Yeah, I've been bashing quite a few entitled male control freaks on The Hill articles today. It's a great form of stress relief. Forced-birthers are pretty fragile. Apparently, all uterus owners are supposed to subjugate themselves to these fools and allow them to hold p#nile dominion over them because patriarchal brand of gawd sez so.
Well, that response to the Mexico City Policy question was enough for me to use the Whitehouse dot gov "Message for the President" form to tell Biden that I, a Christian woman, had an abortion last year. Mentioned crying in the waiting room because the TV was airing the Amy Coney Barrett confirmation hearings, told him about talking to my priest before and after, and that I'm glad I had a choice. I know the chances of it getting screened up to him actually seeing it are slim, but I needed to tell someone that hearing a response to a question about abortion policy including his attendance in church was a kick in the gut to me.
Yep, women of means will continue to have access to abortion, as they've always done. Meanwhile poor women and girls, mostly of color are facing a lifetime of drudgery, struggle, and crushing poverty.
I have often read the legislation and come away appalled at how badly it's written. Just a bunch of nonsense, and often citing discredited studies over and over and over. Planned Parenthood and others waste money and energy on these Krackenheaded weak, poop laws, while the GOP and red state churches raise a gout of money on this one issue.
We need to apply some SLAPP laws, stat. I don't know how great Biden will be on this, but Harris is loaded for bear. I think this will be a good cop, bad-ass-bitch approach, or I at least hope that's the case. She's been very strong, very vocal on getting women's equality to be represented in legislation.
The conpervatives can cling to their religious beliefs, I don't care one whit, but they need to know: America is not their church, and my body and my medical needs do not fall under their church doctrine. It never did.
All the conversation I read is about the Supremes overturning Roe and thus throwing the issue back to the states. But could they not outlaw it altogether? If they can overturn all marriage laws to make same-sex marriage the law of the land, why couldn't this fascist Court do likewise with abortion?
I'm hoping there is a reason they can't, but I've never seen it addressed.
It is excellent to see the new Biden administration being active and using GOP shit against them. As has been discussed in the past, isn't it time for SCOTUS to be "balanced" (or as some say, 'packed')? At least the discussion needs to be restarted now that the Democrats have the power to do it.
Last month, Alex Azar announced that the cheeto administration was withholding 200 million dollars in Medicaid funding to California because the funds could be used for abortions. We're knee-deep in a pandemic and that's what Azar was doing.I hope that the Biden administration has reversed that. Also, fuck Alex Azar forever.
I will never ever tire of telling people that until countries (not just the US!) ensure that all children that are already born are cared for, clothed, nourished, and educated well, regardless of parental income, you cannot in good conscience ban abortion. It's the argument that made my Catholic mother vote yes in the Irish abortion referendum a few years ago.
Women vote. Women out number men in the U.S. How is this still an issue? Are the "religious" propagandists really that influential? I have never understood how we can't seem to get people in this country to vote in their own interest.
The Court can declare laws to be beyond the legislative power, returning the decision making to individuals' free choices, or require laws to be equitably enforced, extending the benefits of laws to classes of people previously excluded. But what you are describing is not within judicial power: "outlaw" it meaning what exactly? What punishment would be inflicted on whom? That would something a legislature would have to happen. What the Court can decide is whether a legislature is or is not allowed to do that.
Oh damn, it sure does.
Yeah, I've been bashing quite a few entitled male control freaks on The Hill articles today. It's a great form of stress relief. Forced-birthers are pretty fragile. Apparently, all uterus owners are supposed to subjugate themselves to these fools and allow them to hold p#nile dominion over them because patriarchal brand of gawd sez so.
Well, that response to the Mexico City Policy question was enough for me to use the Whitehouse dot gov "Message for the President" form to tell Biden that I, a Christian woman, had an abortion last year. Mentioned crying in the waiting room because the TV was airing the Amy Coney Barrett confirmation hearings, told him about talking to my priest before and after, and that I'm glad I had a choice. I know the chances of it getting screened up to him actually seeing it are slim, but I needed to tell someone that hearing a response to a question about abortion policy including his attendance in church was a kick in the gut to me.
Yep, women of means will continue to have access to abortion, as they've always done. Meanwhile poor women and girls, mostly of color are facing a lifetime of drudgery, struggle, and crushing poverty.
Happy Birthday!
It's such a huge money maker for them.
I have often read the legislation and come away appalled at how badly it's written. Just a bunch of nonsense, and often citing discredited studies over and over and over. Planned Parenthood and others waste money and energy on these Krackenheaded weak, poop laws, while the GOP and red state churches raise a gout of money on this one issue.
We need to apply some SLAPP laws, stat. I don't know how great Biden will be on this, but Harris is loaded for bear. I think this will be a good cop, bad-ass-bitch approach, or I at least hope that's the case. She's been very strong, very vocal on getting women's equality to be represented in legislation.
The conpervatives can cling to their religious beliefs, I don't care one whit, but they need to know: America is not their church, and my body and my medical needs do not fall under their church doctrine. It never did.
I do not consent.
All the conversation I read is about the Supremes overturning Roe and thus throwing the issue back to the states. But could they not outlaw it altogether? If they can overturn all marriage laws to make same-sex marriage the law of the land, why couldn't this fascist Court do likewise with abortion?
I'm hoping there is a reason they can't, but I've never seen it addressed.
Mrs. H. is 5'2" while I'm six feet even. I often say that she only married me because I can reach high shelves.
It is excellent to see the new Biden administration being active and using GOP shit against them. As has been discussed in the past, isn't it time for SCOTUS to be "balanced" (or as some say, 'packed')? At least the discussion needs to be restarted now that the Democrats have the power to do it.
Grisly. Not grizzly.
I would not be overly upset if I were to read of a grizzly getting loose in some of these state Houses.
Last month, Alex Azar announced that the cheeto administration was withholding 200 million dollars in Medicaid funding to California because the funds could be used for abortions. We're knee-deep in a pandemic and that's what Azar was doing.I hope that the Biden administration has reversed that. Also, fuck Alex Azar forever.
I will never ever tire of telling people that until countries (not just the US!) ensure that all children that are already born are cared for, clothed, nourished, and educated well, regardless of parental income, you cannot in good conscience ban abortion. It's the argument that made my Catholic mother vote yes in the Irish abortion referendum a few years ago.
Women vote. Women out number men in the U.S. How is this still an issue? Are the "religious" propagandists really that influential? I have never understood how we can't seem to get people in this country to vote in their own interest.
Not gristly either
The Court can declare laws to be beyond the legislative power, returning the decision making to individuals' free choices, or require laws to be equitably enforced, extending the benefits of laws to classes of people previously excluded. But what you are describing is not within judicial power: "outlaw" it meaning what exactly? What punishment would be inflicted on whom? That would something a legislature would have to happen. What the Court can decide is whether a legislature is or is not allowed to do that.