Official Thread for Abortion Demagoguery

[Chuckie Finster 22,598]

5 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

This is largely Ruth Bader Ginsburg's fault.

Egotistical freak.

lol good job Ruth

Someone needs to photoshop Breyer on this.

[gmr548 16,482]

What's most aggravating is many of these Republican lawmaker's daughters would have an abortion spa trip to Arizona if they got knocked up at a high school party. Meanwhile, the poorest and most destitute will be crushed by this. 

It’s not about “unborn lives” or whatever. It’s about creating a rigid caste system.

[atomheartbevo 89,396]

2 hours ago, hookem2010 said:

Remember how we all joked about how shitty 2020 was, as if it were some sort of aberration? And now 2021 is trying to equal it. I'm pretty sure that after a couple centuries where there was a trajectory of general improvement in human life, we are now on the downturn. It really is something to witness, although I would rather have experienced it a few more decades into my life.

2021 = 2020 won

[gmr548 16,482]

It's the state's fault that me and my fuck buddy fucked even though we don't want kids with each other and it wasn't even done in accordance with 'the schedule'! God damn party of death I tell you!

Lmao look at this incel

[Js1 85,085]

Never forget Susan Collins crying on the Sunday shows that Kavanaugh promised her he would NEVER EVER EVER EVER overturn Roe v Wade. 

[Js1 85,085]

29 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

This is largely Ruth Bader Ginsburg's fault.

Egotistical freak.

lol good job Ruth

As it also belongs to your friends who helped destroy Hillary leading up to 2016, sat out or voted for Jill Stein. 

[F250 28,674]

5 minutes ago, Js1 said:

As it also belongs to your friends who helped destroy Hillary leading up to 2016, sat out or voted for Jill Stein. 

That's a specious argument. Bad_teammate's point is all RGB had to do was simply retire during Obama's 2nd term.

[Bozo_Casanova 26,271]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

it is a good line to express proteins such as receptors) for too many products for Huffines to tweet about.  Components of his perfume was probably tested in a process that included HEK293T.  

Nah. I’m pretty sure Don Huffines wears something older, like L’aire du Temps. 

Edited September 2, 2021 by Bozo_Casanova

[Aqua Buddha 14,501]

Is there a Go Fund Me page for suing the guys who get the girls pregnant?

[Js1 85,085]

8 minutes ago, F250 said:

That's a specious argument. Bad_teammate's point is all RGB had to do was simply retire during Obama's 2nd term.

She could have. She didn’t.  And yet everyone knew the chance of Trump getting 2-3 picks was pretty high and yet….

[F250 28,674]

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

She could have. She didn’t. 

That's the point.

[tantric superman 4,667]

10 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

Anti-abortion folks are the vegans of the right in that both attempt to ratchet morality past what has been accepted. No more land of milk and honey and no more it’s none of your business, so don’t mention it.

I guess I take a bit of umbrage at this just because the social benefits of there being lots of vegans around just seems to me to be unassailable from a environmental, and assuming the meat isn't all from hunting, an animal cruelty standpoint, if you just exclude the beating you get from having to actually deal with vegans.  On the flip side, as far as anti-abortion, you get a beating plus you get lots of unwanted children. 

 

 

[Js1 85,085]

19 minutes ago, F250 said:

That's the point.

You can blame RBG up until the point (so pre-2014) where it was on the voters to decide who would name her replacement and they sat at home instead or threw a tantrum and voted third party. 

And you know, I know, everyone knows, Hillary warned us that the winner was going to name 2-3 SCOTUS picks and set the direction for the court for 30 years.   At that point, it was on us, not RBG, to vote for the Dem.  Instead of, y'know, Jill Stein. 

Edited September 2, 2021 by Js1

[Biff Tannen 45,491]

42 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Never forget Susan Collins crying on the Sunday shows that Kavanaugh promised her he would NEVER EVER EVER EVER overturn Roe v Wade. 

Susan Collins might be the dumbest senator in a large group of dumb senators.

[bad_teammate 13,132]

42 minutes ago, F250 said:

That's a specious argument. Bad_teammate's point is all RGB had to do was simply retire during Obama's 2nd term.

He knows, he just has the most obscure and idiotic axe to grind and he will never stop doing it.

Gary Johnson took more votes from Trump (4.48M) than Stein took from Hillary (1.2M).

If we take 3rd parties out, Trump wins by an even wider margin.

This 538 conversation on it is interesting. Clare Malone is the Js1 role of desperately wanting to assign the same blame despite having no supportable rational basis for doing so. At the end, it's emotional allegiance to a belief and reason has no place in it. He got mad at individual personalities online and it dominates his entire view on the events. 

Edited September 2, 2021 by bad_teammate

[RomaVicta 29,769]

1 hour ago, hpslugga said:

This bears severe repetition.

If one is one of those dumbasses that describes themselves as "pro-life," and one plans to defend their position by citing the Bible, they will absolutely fail rather spectacularly. The Bible does not support their position, and one would understand that if they actually read what was in their favored text. The biggest failing religious people have is that they read into their texts things they do not say, and then they ignore what they do say. That's called "reading between the lines without reading the lines." 

I'm probably very late to this observation, but haven't the fundamentalist Christian sects become what the Protestants wanted to get away from?

The ideal, as I understand it, was that printing millions of Bibles would put individuals directly in touch with God skipping the corrupt, controlling middleman from the Vatican. It's a sweet notion.

What we have today are middlemen not from the Vatican herding the cattle just like the reversed-collar guys. The yokels don't read and interpret the Bible for themselves. They may memorize a lot of it, but they go mass service to have it all explained to them by self-serving demagogues.

It's so obvious, I'm almost embarrassed to write this. As an outsider to religion, my scorn or admiration for belief has been general.

How deeply do you plant a woman's lower body in the ground for the most effective stoning?

My state sucks.

[sidis 9,731]

3 hours ago, Anastasis said:

I just skimmed sb8. It allows for abortion in the case of medical emergency or complicating medical condition. Ectopic pregnancies would seem to fall under that.  
 

This bill is stupid and counterproductive. Much better reduction strategy is to address aspects related to abortion that the vast majority of reasonable people can agree on. But our politics are totally fn broken. 

you seem less passive aggressive and snarky about peoples' concerns re: gorsuch, kavanaugh, and coney barrett and their perspectives towards abortion than in previous posts.  perhaps there was some validity to those concerns.  i was promised that kavanaugh would not break with roberts.

[Js1 85,085]

Just now, sidis said:

you seem less passive aggressive and snarky about peoples' concerns re: gorsuch, kavanaugh, and coney barrett and their perspectives towards abortion than in previous posts.  perhaps there was some validity to those concerns.  i was promised that kavanaugh would not break with roberts.

He wouldn't overturn Roe v Wade and the court is 3-3-3.  These are things people said and were serious about. 

[wildcat09 29,213]

12 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Susan Collins might be the dumbest senator in a large group of dumb senators.

She's not dumb, she was just full of shit.

[sidis 9,731]

46 minutes ago, F250 said:

That's a specious argument. Bad_teammate's point is all RGB had to do was simply retire during Obama's 2nd term.

correction, during the first year of his second term apparently.

[wildcat09 29,213]

I really don't think we've even begun to comprehend how many different ways SB8 can be used to harass people. It's going to be an absolute fucking disaster for Texas.

[Bama Chick 28,596]

lol at anyone believing Mitch McConnell would have allowed a vote on confirming RGB’s replacement.

And any man running down her character can fuck off.

[Anastasis 23,390]

12 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

Were they not stem cells?

Differentiated kidney cells.

12 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

An abortion is an abortion, a murder of an unborn child is a murder of an unborn child. Using tissue from an aborted fetus is using tissue from an aborted fetus. 

This seems dogmatic. 

 

The cells were obtained from kidney tissue extracted from a fetus after either a miscarriage or a therapeutic abortion in the Netherlands in 1970-1972 (elective abortions were not legal during this timeframe in the Netherlands). The scientist that produced the cell line did not know which, miscarriage or therapeutic abortion. Standing up HEK293T in this discussion as some sort of a gotcha, and especially blending it with ESC is counterproductive imo and just indicative of the demagoguery from...well you know.    

[Bama Chick 28,596]

I really don't think we've even begun to comprehend how many different ways SB8 can be used to harass people. It's going to be an absolute fucking disaster for Texas.

I’m waiting for the first VICE News story on a Texas Abortion Posse.

[Aqua Buddha 14,501]

Abbott was just on CNBC trying to downplay this.  Don’t know what he said because I was on a call.  They did have a graphic about 2/3 of white collar women wanting to avoid Texas.  
 

I’d like to see the interview once they post it on the inter-Google.

[Anastasis 23,390]

8 minutes ago, sidis said:

you seem less passive aggressive and snarky about peoples' concerns re: gorsuch, kavanaugh, and coney barrett and their perspectives towards abortion than in previous posts.  perhaps there was some validity to those concerns.  i was promised that kavanaugh would not break with roberts.

For what it is worth, I think that they should issue some sort of statement or explanation or opinion or whatever is appropriate. I think that whatever justification was used to not take the case should be explained transparently. 

[yoladu 4,066]

3 hours ago, hookem2010 said:

Remember how we all joked about how shitty 2020 was, as if it were some sort of aberration? And now 2021 is trying to equal it. I'm pretty sure that after a couple centuries where there was a trajectory of general improvement in human life, we are now on the downturn. It really is something to witness, although I would rather have experienced it a few more decades into my life.

I feel like Texan's lives get shittier in roughly 2 year increments, which coincidentally, corresponds to the Texas State Legislature being in session.

[yoladu 4,066]

3 hours ago, SimonBolivar said:

Winstar just keeps getting bigger and bigger.

I love their 3-day getaway abortion/gambling promotional packages.

Edited September 2, 2021 by yoladu

[bad_teammate 13,132]

"She should retire because she's 80 and has fought cancer 4 times already. The next president is going to be a Republican and will appoint a replacement that will end a woman's right to have an abortion."

- "SLAY KWEEN DOES WHAT SHE GIRLBOSSING WANTS TO DO!"

[wildcat09 29,213]

The State of Texas has just deputized and financially incentivized people to narc on their neighbors for speaking out in support of a fucking constitutional right and made speaking out in support of that constitutional right subject to substantial fines and the Supreme Court has said that's just great.  Anyone want to bet that we'll hear a fucking peep from the "leftists on campus are out of control!" crowd about this?

 

[sidis 9,731]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

For what it is worth, I think that they should issue some sort of statement or explanation or opinion or whatever is appropriate. I think that whatever justification was used to not take the case should be explained transparently. 

and justices roberts and kagan completely agree with you.

but they were clever and kept it to a bullshit paragraph for which there is no accountability beyond fellow justices calling them out for being disingenuous idealogues. this is unquestionably a constitutionality issue and hiding it behind "well, the government isn't the one enforcing it and texas has 'brilliantly' carved out a loophole by instead establishing a pseudo-vigilante harassment vehicle" as if the state judiciary hearing and enforcing judgments brought by private citizens against other private citizens is not a crisis of constitutionality is well, ya know.  we knew alito and thomas were complete pieces of shit partisan fucks.  now we have confirmation that all those crybaby liberals having hissy fits during trump's appointments maybe had a point while all of you moderate conservatives stood by saying "stop worrying about it."

[RomaVicta 29,769]

3 minutes ago, yoladu said:

I love their 3-day getaway abortion/gambling promotional packages.

You can roll the dice on a coathanger or roll real dice here at Winstar!

Your life or your money!

[lemonlime 5,503]

Need to get to work

[sidis 9,731]

7 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

The State of Texas has just deputized and financially incentivized people to narc on their neighbors for speaking out in support of a fucking constitutional right and made speaking out in support of that constitutional right subject to substantial fines and the Supreme Court has said that's just great.  Anyone want to bet that we'll hear a fucking peep from the "leftists on campus are out of control!" crowd about this?

 

if people thought their neighborhood karens on facebook and nextdoor were bad before...the anti-abortion karen posses are about to take it to the next level.

i would like to start paying some high school romeos to start pumping republican state legislators' daughters with babies so i can start suing their sorry, hypocritical asses.

[Js1 85,085]

4 minutes ago, sidis said:

and justices roberts and kagan completely agree with you.

but they were clever and kept it to a bullshit paragraph for which there is no accountability beyond fellow justices calling them out for being disingenuous idealogues. this is unquestionably a constitutionality issue and hiding it behind "well, the government isn't the one enforcing it and texas has 'brilliantly' carved out a loophole by instead establishing a pseudo-vigilante harassment vehicle" as if the state judiciary hearing and enforcing judgments brought by private citizens against other private citizens is not a crisis of constitutionality is well, ya know.  we knew alito and thomas were complete pieces of shit partisan fucks.  now we have confirmation that all those crybaby liberals having hissy fits during trump's appointments maybe had a point while all of you moderate conservatives stood by saying "stop worrying about it."

The Shadow Docket is bullshit.  Our unelected highest court in the land issuing opinions late at night with no real justification is such bullshit. 

[Macanudo 12,925]

4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

The State of Texas has just deputized and financially incentivized people to narc on their neighbors for speaking out in support of a fucking constitutional right and made speaking out in support of that constitutional right subject to substantial fines and the Supreme Court has said that's just great.  Anyone want to bet that we'll hear a fucking peep from the "leftists on campus are out of control!" crowd about this?

 

Kind of funny that the Republicans, in this state and around the country, like to spew out crap about socialism/communism and yet they have basically created a Texas citizen version of the Stasi.

[brakeman 28,219]

[4th&Five 41,457]

how long until businesses start to have second thoughts about operating in this backwards fucking state?

[RomaVicta 29,769]

9 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

The State of Texas has just deputized and financially incentivized people to narc on their neighbors for speaking out in support of a fucking constitutional right and made speaking out in support of that constitutional right subject to substantial fines and the Supreme Court has said that's just great.  Anyone want to bet that we'll hear a fucking peep from the "leftists on campus are out of control!" crowd about this?

 

They're turning Texas (TEXAS!) into a Rat Ship.

 

I'll stop crowding the thread. But this disgraceful state I was born in needs a laxative.

Never vote for a white man unless it's your only choice. Even the best of us are just blind to shit that's going on.

[Nivek 16,843]

12 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

The "framing" of someone who is pro-choice as being "pro-abortion" is very wrong. A woman considering her health in order to have "freedom" must be granted the right to make these choices without interference by the state. Her "eggs" are not the state's any more than is the sperm that might fertilize any one or more eggs. If the state sees it differently, then consider that a female cannot be impregnated w/o those sperm thus the male who fails to use a birth preventative is violating not only her rights but the state's and therefore he should be found guilty of wanton disregard of life as well. To think that most women who have an abortion think of it as easily as they order a breakfast taco is asinine.

As mentioned earlier, we have a lot of problems with lack of sex education, with lack of maternity/paternity leave, with basic FREAKING healthcare for women and children,  and when men get over their anxiety and fear that women are capable of enjoying sex and that it has nothing to do with them personally and the size of their penis and whatever other male centric beliefs they've been carrying around and if a women wants to make a choice regarding her reproductive health that choice is hers to make, the world would be a lot more peaceful.

You lost me here at women penises.  

[sidis 9,731]

here is the snitch site...

https://prolifewhistleblower.com/

i think everyone here should certainly feel free to start submitting cases for them to consider.  I am fairly certain I saw Audrey Abbott, Caroline Cruz, Catherine Cruz, at the local planned parenthood last summer.  i am pretty sure i saw shane patrick and ryan patrick giving them a ride there and encouraging them to do so.

[Nivek 16,843]

10 hours ago, Satchel said:

What continues to be amazing is to watch mostly men get so lathered up about women’s pre birth health issues and later lose their zeal for post birth concerns. I mean, the drop off is dramatic. I guess it never occurs to the people (who consider themselves to be the last Christians) that there is a tie in to giving birth and providing essential health care that they simply refuse to give.

I guess the cruelty really is the point.

They don't care.  They don't care.  They never cared.   The only thing they give a shit about is using our general collective adoration of babies and warping that feeling into some sort of political gain so they can distract us from their failings in leadership and grift.  

[Anastasis 23,390]

11 minutes ago, sidis said:

and justices roberts and kagan completely agree with you.

but they were clever and kept it to a bullshit paragraph for which there is no accountability beyond fellow justices calling them out for being disingenuous idealogues. this is unquestionably a constitutionality issue and hiding it behind "well, the government isn't the one enforcing it and texas has 'brilliantly' carved out a loophole by instead establishing a pseudo-vigilante harassment vehicle" as if the state judiciary hearing and enforcing judgments brought by private citizens against other private citizens is not a crisis of constitutionality is well, ya know.  we knew alito and thomas were complete pieces of shit partisan fucks.  now we have confirmation that all those crybaby liberals having hissy fits during trump's appointments maybe had a point while all of you moderate conservatives stood by saying "stop worrying about it."

Putting aside the specific topic at hand, is the legal justification provided below total legal horseshit, or does it have some merit and its just a matter of people takes sides based on the topic and the outcome? Would a different case with a different set of plaintiffs potentially fare differently wrt to relief while it played out in the court system?

 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 21A24

WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH ET AL. v. AUSTIN REEVE JACKSON, JUDGE, ET AL.

ON APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

[September 1, 2021] The application for injunctive relief or, in the alternative, to vacate stays of the district court proceedings presented to JUSTICE ALITO and by him referred to the Court is denied. To prevail in an application for a stay or an injunction, an applicant must carry the burden of making a “strong showing” that it is “likely to succeed on the merits,” that it will be “irreparably injured absent a stay,” that the balance of the equities favors it, and that a stay is consistent with the public interest. Nken v. Holder, 556 U. S. 418, 434 (2009); Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 141 S. Ct. 63, 66 (2020) (citing Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U. S. 7, 20 (2008)). The applicants now before us have raised serious questions regarding the constitutionality of the Texas law at issue. But their application also presents complex and novel antecedent procedural questions on which they have not carried their burden. For example, federal courts enjoy the power to enjoin individuals tasked with enforcing laws, not the laws themselves. California v. Texas, 593 U. S. ___, ___ (2021) (slip op., at 8). And it is unclear whether the named defendants in this lawsuit can or will seek to enforce the Texas law against the applicants in a manner that might permit our intervention. Clapper v. Amnesty Int’l USA, 568 U. S. 398, 409 (2013) (“threatened injury must be certainly impending” (citation omitted)). The State has represented 2 WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH v. JACKSON ROBERTS, C. J., dissenting that neither it nor its executive employees possess the authority to enforce the Texas law either directly or indirectly. Nor is it clear whether, under existing precedent, this Court can issue an injunction against state judges asked to decide a lawsuit under Texas’s law. See Ex parte Young, 209 U. S. 123, 163 (1908). Finally, the sole private-citizen respondent before us has filed an affidavit stating that he has no present intention to enforce the law. In light of such issues, we cannot say the applicants have met their burden to prevail in an injunction or stay application. In reaching this conclusion, we stress that we do not purport to resolve definitively any jurisdictional or substantive claim in the applicants’ lawsuit. In particular, this order is not based on any conclusion about the constitutionality of Texas’s law, and in no way limits other procedurally proper challenges to the Texas law, including in Texas state courts.

[sidis 9,731]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Putting aside the specific topic at hand, is the legal justification provided below total legal horseshit, or does it have some merit and its just a matter of people takes sides based on the topic and the outcome? Would a different case with a different set of plaintiffs potentially fare differently wrt to relief while it played out in the court system?

 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 21A24

WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH ET AL. v. AUSTIN REEVE JACKSON, JUDGE, ET AL.

ON APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

[September 1, 2021] The application for injunctive relief or, in the alternative, to vacate stays of the district court proceedings presented to JUSTICE ALITO and by him referred to the Court is denied. To prevail in an application for a stay or an injunction, an applicant must carry the burden of making a “strong showing” that it is “likely to succeed on the merits,” that it will be “irreparably injured absent a stay,” that the balance of the equities favors it, and that a stay is consistent with the public interest. Nken v. Holder, 556 U. S. 418, 434 (2009); Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 141 S. Ct. 63, 66 (2020) (citing Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U. S. 7, 20 (2008)). The applicants now before us have raised serious questions regarding the constitutionality of the Texas law at issue. But their application also presents complex and novel antecedent procedural questions on which they have not carried their burden. For example, federal courts enjoy the power to enjoin individuals tasked with enforcing laws, not the laws themselves. California v. Texas, 593 U. S. ___, ___ (2021) (slip op., at 8). And it is unclear whether the named defendants in this lawsuit can or will seek to enforce the Texas law against the applicants in a manner that might permit our intervention. Clapper v. Amnesty Int’l USA, 568 U. S. 398, 409 (2013) (“threatened injury must be certainly impending” (citation omitted)). The State has represented 2 WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH v. JACKSON ROBERTS, C. J., dissenting that neither it nor its executive employees possess the authority to enforce the Texas law either directly or indirectly. Nor is it clear whether, under existing precedent, this Court can issue an injunction against state judges asked to decide a lawsuit under Texas’s law. See Ex parte Young, 209 U. S. 123, 163 (1908). Finally, the sole private-citizen respondent before us has filed an affidavit stating that he has no present intention to enforce the law. In light of such issues, we cannot say the applicants have met their burden to prevail in an injunction or stay application. In reaching this conclusion, we stress that we do not purport to resolve definitively any jurisdictional or substantive claim in the applicants’ lawsuit. In particular, this order is not based on any conclusion about the constitutionality of Texas’s law, and in no way limits other procedurally proper challenges to the Texas law, including in Texas state courts.

come the fuck on...you really think that if vermont imposed a law saying that citizens could sue other citizens for $10,000 for owning a firearm in their household or that they could sue them for going to the local baptist church every sunday even though the "state government" wouldn't be the one enforcing it, they wouldn't have intervened?

Edited September 2, 2021 by sidis

[dcbc 14,398]

1 hour ago, F250 said:

That's a specious argument. Bad_teammate's point is all RGB had to do was simply retire during Obama's 2nd term.

And then the Turtle would have held up that confirmation vote too.

[Captainant 27,404]

1 hour ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Someone needs to photoshop Breyer on this.

 

[Js1 85,085]

10 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

how long until businesses start to have second thoughts about operating in this backwards fucking state?

Never, because the State of Texas continues to be a low-tax, high-growth, business friendly state with a poorly educated workforce who will take the pittance of a paycheck for whatever menial tasks they can be hired to do for cheap.  

Profits over people, baby! 

[High Plains Drifter 10,970]

5 minutes ago, sidis said:

here is the snitch site...

https://prolifewhistleblower.com/

i think everyone here should certainly feel free to start submitting cases for them to consider.  I am fairly certain I saw Audrey Abbott, Caroline Cruz, Catherine Cruz, at the local planned parenthood last summer.  i am pretty sure i saw shane patrick and ryan patrick giving them a ride there and encouraging them to do so.

 

can one of you computer geniuses write a program that floods this site with millions and millions of "reports", basically a DOS attack? bonus if all the reports are of state elected R who voted for this abortion. I'll donate tree fiddy to the cause.

[MissingInAction 24,807]

11 hours ago, Satchel said:

What continues to be amazing is to watch mostly men get so lathered up about women’s pre birth health issues and later lose their zeal for post birth concerns. I mean, the drop off is dramatic. I guess it never occurs to the people (who consider themselves to be the last Christians) that there is a tie in to giving birth and providing essential health care that they simply refuse to give.

I guess the cruelty really is the point.

Having grown up in an evengelical/southern Baptist family, I can confirm that cruelty is the point of 95% of all their actions.

I'm ready to torch their churches at this point.

[4th&Five 41,457]

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Never, because the State of Texas continues to be a low-tax, high-growth, business friendly state with a poorly educated workforce who will take the pittance of a paycheck for whatever menial tasks they can be hired to do for cheap.  

Profits over people, baby! 

yet we still can't get weed.