Official Thread for Abortion Demagoguery

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19,101]

2 hours ago, Serak The Preparer said:

You wanna explain yourself @PenelopeWitherspoon?

 

2 hours ago, tigol said:

I do not believe they are relation, sir.

 

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

white feminism AM I RITE?

Um, not me.  My Twitter.  

https://twitter.com/StregaHorn/with_replies

Penelope Maynard, whoever that is, is a racist cunt.  It is cunts like her that give white women a bad name.

Also, here is her Twitter.  

https://twitter.com/penelope7usa

She blocks her tweets.

[mchookem 16,336]

damn

 

[Gap03 3,308]

1 hour ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

The fact that they made the "my religion" guy look like a mouthbreather ...

 

[Serak The Preparer 3,431]

26 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

 

 

Um, not me.  My Twitter.  

https://twitter.com/StregaHorn/with_replies

Penelope Maynard, whoever that is, is a racist cunt.  It is cunts like her that give white women a bad name.

Also, here is her Twitter.  

https://twitter.com/penelope7usa

She blocks her tweets.

I should have used /s tag - I am certain that nobody actually thought you were the Penelope in the question. My bad.

[Sbbruin 21,853]

3 hours ago, elfenix said:

 

 

I have no doubt there are many people who think like her.  But what has happened now is they are now out in the light and screaming their racism from the mountaintops.  @Brisketexan may be right.  The end is nigh.

[bad_teammate 13,195]

50 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Um, not me.  My Twitter.  

I know. I was just teasing.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19,101]

33 minutes ago, Serak The Preparer said:

I should have used /s tag - I am certain that nobody actually thought you were the Penelope in the question. My bad.

 

9 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I know. I was just teasing.

I know.  Just found it interesting that that crazy racist blocked her tweets.

[Michael Knight 12,979]

 

[Brew 3,049]

8 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

 

Had a meeting with a large OB practice tonight and the entire meeting was about Roe v Wade and the impact to practicing in light of the trigger laws that went into place in our state. It’s pretty scary as the father of two girls the list of issues they see that would potentially be legal issues in our state. Even more concerning was that our local state reps blew them off when they brought it up. 

[WhatTheBuck 28,781]

10 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

 

Go Joe.

I’m pro-Patty who was assaulted and raped one night as a student walking alone. If she had been impregnated and forced to bear the child of her rapist, it would’ve wrecked her. Not to mention how the child couldn’t possibly have dealt with that reality. If you support the victims of rape being forced to bear the children of their rapists, don’t you dare call yourself a Christian. You are pure evil. You are an instrument of hate. Ignorance -> Fear -> Intolerance -> Hate. Jesus taught love. You are an agent of hate. You should be glad that Saint Peter won’t be waiting for you after you pass because he’d have some serious questions for you that you wouldn’t be able to answer.

I mean this euphemistically, but go to hell. All of you.

[Willfully Horn 8,017]

Pro Marcy, who decided to abort because it is her body, her life, and no one else’s business.

[bad_teammate 13,195]

23 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

Pro Marcy, who decided to abort because it is her body, her life, and no one else’s business.

100%

It's important to share stories that are "sympathetic" to basically everyone, including the American Taliban.

But also... Freedom, bitch.

[jimmyjazz 45,957]

8 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Don't worry, rape rarely leads to pregnancy

 

 

Let's think this through.  One case in her vast 11 years of law enforcement experience led to a rape victim becoming pregnant.

OK.  How many rape cases did she work, total?  How many of those women were not on birth control?  In how many of those cases did the assailant ejaculate in the woman?  In how many of those cases was the woman within the ~ 7 day window (per 28) of being capable of getting pregnant?

I mean, I'd be a terrible attorney but it wouldn't be too hard to destroy this silly line of "reasoning" in a court of law.

Edited June 28, 2022 by jimmyjazz

[Biff Tannen 45,687]

2 hours ago, Sbbruin said:

I have no doubt there are many people who think like her.  But what has happened now is they are now out in the light and screaming their racism from the mountaintops.  @Brisketexan may be right.  The end is nigh.

They are screaming it from the mountaintops of Twitter.  That is a very small mountaintop.  The vast, vast majority of people will never see this.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13,585]

"Within a matter of months, women in about half of the United States may be breaking the law if they decide to end a pregnancy. This will be, in large part, because Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito is surprised that there is so little written about abortion in a four-thousand-word document crafted by fifty-five men in 1787. As it happens, there is also nothing at all in that document, which sets out fundamental law, about pregnancy, uteruses, vaginas, fetuses, placentas, menstrual blood, breasts, or breast milk. There is nothing in that document about women at all. Most consequentially, there is nothing in that document—or in the circumstances under which it was written—that suggests its authors imagined women as part of the political community embraced by the phrase “We the People.” There were no women among the delegates to the Constitutional Convention. There were no women among the hundreds of people who participated in ratifying conventions in the states. There were no women judges. There were no women legislators. At the time, women could neither hold office nor run for office, and, except in New Jersey, and then only fleetingly, women could not vote. Legally, most women did not exist as persons."

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-there-are-no-women-in-the-constitution

[TexasHooch 5,122]

Apologies is its been discussed but, among the states that are criminalizing abortion, do we know what penalties are going to be assigned?

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19,101]

 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19,101]

3 hours ago, mchookem said:

damn

 

That is powerful.

[safe sex 11,731]

18 minutes ago, TexasHooch said:

Apologies is its been discussed but, among the states that are criminalizing abortion, do we know what penalties are going to be assigned?

Philosophically, how can it be anything less than murder?

[jimmyjazz 45,957]

I love that Lily Allen song.  Olivia just stepped up quite a pages in my ledger book.  That was great!

[tchookem 3,900]

Apologies is its been discussed but, among the states that are criminalizing abortion, do we know what penalties are going to be assigned?

I'm not sure criminal penalties are the problem, so much as access. They won't have to prosecute women, they just close the clinics. Can't get (safe) abortions if there aren't clinics to provide them.

[TwiceHorn 31,475]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

Let's think this through.  One case in her vast 11 years of law enforcement experience led to a rape victim becoming pregnant.

OK.  How many rape cases did she work, total?  How many of those women were not on birth control?  In how many of those cases did the assailant ejaculate in the woman?  In how many of those cases was the woman within the ~ 7 day window (per 28) of being capable of getting pregnant?

I mean, I'd be a terrible attorney but it wouldn't be too hard to destroy this silly line of "reasoning" in a court of law.

And, apparently, her actual law enforcement career is substantially shorter than 11 years.  She left for Korea with her husband in 2012 and didn't resume until 2016.  And there's zero indication that she was an actual rape investigator.  Indeed, her LEO experience post-2016 appears to be as a deputy sheriff, where the county sheriff has no general law-enforcement responsibility.

[Bullneck 19,091]

2 hours ago, Michael Knight said:

 

Just came here to post this.  I might start to forgive some of those "cramp" and "injury" timeouts from September 7th 2019.

[Brew 3,049]

39 minutes ago, TexasHooch said:

Apologies is its been discussed but, among the states that are criminalizing abortion, do we know what penalties are going to be assigned?

Class C felony in TN for provider punishable by 3-15 years, nothing in the law for the person having the abortion currently although you would think conspiracy or solicitation could come into play. There are also no exceptions here after 6 weeks assuming the trigger law goes into effect, so ending a pregnancy under any circumstance after 6 weeks would be against the law.

[Bullneck 19,091]

 

 

[WhatTheBuck 28,781]

1 hour ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

As it happens, there is also nothing at all in that document, which sets out fundamental law, about pregnancy, uteruses, vaginas, fetuses, placentas, menstrual blood, breasts, or breast milk. There is nothing in that document about women at all.

They didn’t even know what human sperm and ova were. And the religious nuts follow a religious text that never recognized an unborn fetus, not that “fetus” was a concept they understood, as a person with rights. But they didn’t even know where the sun went at night. They thought the world was flat. Jesus thought that stars could fall to earth. These are people undereducated in both their scripture and in science.

Stupid people making stupid laws. 

[elfenix 34,242]

society should be structured according to the superstitious whims of a bunch of desert dwelling hill people on the edge of actual civilization 2,000+ years ago and if you don't like it you're free to move to canada!

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Imagine getting owned and having your sexual prowess shamed BY A LAKE.

[Bama Chick 28,596]

OMGGGGGGG

[F250 28,776]

1 hour ago, Bullneck said:

 

 

 

Virtue signaling.

Same shit bags that were "We support the troops" with slogans only.

My ex and myself were personally Pro-Life while being politically Pro-Choice. We had 4 kids and were also foster parents. We were part of the Anti-war movement but supported families of troops deployed.

Once my ex got into big Facebook fight with some Christian women who said she was anti-American. She went on a rant about how we were doing lawn work, house maintenance and baby sitting for two families of deployed soldiers from their church and the only thing they ever do is send prayers and say God Bless America on Facebook. It was a pretty good rant.

Anyways, these people are all about theatrics without any real commitment.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20,400]

 

[Willfully Horn 8,017]

35 minutes ago, F250 said:

 

Virtue signaling.

Same shit bags that were "We support the troops" with slogans only.

My ex and myself were personally Pro-Life while being politically Pro-Choice. We had 4 kids and were also foster parents. We were part of the Anti-war movement but supported families of troops deployed.

Once my ex got into big Facebook fight with some Christian women who said she was anti-American. She went on a rant about how we were doing lawn work, house maintenance and baby sitting for two families of deployed soldiers from their church and the only thing they ever do is send prayers and say God Bless America on Facebook. It was a pretty good rant.

Anyways, these people are all about theatrics without any real commitment.

Smartest move I ever made was convincing my wife to marry me. We might have that in common.

[Anastasis 23,469]

4 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

Smartest move I ever made was convincing my wife to marry me. We might have that in common.

[Willfully Horn 8,017]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 
 

 

[High Plains Drifter 11,049]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Pods 7,552]

dp

 

Edited June 28, 2022 by Pods
delete

[Pods 7,552]

[NWBuck 8,568]

29 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

 

 

I've been following this case since it started (even teaching about it in graduate Education classes)... the "retaliate against players who didn't join him" is news to me. It wasn't covered in any of the newspapers or other stories written about it (and we're not exactly conservative friendly here in Seattle), it didn't show up in any of the previous court case details that I can recall. Can someone point me to something substantive? 

The court decision is still wrong- case that was open and shut all across the nation, even was denied a SCOTUS hearing on one other occasion. When this first came to light, the district offered him a place to pray in private (accommodating his freedom of religion) and even told him he could pray on the field after everyone had left (and he was heading home) if he wished. He initially accepted the offer of privacy until a conservative legal group stepped in and offered to represent him.

This may have been covered as well- but a number of community members were also concerned when a group of Satanists showed up at the game to support him (and, therefore, their right to be on the field after games as well).

Like a said- the decision was a bad one.

[henrygandorf 29,191]

7 hours ago, mchookem said:

damn

 

take a good, hard look at that sign. those proportions are correct…

[High Plains Drifter 11,049]

42 minutes ago, NWBuck said:

I've been following this case since it started (even teaching about it in graduate Education classes)... the "retaliate against players who didn't join him" is news to me. It wasn't covered in any of the newspapers or other stories written about it (and we're not exactly conservative friendly here in Seattle), it didn't show up in any of the previous court case details that I can recall. Can someone point me to something substantive? 

The court decision is still wrong- case that was open and shut all across the nation, even was denied a SCOTUS hearing on one other occasion. When this first came to light, the district offered him a place to pray in private (accommodating his freedom of religion) and even told him he could pray on the field after everyone had left (and he was heading home) if he wished. He initially accepted the offer of privacy until a conservative legal group stepped in and offered to represent him.

This may have been covered as well- but a number of community members were also concerned when a group of Satanists showed up at the game to support him (and, therefore, their right to be on the field after games as well).

Like a said- the decision was a bad one.

 

I have nothing substantive, but I seem to have read somewhere* that at least two players had given statements that they felt like there was unspoken "coercion" about attending the prayer. The attorneys certainly included those statements in their filings.

 

edit to add: "somewhere" almost certainly being a link posted on one of these threads, or maybe a New Yorker article.

 

Edited June 28, 2022 by High Plains Drifter

[notre dame joe 187]

On 6/24/2022 at 9:52 PM, Patricio Swayze said:

Serious question, has congress ever passed a law that was sincerely supported by the voting public?

People love it when the taxes sent to Washington are returned in really small amounts.  

On 6/26/2022 at 5:05 PM, Brisketexan said:

Does the Supreme Court, as a creature of the society it serves and is part of, carrying many of that society's same flaws, sometimes miss that certain rights are inherent in all people, and then have to later correct itself?

Yes.  See Plessy v. Ferguson leading to Brown v. Board of Education (the point that our own senior senator tried to make, but was too fucking inept to do, and too fucking dumb to realize he had it ass-backwards), taking a case that said that an entire racial group actually didn't have true equal rights, and correcting the fuck out of that idiocy.  Oh, and if you actually want to look at "longstanding history" (the apparent standard that Alito would have us apply), the overwhelming, almost completely unidirectional path of history, has been that society is slow to recognize and follow rights for "out" groups, but eventually does so.

What we have never, ever seen -- from SCOTUS and frankly, in Western history (with notable exceptions, which are both relevant and analogous here -- I'll get to those) -- is a lurch in the opposite direction, voiding a right that has been recognized for a long-ass time (two generations).  We HAVE seen western societies lurch that direction before.  Fascist Italy.  Nazi Germany.  Various medieval governments and entities that afforded jews some protections, and then withdrew them and persecuted the fuck out of jews again when it was politically expedient.  In the class of "nations/societies that have had a right for an out/marginalized group, but then revoked that right," we are in super ultra mega shitty company.

And underneath ALL of this is the actual right that got revoked.  The right to privacy as it relates to bodily autonomy.  Clarence Thomas said they are coming for the right to choose contraception, the right to engage in private, consensual sex with another adult regardless of gender and the nature of the act, and the right to obtain the benefits of state-sanctioned marriage without regard to the gender of the participant (fucking HYSTERICAL that he left out the 4th member of that group of cases, Loving, which acknowledged the right to his own interracial marriage....don't worry, Clarence, they'll come for that, too).  He's dead right, and I credit him for his honesty, even if it came about because he is a dumbass as opposed to being ethical and honorable.  You and your pals are too fucking stupid to realize what Dobbs actually does.  Dobbs is only facially about abortion.  It is really about the foundational issue that had to be decided before the matter of abortion could be reached: you do not have any constitutional right to control your own body.  Because we're a hung-up, retrograde society, we think that only relates to matters revolving around sex (contraception, buttfucking, gay marriage).  But it's so, so, so much more than that.

Congratulations, conservatives.....you got what you wanted.  And all it does is give us a choice of future hellscapes.  Do you want the conservative one, where it's illegal to have any sort of sex except with your opposite gender spouse, in certain positions, with no contraceptives allowed?  Or do you want the insane, ultra-control "progressive" one, where you'll be longing for the days that all that was imposed were public mask mandates and vaccine passes?  Pick, but you no longer get to vote for "none of the above," because your body is no longer yours.  It belongs to whichever power faction happens to have control of the government at any given time.  Which obviates the whole fucking point of rights, which are supposed to be bedrock inviolable constants.

Congratulations.  You did it.

Did what?  read the constitution?

 

there too many wrong in this ramble to list them all, lowlights include.

 

- the history as god theory.  Saying the present has to follow the perceived path of the past is just another abortion of circular logic.   Case in point, the Germans would say History has long marched towards national socialism and all individuals must fall in liiiiiine.

- But that is not even the history of American law.  Power has been flowing to the government from the people for over 100 years.  Take any limitation on federal power and try to say it hasn't been diluted: interstate commerce means non-commercial activity that remains in state.  Freedom of association means punishment for association.  Freedom of speech outside of 5 million exceptions etc. 

 

- "we think that only relates to matters revolving around sex (contraception, buttfucking, gay marriage)." [abortion, cross-dressing, transomething]  Well YOU think that.  Did you ever notice the only place Ds care about individual rights is the genitals? 

[NWBuck 8,568]

1 hour ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

I have nothing substantive, but I seem to have read somewhere* that at least two players had given statements that they felt like there was unspoken "coercion" about attending the prayer. The attorneys certainly included those statements in their filings.

 

edit to add: "somewhere" almost certainly being a link posted on one of these threads, or maybe a New Yorker article.

 

I don't doubt that... We teach about the concept of authoritative pressure and expectation, but there seems to be a difference between "we felt like we were supposed to" and "we were punished if we didn't" 

[DigglerontheHoof 21,200]

Christianity is evil.  

[hpslugga 4,059]

3 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

People love it when the taxes sent to Washington are returned in really small amounts.  

Did what?  read the constitution?

You’ve already exposed yourself as a complete moron who hasn’t the foggiest conception of what judicial precedent even is and now you want to make believe and pretend that you’ve read the the constitution when you clearly haven’t? 

 

[WhatTheBuck 28,781]

5 hours ago, NWBuck said:

I've been following this case since it started (even teaching about it in graduate Education classes)... the "retaliate against players who didn't join him" is news to me. It wasn't covered in any of the newspapers or other stories written about it (and we're not exactly conservative friendly here in Seattle), it didn't show up in any of the previous court case details that I can recall. Can someone point me to something substantive? 

The court decision is still wrong- case that was open and shut all across the nation, even was denied a SCOTUS hearing on one other occasion. When this first came to light, the district offered him a place to pray in private (accommodating his freedom of religion) and even told him he could pray on the field after everyone had left (and he was heading home) if he wished. He initially accepted the offer of privacy until a conservative legal group stepped in and offered to represent him.

This may have been covered as well- but a number of community members were also concerned when a group of Satanists showed up at the game to support him (and, therefore, their right to be on the field after games as well).

Like a said- the decision was a bad one.

We need more Muslim coaches.

[Caponata 151]

 

[speed817 19,277]

 

 

[Neonmoon 38,129]

4 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

 

- the history as god theory.  Saying the present has to follow the perceived path of the past is just another abortion of circular logic.   Case in point, the Germans would say History has long marched towards national socialism and all individuals must fall in liiiiiine.

This isn’t what he was saying whatsoever 

[TwiceHorn 31,475]

9 hours ago, Bullneck said:

 

 

Well, it is apparently true that "practicing Christians" adopt at higher rates than the rest of "us."  https://adoption.org/who-adopts-the-most

But that doesn't account for whether they're pro-life fundagelicals or something else.

Regardless, as long as there's a huge surplus of unadopted children, all modes of family planning should remain on the table.

[immamac 42,850]

36 minutes ago, Caponata said:

 

It's almost like ole Joe is a huge piece of shit politician, who would have thought! 

Joe is and has been wrong the entire time on this, but this isn't Joe Bidens fault.