OP
OP
It helps convince people on the fence (who do actually matter) and it also could possibly pass. Especially interracial marriage and access to contraception.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Justice Clarence Thomas Wants SCOTUS to 'Correct the Error' of Legal Gay Marriage
- Thread starter Coyote Starrk
- Start date
OP
OP
If they were "on the fence" about basic human dignity, I don't want them on my side in the first place.
If only there was a word for politicians getting positions for life without being elected, it could give clues to how this usually ends.
We know exactly what the GOP are going to do. They've been signaling it as far back as 2008 as soon as Obama won and as soon as Trump took office with the Republican lead Senate, the courts at all levels were packed with right leaning judges.
What we're seeing today is a failure of the Democratic leadership to adequately express to people what was going to happen if we continued to lose seats at all levels of government from local offices up through the Presidency and light a fire under everyone's ass to put people in office that believe in basic human rights.
Are the right fucking insane? Absolutely, the last few weeks of these Supreme Court opinions have been disgusting and the fact there are more to come next week is just sickening. They're setting the US back decades in equality and inclusion. The leadership of the left has failed every single person impacted by every single one of these opinions with their complete cluelessness of how to successfully garner support and votes.
We need to do more. We need to vote, we need to mobilize and get more people to vote and run for office, and it needs to be made abundantly clear that until there is a larger majority of progressive representation through all levels of the government, we will be dealing with the effects of the petulant right.
Only because it doesn't work, clearly. Watch how effective this strat will be in mid terms when Republicans take over the Senate and House in mid terms. Only thing they care about is stuff like Gas prices and inflation.
OP
OP
Even if it means it allows you to pass the very thing that will protect basic human dignity and human rights? That's absolutely ridiculous.
If it meant that all of these things became federally protected by law I would accept whatever help I could get!
I agree the SC will overturn it, but you still have to do it.
OP
OP
Did you miss the part where I said that it could actually pass? So yes we should still absolutely try to get them codified and yes we should still absolutely shit on anyone who votes against it.
It is 100% a Catholic thing:
BBC - Religions - Christianity: Contraception
Christian teachings on contraception and birth control - a contentious subject particularly in the Catholic Church and in countries with high incidence of HIV.www.bbc.co.uk
Birth Control
The Catholic Church has always maintained that it is intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings from coming into existence.www.catholic.com
The Catholic Church and Birth Control | American Experience | PBS
On New Year's Eve 1930, the Roman Catholic Church officially banned any artificial means of birth control.www.pbs.org
Contraception and Catholicism in the Twentieth Century: Transnational Perspectives on Expert, Activist and Intimate Practices
This special issue uses Catholicism as a thread to bring together five contributions to the transnational history of contraception. The articles, which cover examples from Western and East-Central Europe, East Africa and Latin America, all explore the ...www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Protestants are divided on it, Vatican doesn't even approve of condoms.
To add some context, though, It is the official stance of the Catholic church, but is not actually followed by your average catholics. 87% of Catholics at risk of unintended pregnancy at the time of the study used a form of contraception other than "natural family planning"
https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2012/02/guttmacher-statistic-catholic-womens-contraceptive-use
Banning birth control would be welcome by the church itself, but not be popular with the actual members of the church.
Vote blue no matter who! No way it'll lead to another Manchin and Sinema! That's absolutely ridiculous -- I'll accept whatever help I can get! /s
Ask yourself why these people are on the fence in the first place. You'll see why you can't trust them to get the job done.
Can we take any solace from the fact that none of the others signed onto this? I'm seeing commentary out on social media that this opinion is an irrelevance, that he's out on his own with it and always has been with his particular interpretation of the law underpinning those decisions, that it's telling none of the others signed onto it etc. Of course that could just be folk who want people to be complacent.
I think so too. Just don't see it being effective. It's like trying to get Trump imprisoned for January 6th. Ain't happening.
OP
OP
As opposed to what? Just doing nothing? Voting Republican instead?
Tell me what we should do instead of trying to get things codified?
I don't doubt they'd come up with some rationale but it'd be much harder to overturn. This is them overturning their own decision not federal legislation.
OP
OP
They couldn't overturn it due to their own decision today. Their whole decision today is that things should be left up to the states and Congress and that the court shouldn't be dictating things for the entire country.
If things like Griswold and Obergefell were codified then it would remove their argument.
I never said don't get it codified. I'm saying don't try to compromise with the people "on the fence" about human dignity. If a politician's on the fence, something dead wrong.
It would still strike a law like that down. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/04/roe-overturned-congress-abortion-law/
It wouldn't matter that it came from Congress. It's not just about "leaving it up to the states." Thomas and others have argued that issues like public health (which you know conservative states will interpret as including abortion access) are part of states' police powers and that Congress can't regulate in those areas.
Conservatism is not dying out. There are plenty of young people to carry their mantle.
It's not just old people anymore unfortunately. Gamergate and alt right has emerged for all ages. See Ben Shamprio.
OP
OP
I'm not saying compromise. To hell with compromise on something as important as the things we are talking about. I'm trying to say convince them by shining a light on the fact their own representatives are against them. If it doesn't work then yeet their sorry asses into the sun as well. But just completely ignoring their existence does nothing.
When it comes to condoms, sure, because the mechanism of action there is obvious, but everything else is some flavor of abortifacient in a lot of ignorant evangelicals' eyes. Plan B, IUD, even the monthly pill: they're basically genocide to them. And of course they're not interested in anyone who'll try to tell them that no, that's not at all how they work, because scientists are liars with their evolution and their billions of years nonsense.It is 100% a Catholic thing:
BBC - Religions - Christianity: Contraception
Christian teachings on contraception and birth control - a contentious subject particularly in the Catholic Church and in countries with high incidence of HIV.Birth Control
The Catholic Church has always maintained that it is intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings from coming into existence.The Catholic Church and Birth Control | American Experience | PBS
On New Year's Eve 1930, the Roman Catholic Church officially banned any artificial means of birth control.www.pbs.orgContraception and Catholicism in the Twentieth Century: Transnational Perspectives on Expert, Activist and Intimate Practices
This special issue uses Catholicism as a thread to bring together five contributions to the transnational history of contraception. The articles, which cover examples from Western and East-Central Europe, East Africa and Latin America, all explore the ...
Protestants are divided on it, Vatican doesn't even approve of condoms.
The argument is an excuse. They don't technically need one. There are no consequences for their actions unless states decide to ignore their orders and then who knows what happens. National guard involved? 🤷‍♂️
This can't be stated enough. Lots of young people are seeing this and thinking "F*** YEAH!"
Banning contraception and abortion isn't really about the desires, or day-to-day lives, of average conservative Christians, because you're right that most Christians use contraception when planning a family, just like everyone else, and abortion rates in red states are almost exactly on par with rates in other states (higher in some cases).
It's a push by the fundamentalists of the party, the zealots, and it's a lot more about creating and perpetuating permanent underclasses of people. You can't ever truly take away access either both abortion or contraceptives for wealthy people; you can only prevent lower-middle class and working poor people from accessing them. Rich and upper-middle class people will always be able to afford contraceptive care and, if necessary, have access to doctors who will perform safe, discreet abortions.
Poor people, on the other hand, are shit out of luck, and since you can't simply turn off human nature, you can't just expect entire segments of society to stop fuckin' just because they don't have access to this kind of health care, which means more middle and lower class people having babies, which traps them in vicious cycles of financial desperation, which makes it easier to exploit them as workers and keep wages low; the more kids you have to take care of, the fewer options you have, because you can't afford to be too picky about where you work or for how much when you have hungry kids at home. Most parents will do anything to make sure their kids suffer as little as possible, even if that means doing back-breaking work for shit pay; especially if that's their only option.
It might seem like a stretch to some, but think about it - if conservatives really cared about "the sanctity of life", they wouldn't constantly be fighting to cut funding for starving kids, for single mothers, and for impoverished urban centers. They wouldn't spend trillions on forever wars while saying with a straight face that the budget can only be balanced by cutting WIC, or Medicaid, or school lunch programs for little children. They wouldn't be utilizing the death penalty at breakneck pace to excitedly kill as many "undesirable elements of society", regardless of the circumstances of their conviction (places like Texas and Mississippi seem especially intent on executing mentally ill and disabled people as possible). At every turn, the conservative agenda is anti-life... except when it comes to preventing pregnancies. Once those babies are born, conservatives couldn't give two flying fucks about their well-being. So long as you're financially strapped trying to care for children you knew you couldn't afford and would have avoided having if only you'd had the means, the wealthy in this country have all the cheap, expendable labor they need.
It's not a coincidence that the wealth gap increased considerably once Reagan got into office, and it's not surprising that Republicans continue to espouse Reaganomics to this day, despite the mountains of evidence that it only benefits the wealthiest among us. It's very intentional, and a necessary part of maintaining that wealth gap is making sure the poorest among us are too busy struggling to survive to do anything other than feed the machine that preys on our desperation.
Always helps to remember the old people deciding our fate were once young too. This shit wouldn't survive if being young canceled it out.
OP
OP
Overturning their own previous decision is infinitely easier than overturning federal law. They could try, but it would expose them in a very dangerous way.
Oh I'm not trying to be positive. I'm not talking about going out and voting in the next election. As you have pointed out the political system is broken. The only way to get change it go out and do something. There should be millions of Americans right now on the streets tearing shit down and burning things, because enough is enough, and honestly I am seeing f all. Decency died in 2016.
Nothing is going to change with these republicans until the mob is at their door with pitchforks and rope.
OP
OP
Actual consequences. If the Right Wing justices demonstrated that they are literally not following the letter of the law or their own judgements it would expose them as the political actors that they are. None of them want that.
No one is gonna ban you for talking about good ol' uncle Thomas, fam.
It won't matter at a certain stage and I think we are approaching that. Judicial culture has basically collapsed. There's nothing left to uphold except strict by-force power dynamics.
shit is wild and a black woman tried to warn us about this POS and they didnt want to believe her.
Remove Women's right to vote? I mean things are looking BAD.
How about bringing back prohibition although I guess Bret is a no on that one?
Honestly, probably won't happen
And the twisted irony of it all is that as we move closer to indefinite minority Republican rule and fascism, any push back will simply become justification to clamp down on dissidence under the name of security and law…laws they have perverted through undemocratic means
If you ever see him in public, he will have armed police around him. After this BS, he painted a target on him.
The fact this self hating POS occupies the seat Thurgood Marshall once presided is fucking grotesque.
The black people who allow others to use their skin tone as a bludgeon against oppressed populatione are a waste of genetic material and I will not shed a tear if they happen to meet a violent end.
Rolling back gay marriage would cause a civil war. You can't just tell people they are not married anymore and deny people the right to be with who they want.