
Koodz
2020-10-23 7:12:17 AM  

Cythraul: fusillade762: FlashHarry: Roe will be overturned. It's all but guaranteed. So wealthy women will still have abortions, but poor ones will wind up in one of hundreds of Kermit Gosnell butcher shops around the country to die of sepsis.

I still think Republicans are making a tactical mistake by getting Roe repealed.  A lot of single-issue abortion voters may simply stop voting.

As I've said before, the wedge issue will change from make abortion illegal, to keep abortion illegal.  I see no reason why the latter tactic would draw less enthusiasm from conservative voters than the former tactic.


Yep. "Those liberals want to bring back the atrocity of abortion."
 
HypnozombieX
2020-10-23 7:17:47 AM  

havocmike: I've always kind of toyed with the idea of "what would happen to politics if Democrats just conceded on abortion?" A mental exercise. Would the evangelicals shift to the democratic economic message now that it's off the table? Would the democratic party suffer at the polls if they were forced to campaign on "let's bring back abortions, gang!"

We're about to find out.


After getting their way on abortion evangelicals will move to banning contraceptives. They will never give a shiat about economic issues because they believe that if your poor it means you're a failure in gods eyes or some such nonsense. Evangelicals are led by billionaires who make their money off human suffering, economic equality is the last thing they want.
 
I May Be Crazy But...
2020-10-23 7:21:50 AM  

gcc: Gentle reminder that if a democrats win control of both houses and the presidency and this still happens, they've decided it's ok if abortion is outlawed.

/ Don't let anyone off the hook, regardless of party.
// And by hook I mean coat hanger
/// Literal slashies


Remember, not fixing it fast enough in the way this guy likes is just as bad as maliciously breaking it in the first place.
 
HypnozombieX
2020-10-23 7:26:28 AM  

Koodz: Cythraul: fusillade762: FlashHarry: Roe will be overturned. It's all but guaranteed. So wealthy women will still have abortions, but poor ones will wind up in one of hundreds of Kermit Gosnell butcher shops around the country to die of sepsis.

I still think Republicans are making a tactical mistake by getting Roe repealed.  A lot of single-issue abortion voters may simply stop voting.

As I've said before, the wedge issue will change from make abortion illegal, to keep abortion illegal.  I see no reason why the latter tactic would draw less enthusiasm from conservative voters than the former tactic.

Yep. "Those liberals want to bring back the atrocity of abortion."


Oh that message will start losing value right away as women are reminded why abortion was made legal in the first place. Also, once the inevitable stories of prominent conservatives secretly sending their daughters into blue states to get abortions start rollin in.
 
Smirky the Wonder Chimp
2020-10-23 7:34:07 AM  

HypnozombieX: Koodz: Cythraul: fusillade762: FlashHarry: Roe will be overturned. It's all but guaranteed. So wealthy women will still have abortions, but poor ones will wind up in one of hundreds of Kermit Gosnell butcher shops around the country to die of sepsis.

I still think Republicans are making a tactical mistake by getting Roe repealed.  A lot of single-issue abortion voters may simply stop voting.

As I've said before, the wedge issue will change from make abortion illegal, to keep abortion illegal.  I see no reason why the latter tactic would draw less enthusiasm from conservative voters than the former tactic.

Yep. "Those liberals want to bring back the atrocity of abortion."

Oh that message will start losing value right away as women are reminded why abortion was made legal in the first place. Also, once the inevitable stories of prominent conservatives secretly sending their daughters into blue states to get abortions start rollin in.


I'm sure that's crossed the minds of at least some of them.  Particularly the ones who are most hostile toward the idea of female suffrage.

That's a genie they'll at least seriously contemplate trying to force back into the bottle.
 
Smirky the Wonder Chimp
2020-10-23 7:37:36 AM  

Marcos P: Why do people want to control women?


Because they believe that the one and only desirable thing about women is what's between their legs and what it can be used to produce, and because nothing gets male authoritarian SDO religious fundamentalists quite as excited as being able to treat women as a useful commodity that can be used to compel the obedience of other men.
 
mrwhippy
2020-10-23 7:39:52 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
Koodz
2020-10-23 7:40:08 AM  

HypnozombieX: Koodz: Cythraul: fusillade762: FlashHarry: Roe will be overturned. It's all but guaranteed. So wealthy women will still have abortions, but poor ones will wind up in one of hundreds of Kermit Gosnell butcher shops around the country to die of sepsis.

I still think Republicans are making a tactical mistake by getting Roe repealed.  A lot of single-issue abortion voters may simply stop voting.

As I've said before, the wedge issue will change from make abortion illegal, to keep abortion illegal.  I see no reason why the latter tactic would draw less enthusiasm from conservative voters than the former tactic.

Yep. "Those liberals want to bring back the atrocity of abortion."

Oh that message will start losing value right away as women are reminded why abortion was made legal in the first place. Also, once the inevitable stories of prominent conservatives secretly sending their daughters into blue states to get abortions start rollin in.


I believed that until this virus came. Now I realize that people will excuse death and permanent incapacitation all around them, even when it happens to their own friends and family, as long as it fits their narrative. Grandma didn't die of coronavirus. She was old. My friend was overweight/underweight/diabetic/had a heart murmur. He certainly didn't die because the people I voted for failed to protect him from a pandemic.

They'll jump through similar mental hoops when the abortion wards start filling with dying young women again. If it happens to a stranger she deserved it and if it happens to their own family they'll reject their own family as sinners.

Dead white girls probably will not turn them off. Dead black and brown girls sure as hell won't.

I'd be more likely to believe legal abortion will come back if the white middle class starts thinking a tidal wave of black and brown babies is coming for their jobs and their lily white daughters' virtue.

That's the one thing that mystifies me about the whole argument. Suppose they're right and we'd have 50 million more people in this country right now if abortion were illegal. Who farking wants that? And considering how many of them would be nonwhite, why do the racist evangelicals think they want that?
 
Koodz
2020-10-23 7:42:11 AM  

HypnozombieX: havocmike: I've always kind of toyed with the idea of "what would happen to politics if Democrats just conceded on abortion?" A mental exercise. Would the evangelicals shift to the democratic economic message now that it's off the table? Would the democratic party suffer at the polls if they were forced to campaign on "let's bring back abortions, gang!"

We're about to find out.

After getting their way on abortion evangelicals will move to banning contraceptives. They will never give a shiat about economic issues because they believe that if your poor it means you're a failure in gods eyes or some such nonsense. Evangelicals are led by billionaires who make their money off human suffering, economic equality is the last thing they want.


No contraception, no prostitution, no pornography, no masturbation.

They'd really like it if violence were the only catharsis left to us.
 
FlashHarry [TotalFark]
2020-10-23 7:46:05 AM  
My gut reaction is that I want dems to do everything in their power to stop this now - including impeaching Bill Barr to force the Senate to take up the trial. But that would play into Trump's hands and could hurt Biden. The smarter play is to vote against her in unison and use her bullshiat nomination as a club going forward. And when Roe is overturned, either legalize abortion via legislation or put forth a constitutional amendment to legalize it permanently.
 
qorkfiend [TotalFark]
2020-10-23 7:47:03 AM  

FlashHarry: My gut reaction is that I want dems to do everything in their power to stop this now - including impeaching Bill Barr to force the Senate to take up the trial. But that would play into Trump's hands and could hurt Biden. The smarter play is to vote against her in unison and use her bullshiat nomination as a club going forward. And when Roe is overturned, either legalize abortion via legislation or put forth a constitutional amendment to legalize it permanently.


They should boycott the vote.
 
Flappyhead
2020-10-23 8:00:49 AM  

quatchi: Hey look. The thing everyone jumped up and down 4 years ago and warned people was going to happen if Trump got elected is going to happen.

itshappening.jpg


Yeah, but Bernie should have gotten the nomination.
 
Displayed 50 of 135 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

More funny for your money.

learn more | sign up

On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.