Misogynist barbarians in Alabama impose forced pregnancy law

[Jeff Robinson]

The fightback against the sadistic fascist and tyrant Clarence Thomas begins:

Dozens of protesters showed up outside Justice Clarence Thomas’ home overnight, chanting “no privacy for us, no peace for you!” and accusing his wife, Ginni, of being an “insurrectionist.”

Some also brandished signs reading “Thomas is a treasonous turd” and “Off with their d—s.”

Abortion protesters swarm conservative SCOTUS justices’ homes

Protesters arrived outside Justice Clarence Thomas’ home overnight, chanting “no privacy for us, no peace for you!” and accused his wife, Ginni, of being an “insurrectionist…

nypost.com

 

[Ax^]

how can you be a surpreme court judge where the time frame is for life to keep you away from political influence

when you wife is another legal professional who called the justic department to insist they block the result of a fair election

he should of been rescued until the investigation into his wife concluded

 

[Yossarian]

Might not be as easy as the Bible-bashing states think for them to completely ban abortion - Merrick Garland says states can't ban abortion pills that have been approved by federal regulators.

To be crystal clear: Abortion pills are not a solution to abortion bans. They’re only FDA-approved for the first 10 weeks of pregnancy, and many people need abortions further along in pregnancy (or just prefer an in-clinic procedure for their early abortion). The Biden administration needs to take much more action, including exploring leasing federal land to abortion providers in states with bans. But for now, we will take the tiniest win in the form of Garland coming out of the gates with something.

AG Merrick Garland Locates Spine, Says States Can’t Ban FDA-Approved Abortion Pills

Well, well, well, if it isn't the Supremacy Clause.

jezebel.com

 

[spring-peeper]

They’re only FDA-approved for the first 10 weeks of pregnancy, and many people need abortions further along in pregnancy (or just prefer an in-clinic procedure for their early abortion).

There are numerous pregnancy tests that will register pregnancy within days of conception.

It is possible to find out before the 10 week deadline.

I have no clue how affordable these tests are. If the woman is concerned, the tests can help with the 10 week deadline.

 

[Cloo]

I was thinking today one of the many sad things in this is that at least I can appreciate the honest misogyny of the 'Well, just don't be a slut, then' social media crowd. At least they're admitting they support this because they hate women.

Unlike the 'save the babies' lot who I do believe really believe that, whilst it never occurs to them to do anything to make that babies' lives better seeing as they insist they're born whatever the context. They don't even realise how much they hate women.

 

[Red Cat]

I was thinking today one of the many sad things in this is that at least I can appreciate the honest misogyny of the 'Well, just don't be a slut, then' social media crowd. At least they're admitting they support this because they hate women.

Unlike the 'save the babies' lot who I do believe really believe that, whilst it never occurs to them to do anything to make that babies' lives better seeing as they insist they're born whatever the context. They don't even realise how much they hate women.

I don't think it's so much about conscious admitting or not admitting, they're not aware. It makes them very dangerous because it's unconscious. I'd say it's a kind of collective punishment for mothers (mothers, potential mothers, don't want to be mothers), it's really very sadistic.

 

[Cloo]

I don't think it's so much about conscious admitting or not admitting, they're not aware. It makes them very dangerous because it's unconscious. I'd say it's a kind of collective punishment for mothers (mothers, potential mothers, don't want to be mothers), it's really very sadistic.

It really is. And if anyone were to suggest, I dunno, compulsory genetic testing if the father of a child hasn't come forward and enforced child support in that case, can you imagine how loud the 'But then unscrupulous women will deliberately entrap men into fatherhood!' crowd would be?

Ultimately, they want these babies to be a punishment for their mothers, either in the bringing up or the guilt and loss of adoption, and don't give a fuck about how that as aresult punishes the child - as countless posts on social media from people who were adopted or unwanted children at the moment attest.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Strikes me that elevating the moment an egg is fertilised by a sperm to a sacred, special place is a very male-centred attitude. It's when the man's bit does its thing. So what?

I've seen people who say that if you didn't support anti-vax people in their desire for bodily autonomy, then you have no basis to support pro-choice options. As if they're somehow equivalent.

 

[Ax^]

Strikes me that elevating the moment an egg is fertilised by a sperm to a sacred,

would make a good song mind

 

[Pickman's model]

Yeah got to avoid falling into the trap of taking other people's assumptions seriously and talking like they make sense, imo. It's not abortion cos it's preventing pregnancy. One off the ways IUDs can prevent pregnancy is by preventing a blastocyst from implanting. And if you don't consider the moment of fertilisation to be some kind of 'magic' god-given moment, you don't have to follow the logic of those who do.

This is the moment to which lbj's nascent fotlery will be traced

 

[8ball]

The fightback against the sadistic fascist and tyrant Clarence Thomas begins:

Abortion protesters swarm conservative SCOTUS justices’ homes

Protesters arrived outside Justice Clarence Thomas’ home overnight, chanting “no privacy for us, no peace for you!” and accused his wife, Ginni, of being an “insurrectionist…

nypost.com

Is this guy worse than the other judges that were instrumental in this?
Seems to be copping a lot of the flack (obv deserves some of it).

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Is this guy worse than the other judges that were instrumental in this?
Seems to be copping a lot of the flack (obv deserves some of it).

I guess the short answer is "yes."

He's openly said he's going after gay marriage, contraceptives, and even gay sex next. He's ruled on cases that his wife's organization was involved in, when he should have recused himself. His wife has also been implicated in the Jan 6 insurrection.

 

[8ball]

He's openly said he's going after gay marriage, contraceptives, and even gay sex next. He's ruled on cases that his wife's organization was involved in, when he should have recused himself. And, his wife has been implicated in Jan 6 insurrectionist actions.

Ok, that's a pretty solid affirmative. Thanks.

 

[Pickman's model]

I guess the short answer is "yes."

He's openly said he's going after gay marriage, contraceptives, and even gay sex next. He's ruled on cases that his wife's organization was involved in, when he should have recused himself. His wife has also been implicated in Jan 6 insurrection.

Off to guantanamo with the pair of them

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Off to guantanamo with the pair of them

I wouldn't go that far. I'd settle for having him resign from the court.

 

[bimble]

Am not usually a big one for quotes off twitter but found this (its not new) to contain a really useful insight.

 

[Pickman's model]

I wouldn't go that far. I'd settle for having him resign from the court.

A grovelling and abject apology too

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Ok, that's a pretty solid affirmative. Thanks.

The other thing that sets him apart is that the same theoretical framework that supported Roe v. Wade, also supports Loving v. Virgina--the decision that made interracial marriage possible. He hasn't suggested that he's going after that ruling, probably because as a partner in an interracial marriage, he directly benefits. He's a massive hypocrite.

 

[Sue]

Is this guy worse than the other judges that were instrumental in this?
Seems to be copping a lot of the flack (obv deserves some of it).

Well he definitely didn't sexually harass Anita Hill. Like Kavanaugh who definitely didn't sexually assault Christine Blasey Ford. Both fine and upstanding chaps.

 

[Ax^]

A grovelling and abject apology too

just retiring from the surpreme court would be enough

fuck off and stop interfrering for your trumpist wife

 

[frogwoman]

The other thing that sets him apart is that the same theoretical framework that supported Roe v. Wade, also supports Loving v. Virgina--the decision that made interracial marriage possible. He hasn't suggested that he's going after that ruling, probably because as a partner in an interracial marriage, he directly benefits. He's a massive hypocrite.

Don't they have to wait for cases to be brought tbf? They can't just overturn it.

 

[frogwoman]

In the abortion case it was Dobbs vs Wade or something. They weren't just saying that Roe vs Wade no longer applies, someone brought a case and they agreed with it.

 

[Pickman's model]

just retiring from the surpreme court would be enough

fuck off and stop interfrering for your trumpist wife

Always ask for twice what you want so you get what you're after - the lesson of the social fund

 

[frogwoman]

The abortion case is named after Thomas Dobbs, who says he has nothing to do with it

The "Dobbs" in the case title refers to Thomas Dobbs, an infectious diseases doctor who became Mississippi's top health officer the same year the state adopted new abortion restrictions.

www.npr.org

The abortion case is named after Thomas Dobbs who says he had nothing to do with it

 

[spring-peeper]

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Don't they have to wait for cases to be brought tbf? They can't just overturn it.

Yes, they have to wait for cases to come up. However, they can pick and choose once cases work their way through the lower courts. It's not difficult to figure out how someone with an agenda could file suit, appeal any rulings through the courts, with the idea that a conservative Supreme Court would choose it as a case and rule on it. Basically, that's how Roe v. Wade was overturned. It takes time and money, but it's a system that can be gamed.

 

[frogwoman]

Yes, they have to wait for cases to come up. However, they can pick and choose once cases work their way through the lower courts. It's not difficult to figure out someone with an interest could file suit, work it through the courts, with the idea that a conservative Supreme Court would choose it as a case. Basically, that's how Roe v. Wade was overturned.

So it's not something like the EHRC which is basically a 'court of appeal' when other avenues have failed (and the claimant has enough resources to bring it there)? They can choose which cases to rule on, they don't just get what they're given? Does that mean that someone could be trying to bring something to them for years and they're just not interested because it's not about guns etc?

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

So it's not something like the EHRC which is basically a 'court of appeal' when other avenues have failed (and the claimant has enough resources to bring it there)? They can choose which cases to rule on, they don't just get what they're given? Does that mean that someone could be trying to bring something to them for years and they're just not interested because it's not about guns etc?

Yes, they can choose which cases they wish to rule on and which ones they don't. I think they have a limited time to decide to accept the case for review. Any case they decline to review usually means that the lower court ruling stands.

 

[frogwoman]

Is there a way to appeal any of its decisions? I'd agree with the US administration trying to setup abortion clinics in states that have banned it but I also have a really bad feeling about this dual power stuff especially as the SC supporters have a shit load of guns and local representatives behind them

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Is there a way to appeal any of its decisions? I'd agree with the US administration trying to setup abortion clinics in states that have banned it but I also have a really bad feeling about this dual power stuff especially as the SC supporters have a shit load of guns and local representatives behind them

Not generally. You can appeal to your congressional representatives to change the governing law in some cases. That new law will then be subject to the same process of judicial review. You can also pack the Supreme Court with justices friendly to your views, but that takes winning elections to get the power to do that. Then, you need to file a case similar to the case you want overturned, but not so similar as to have the lower courts settle the case and the Supreme Court decide to affirm the lower court's ruling. It took the far-right 50 years of work to get Roe v. Wade overturned.