Official Thread for Abortion Demagoguery

[wildcat09 29559]

6 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

no one is suggesting that. not even close. but at some point even they have to stand up go, "come on, what the fuck?"

No, they actually don’t. Corporations will absolutely bow to fascists.

[Brisketexan 106629]

1 hour ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

is.... is it finally happening? are these chucklefucks finally tripping over their dicks to the point that even the corporations are gonna have to stand up to them? I just don't understand it

 

$100,000 fine?  On what authority?  Seriously, on what authority?

Yeah, I know.....it doesn't matter.  Calvinball.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

28 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

No, they actually don’t. Corporations will absolutely bow to fascists.

I believe you were the one who pointed out the old case regarding the motel? The owner used the Constitution as his basis for his defense (pardon if I screw up legal terms and procedures) correct? That the founders and what was laid out in the beginning superceded any plaintiff's claims regarding the Commerce Clause or any other related grievance.

Given what recently transpired with SCOTUS, it seems plain that corporations will pay lip service to the outgroups while slowly but surely consolidating their money and influence with the group that will give them what they need to further the gap between the 1% and the desperate rest.

The list of collaborators with the Axis countries during the war is too numerous to list here. Coca-Cola has had to distance themselves from their involvement to the point that they got scolded for conveniently omitting certain details in their history timeline.

[henrygandorf 29223]

ok, i have a question, and i'm sure it's been discussed several times before, but i am 10+ pages behind on this thread.  you miss a little, you miss a lot, etc.  this was posed in a conversation last night and i didn't really have an explanation (there may not be one).

if certain states are against abortion, which is where we are, then why do they care so much (to the point of bounties, arrests, investigations, tracking, tracing) about women going out of state to more abortion friendly areas to have the procedure?  i mean, before roe (and plenty in the past 50 years) women have been traveling to get the care they need if they're in a restrictive area. 

there are different laws in different states and certainly in different countries.  if an american goes to europe and drinks under 21 or legally gets a prostitute or partakes in illicit american-banned substances, that's not breaking any american law and america sure as shit doesn't care about that when they get back.  so why do states care about what people who are living in their state are doing in other states? 

also what makes you a "citizen of texas"?  drivers license?  registered to vote?  what if a woman grew up in california, then went to ut, then when she was 21, needed an abortion, and she traveled to stay with her parents in la and get one?  is this prohibited?  can they/will they go after her?  what authority or precedent do states have in matters like this, or is there none?

the whole thing is fucked in nine different ways, so i'm not trying to quibble about a side-issue, i just was curious, as i didn't even have any frame of reference, and neither did anyone in our little conversation group.

[Gap03 3374]

25 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

ok, i have a question, and i'm sure it's been discussed several times before, but i am 10+ pages behind on this thread.  you miss a little, you miss a lot, etc.  this was posed in a conversation last night and i didn't really have an explanation (there may not be one).

if certain states are against abortion, which is where we are, then why do they care so much (to the point of bounties, arrests, investigations, tracking, tracing) about women going out of state to more abortion friendly areas to have the procedure?  i mean, before roe (and plenty in the past 50 years) women have been traveling to get the care they need if they're in a restrictive area. 

there are different laws in different states and certainly in different countries.  if an american goes to europe and drinks under 21 or legally gets a prostitute or partakes in illicit american-banned substances, that's not breaking any american law and america sure as shit doesn't care about that when they get back.  so why do states care about what people who are living in their state are doing in other states? 

Because Sky Daddy said so.  

28 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

also what makes you a "citizen of texas"?  drivers license?  registered to vote?  what if a woman grew up in california, then went to ut, then when she was 21, needed an abortion, and she traveled to stay with her parents in la and get one?  is this prohibited?  can they/will they go after her?  what authority or precedent do states have in matters like this, or is there none?

You're thinking too hard.  Authority?  Not if you play by the pre-2022 rules. But under Calvinball?  Hell yeah, we got authority - it's whatever Alito and Co. say it is.  Interstate dispute, you say?  Tie will undoubtedly go to the most Christofascist state because reasons ...   

[safe sex 11914]

Because it's about control, not abortion.

[jimmyjazz 46979]

2 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

Because it's about control, not abortion.

This is the answer.

[hpslugga 4096]

53 minutes ago, Gap03 said:

Because Sky Daddy said so.  

 

[henrygandorf 29223]

28 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

Because it's about control, not abortion.

yeah, that was kinda what we said, but we just didn't know if there was any history behind it.  "because they're pieces of shit" was kinda the default, but i was hoping they had some sort of justification or explanation.  i guess we really don't look for that anymore.

[Willfully Horn 8204]

34 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

Because it's about control, not abortion.

As evidence, I haven’t heard report’s  about men being denied prescriptions for methotrexate, though reports say woman are being denied this best treatment for RA. Ironically, that drug is linked to ectopic abortions (which the lying liars assure us will still be permitted,) but it isn’t an abortifacient for a normal pregnancy.

It does cause fetal abnormalities when either partner takes it. Men are at risk three times as long as women. 
 

https://www.everydayhealth.com/rheumatoid-arthritis/women-with-ra-may-have-trouble-accessing-methotrexate-due-to-abortion-restrictions/

Edited July 1, 2022 by Willfully Horn

[henrygandorf 29223]

 

[HenryJames 67116]

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

In a state that prides itself on outsize masculinity, big firearms, big belt buckles, big cattle, big braggadocio, and big bidness...

Nothing screams WE ARE A BUNCH OF QUIVERING SNIVELING COWARDS more than releasing a ruling in the middle of the night on a holiday weekend.

Oh sure, after gerrymandering and suppressing voting and installing minority rule, then it all comes out in the light of day with the rallies and flags and marches and lib owning, but the scared little inner voice that reveals the weakness of character is all too evident to those who see who you really are.

 

 

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

Sorry if this has already been posted, the thread moves quickly. Very thoughtful piece if you read it through. Her point about nuance is well said.

https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/post-roe-reality-working-class-texas-women-merritt-tierce/

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19279]

This thread is infuriating.  Fuck anyone who is cheering SB 8 or the Dobbs decision. It should be noted that this happened before Dobbs, but after SB 8.  Special fuck you’d to those who insisted this wouldn’t happen.  It did.

 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by PenelopeWitherspoon

[pacman 7491]

22 hours ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

is.... is it finally happening? are these chucklefucks finally tripping over their dicks to the point that even the corporations are gonna have to stand up to them? I just don't understand it

 

But we won't fine them for decades of dumping harmful chemicals into the golden triangle water supply.

 

 

In other news

 

[henrygandorf 29223]

24 minutes ago, pacman said:

But we won't fine them for decades of dumping harmful chemicals into the golden triangle water supply.

 

 

In other news

 

some twitter folks are mad about this tweet, since it’s not pointed out immediately that she was able to go to indiana and get the procedure. i assume those types of people often miss the point. 

[pacman 7491]

Noticed that as well. They also conveniently forget toentuon Ohio legislators have discussed trying to punish those (i was going to say women but this clearly affects children now) who seek abortions from other states.

[bolverk 30237]

South Carolina's turn to step up to the batter's plate.

 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19279]

 

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

3 hours ago, bolverk said:

South Carolina's turn to step up to the batter's plate.

 

I read the article with the tweet:

"I want the public to know that while these providers are now mandated by law to send us these reports regardless of the will of their patients, we will not contact the patient if she doesn’t want us to," Graziano said. "We will offer our support and investigative services only if they request it."

"I know all too well the pain and heartache that comes from sexual assault, as a family member to a victim and as someone who has worked with them as a law enforcement officer," she continued. "It is traumatizing, and my agency will do everything we can to offer care, solace and respect to these women who are seeking health care."

 

 

How many guesses that she will be voted out during the next election and replaced with a male who will have no problem complying with the State.

[henrygandorf 29223]

[Neonmoon 38130]

Civil War coming 

Pitting states against each other only leads to one thing. Thanks Supreme Court

Edited July 3, 2022 by Neonmoon

[chainsaw 10245]

California has way more money than Texas, probably wins that war of attrition

[henrygandorf 29223]

5 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Civil War coming 

Pitting states against each other only leads to one thing. Thanks Supreme Court

the twitterverse is all about saying the gop plan is to condense all the blue votes into blue states then rely on the outdated rules of the senate and electoral college to keep them in power.  it's unrealistic and ridiculous.

or is it?

[troph 25094]

20 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

the twitterverse is all about saying the gop plan is to condense all the blue votes into blue states then rely on the outdated rules of the senate and electoral college to keep them in power.  it's unrealistic and ridiculous.

or is it?

That’s the back up plan. 

[troph 25094]

I think I may have lapped brisket in about 7 calendar days.  it's time to....

[Sawbonz 28084]

On 7/1/2022 at 12:46 PM, Caponata said:

I like Warren as a policy maker but making it through the brutal grind of an election cycle idk. 

Immaculate vibes did his best to save him lol

[WBT 20884]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

the twitterverse is all about saying the gop plan is to condense all the blue votes into blue states then rely on the outdated rules of the senate and electoral college to keep them in power.  it's unrealistic and ridiculous.

or is it?

Plan?  It's been happening organically for a long time

[hobbes2702 13351]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

the twitterverse is all about saying the gop plan is to condense all the blue votes into blue states then rely on the outdated rules of the senate and electoral college to keep them in power.  it's unrealistic and ridiculous.

or is it?

No that’s exactly the goal

[henrygandorf 29223]

12 minutes ago, WBT said:

Plan?  It's been happening organically for a long time

obviously wasn't happening fast enough.  time for the batshit laws.

[elfenix 34658]

2 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

the twitterverse is all about saying the gop plan is to condense all the blue votes into blue states then rely on the outdated rules of the senate and electoral college to keep them in power.  it's unrealistic and ridiculous.

or is it?

if libs wanted to be strategic a bunch of work from homers should move to shore up the margin in GA, AZ, WI, and PA, and try to flip NC, or even sparse places like SD, ND, MT, and WY (though more for the senate seats than the electoral votes). 

[troph 25094]

53 minutes ago, elfenix said:

if libs wanted to be strategic a bunch of work from homers should move to shore up the margin in GA, AZ, WI, and PA, and try to flip NC, or even sparse places like SD, ND, MT, and WY (though more for the senate seats than the electoral votes). 

The only people who do that kind of bat shit crazy stuff believe they are on a mission from god - jihadists and evangelical warriors. Liberals aren’t moving to South Dakota to take a senate seat. Avocado toast in Seattle and the wine in Sonoma is too good to be bothered with missions from god and bullshit like that. 

[henrygandorf 29223]

 

[troph 25094]

On 7/1/2022 at 1:14 PM, hobbes2702 said:

Corporations as our thought and moral leaders is absolute nightmare fuel. 

why? on these issues they more readily follow the will of the people a/k/a the market.  I get what you are saying but at least with respect to LGBTQ rights they have been an important part of advancing non-discrimination policies. I gave a speech in DC once about how corporate executives should not let politicians and others tell them they have no soul, no character because it was corporations that allowed me to thrive in a world that has been less than easy to live in for most of my people. I meant it with conviction, and received a standing ovation when I said it was because of people like them, that my sons can have a normal life with me as their parent. It appears on repo rights they will act the same as LGBTQ rights. I'll admit on their position on Jan 6, other civil rights issues, BLM matters, etc. I'm not up to speed. I mean I DO wish the Court was the bullwark of morality it's supposed to be, uphold our most sacred ideals but yeah, that's not happening again in much of what's left of my life.  so if it's corporations we have, it's corporations I'll take.

Edited July 3, 2022 by troph

[hpslugga 4096]

On 7/1/2022 at 1:16 PM, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

no one is suggesting that. not even close. but at some point even they have to stand up go, "come on, what the fuck?"

I mean I get it, but all that really serves is to show how far to the right they’re willing to go. I find no comfort in that. I find no comfort with any CEO saying “yeah we do want to dominate the world and control its resources, but at least we don’t want to see teachers leading a classroom full of pregnant 15 year olds in prayer while they’re getting shot at.”

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

55 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

 

So rude

[tchookem 3966]

 

I look at that young man's face and only one word comes to mind... Undefeated.

[pacman 7491]

 

 

[Willfully Horn 8204]

1 hour ago, troph said:

why? on these issues they more readily follow the will of the people a/k/a the market.  I get what you are saying but at least with respect to LGBTQ rights they have been an important part of advancing non-discrimination policies. I gave a speech in DC once about how corporate executives should not let politicians and others tell them they have no soul, no character because it was corporations that allowed me to thrive in a world that has been less than easy to live in for most of my people. I meant it with conviction, and received a standing ovation when I said it was because of people like them, that my sons can have a normal life with me as their parent. It appears on repo rights they will act the same as LGBTQ rights. I'll admit on their position on Jan 6, other civil rights issues, BLM matters, etc. I'm not up to speed. I mean I DO wish the Court was the bullwark of morality it's supposed to be, uphold our most sacred ideals but yeah, that's not happening again in much of what's left of my life.  so if it's corporations we have, it's corporations I'll take.

The vast majority (filibuster busting and impeachment confirming numbers, at least) of US citizens stand with you, and the LBGTQ+ community. So, corporations do, too. Of course, the political capital corporations wield can also be a force for good and a better tomorrow. I have trouble believing morality has much weight in corporate positions.

i will eat crow when corporations take a moral stance not supported by most of their consumers. And I admit my suspicions are rooted in Citizens United.

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/new-poll-shows-americans-overwhelmingly-oppose-anti-transgender-laws

Edited July 3, 2022 by Willfully Horn
Link

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20835]

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20835]

[troph 25094]

5 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

The vast majority (filibuster busting and impeachment confirming numbers, at least) of US citizens stand with you, and the LBGTQ+ community. So, corporations do, too. Of course, the political capital corporations wield can also be a force for good and a better tomorrow. I have trouble believing morality has much weight in corporate positions.

i will eat crow when corporations take a moral stance not supported by most of their consumers. And I admit my suspicions are rooted in Citizens United.

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/new-poll-shows-americans-overwhelmingly-oppose-anti-transgender-laws

Well I’d rather have the Court but I won’t reject the weight of corporations, and while I tend to agree they aren’t moral in the strictest sense they’ve had more backbone on a lot of issues when compared to their soulless counterparts the politicians, and in both cases they are quite similar at least in theory. The corporation is beholden to its stakeholders so we the people do have a say through the capital corporations wield when the politicians decide we the people makes for only a nice hallmark card. Put simply, on progressive matters of all kinds, climate, LGBTQ, repro rights etc I’ll hitch my wagon to the corporations because they may be all we have left.

[Serak The Preparer 3482]

41 minutes ago, pacman said:

 

 

@Hank Kingsley - not sure if you're still banking the Pete drum but I think of you when I think of Pete. This may be one of the best responses to a loaded abortion question I've seen. 

[henrygandorf 29223]

28 minutes ago, Serak The Preparer said:

@Hank Kingsley - not sure if you're still banking the Pete drum but I think of you when I think of Pete. This may be one of the best responses to a loaded abortion question I've seen. 

he is.

that clip has been played plenty, here it is, though not sure what's wrong with the picture on it.

 

[Bullneck 19454]

On 7/1/2022 at 1:46 PM, Caponata said:

I like Warren as a policy maker but making it through the brutal grind of an election cycle idk. 

Quote

Caponata

 

crowd sourced

 281

 117

For realz?  No tricking?

Edited July 4, 2022 by Bullneck

[Aqua Buddha 14782]

On 7/2/2022 at 10:41 AM, pacman said:

But we won't fine them for decades of dumping harmful chemicals into the golden triangle water supply.

 

 

In other news

 

Forcing 10 year olds to have a baby.  Makes you wonder who the real groomers are.

[troph 25094]

He looks like an 18 year old version of my dad.

[Bullneck 19454]

On 7/1/2022 at 2:23 PM, wildcat09 said:

No, they actually don’t. Corporations will absolutely bow to fascists.

 

29 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

he is.

that clip has been played plenty, here it is, though not sure what's wrong with the picture on it.

 

Damn, he's on his game.  I've never heard him speak outside of the debates, feuding with Klobs.

How old is this?  From 2020 or last week?  If it's last week he's definitely lining it up for 2024

Edited July 4, 2022 by Bullneck

[Bullneck 19454]

On 7/2/2022 at 4:04 PM, bolverk said:

South Carolina's turn to step up to the batter's plate.

 

Doesn't the "they lived happily every after" part include the baby-makes-three couple getting married?  Seems like that could be a problem.  

South Carolina, did you think this through?