Firstly, you need to learn an ancient technique called reading comprehension. If you were to go to the preceding paragraph to the quote you have been posting here on GAG, you will see the following:
"The Court today declines to disturb substantive due process jurisprudence generally or the doctrine’s application in other, specific contexts. Cases like Griswold v. Connecticut,
381 U. S. 479 (1965) (right of married persons to obtain contraceptives)*; Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U. S. 558 (2003) (right to engage in private, consensual sexual acts); and Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U. S. 644 (2015) (right to same-sex marriage), are not at issue. The Court’s abortion cases are unique, see ante, at 31–32, 66, 71–72, and no party has asked us to decide “whether our entire Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence must be preserved or revised,” McDonald, 561 U. S., at 813 (opinion of THOMAS, J.). Thus, I agree that “[n]othing in [the Court’s] opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.” Ante, at 66"
Now you either intentionally left that paragraph out to gin up fear. Or perhaps you are quite the dim bulb.
Also, if you were to read pass the paragraph that you are constantly posting here on GAG, you would see that it says, " . . . . substantive due process exalts judges at the expense of the People from whom they derive their authority." In layman's terms, it means judges can't make law from the bench. Judges are intended to make sure laws adhere to the US Constitution. They are not there to make laws. Perhaps you ignored this lesson in social studies and/or US History class?
So weird, I guess you only read part of the opinion. If you scroll down to where Thomas gives his take, he basically says that other rulings need to be revisited for the same reasons Roe V Wade was struck down. He specifically mentioned Griswald v Connecticut. The ruling that said that no government body could regulate a married couple's access to contraceptives.
Here you are admonishing someone by telling them banning birth control is making law from the bench, when in truth the Supreme Court may consider reversing these rulings for that exact reason. The point Thomas is making is that the rulings themselves are creating rights that are not defined in the Constitution. And by striking them down and returning responsibility to the states, they are fulfilling their responsibility to the American people.
Even as some states are going to restrict access to contraceptives immediately.
WTF?
I can at least understand where pro-lifers are coming from (or claiming to come from) on abortion, even if my opinion on the whole thing is basically “I’m a dude, I don’t really even think about this stuff, but at the end of the day, I defer to the ladies to hammer this one out for themselves, it’s not my pig, not my farm.” But the conceptual idea of an abortion doesn’t offend me in the slightest. You ain’t shit til you’re counted in the census, lmao. Christ, I could’ve been “aborted” two years AFTER I was born and wouldn’t have known either way, I don’t have any memory of consciousness at that age. So I’m not particularly worried about supposed rights of an embryo. I don’t consider humans any better than chickens on a life-value level, we’re just higher on the food chain, and I put chicken embryos in a hot frying pan of sizzling bacon grease regularly without thinking twice about it, lmao, so if the “murderer” shoe fits, I’ll take a size 13😂
But if we start banning BIRTH CONTROL? America might be in the running for batshit craziest country on the planet if that happens. Like are they trying to stop people from fucking altogether? Why would you do that? That sounds like the plan of salty people who don’t get laid enough, lmfao. My problem would be that this reeks of Christian values. I don’t say that to offend Christians, I say that to just remind Christians that they are well within their rights to live however they please, but they have no right to try to impose their values on government or society, those things need to exist as if there’s no such thing as Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc. There can be no concept of God allowed into the public equation, bottom line, because that’s just not everybody’s deal, and it shouldn’t have to be.
Yeah, I know a lot of people keep stressing that Thomas was alone in opinion to go after contraception but they are missing a key detail. Right now there are no other justices that agree with him, but what happens when the composition of the court changes, when all of these members are gone and replaced with new ones? Yes, most of us will be elderly and out of child bearing years by then, but what does that mean for future generations? Or what happens when we have end up with over a billion people, like China, or India, will a supreme court decide their is not right to bodily automony and force sterilizations or abortions. Probably none of these things will happen with the current composition of the court, but we are reminded of how powerful their ruling are, whether making landmark rulings or overturning them.
Not worried about it, for two reasons.
1. Democrats say there is no slippery slope, been told this for years when I bring up concern for gun control. They say they just want one or two things and it will NEVER GO past that, that there is no slippery slope.
We have nothing to worry about then. IF there is a slippery slope then Gun control will never ever end until American's are 100% disarmed.
2. Republicans will Join Democrats to pass a nationwide law to legalize it... as the court doesn't make law, it only interprets. Even if a state decided to outlaw it, one could be it online anyways.
Here's the supreme court position everyone is looking at.
'For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all
of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is “demonstrably erroneous,”'
www.supremecourt.gov/.../19-1392_6j37.pdf
Contraception sits on the same legal ground as Roe did.
Your understanding Democrats on their position of gun control is wrong. We want responsible gun legislation. I don't care if responsible people have guns. What I don't want (and assume you don't either) is for some convicted violent wife-beater with a history of drowning kittens, and a violent criminal history to walk out of Walmart with a machine gun and 1000 bullets, without any background check, without any training, without any assurances that his six-year old can't grab the gun the moment he falls asleep drunk.
"Republicans will Join Democrats to pass a nationwide law to legalize it"
You have a lot of faith in Republicans who for the past 50 years have been trying to strip away human rights, block bills to help women's health, ease poverty, and revert back to some imaginary era when things were better. They are against child tax credit, free lunch programs in schools, paid family leave, any measure of background checks for gun purchases, making voting easier, expanding Medicaid, legalizing marijuana, reforming the prison system, enforcing lower insulin prices, and providing universal healthcare. For you to think Republicans want to best for America is delusion.
Opinion
78Opinion
The weird thing is this is about getting women to produce more babies. Even as there is no protection for women when it comes to pregnancy. They can be investigated for miscarriages and charged with "suspicious" deaths of the child. Then on the contraception front, they can be denied medication. Even if the medicine has nothing to do with pregnancy. My ex had a problem with her menstrual cycle. She almost died and had to be hospitalized for several days. The doctor prescribed birth control to stop her bleeding.
This is beyond insane at this point. Syrian women have more rights.
They do not have the power to ban birth control. The Supreme Court doesn't have the power to legislate. That's what this latest abortion ruling was about.
The Roe v Wade had the effect of granting the federal government unconstutional power. This ruling gave power back to the states where is rightly belongs.
One result of this ruling may be to give justification for restricting the federal government from passing illegal, dictatorial medical mandates.
So, while I support access to abortion, this isn't a bad ruling if it limits Washington DC to the powers it is granted under the constitution.
When republicans gain back control they sure as hell will.
Thank you.
@Massageman
"They do not have the power to ban birth control. The Supreme Court doesn't have the power to legislate. That's what this latest abortion ruling was about."
That's just one part of the puzzle. Republican lawmakers are right now writing laws that will outlaw birth control that will get backed by the Supreme Court. When Republicans gain back control this is their promise.
You know if you democrats would actually read, you wouldn’t look so dumb…
Cases like Griswold v. Connecticut, (right of married persons to obtain contraceptives)... are not at issue.
First is the question of how this decision will affect other precedents involving issues such as contraception and marriage—in particular, the decisions in Griswold v. Connecticut... I emphasize what the Court today states: Overruling Roe does not mean the overruling of those precedents, and does not threaten or cast doubt on those precedents.
Some media asshole with a woman's study degree just takes a huge dump and you eat the shit right out of their asshole like a baby bird rather than reading the decision.
The fake news site referenced this
www.supremecourt.gov/.../19-1392_6j37.pdf
Then lied to you and since you thought it was too long to read, you just believed their lie like an idiot and promoted their lie because you're mentally lazy and a liar.
I would fear for our upcoming years ahead of banning abortions and birth control. We live in a highly sexualized society where men can't even date without sex. The ones bearing the consequences the most will be the unwanted children being born into this new legislation. And no, adoption won't solve the problem. In fact, putting innocent children in the hands of the wrong people will have the worst outcomes. Did you know all throughout history , orphans have been bought and sold as servants, who rarely were ever treated well? what makes you think something like this won't happen today?
@ronaldo75
its the opposite of what you're saying.
@ronaldo75 I agree with Shay. Most of my dates, if I'm not being pressured into having sex with this person I just met, they want nothing to do with me after that moment. Sex is an ingredient of dating now, as Shay says in my opinion.
@iSlipKnot
Very few guys complain about it. Its mostly the women complaining about being pressured into sex just to keep a guy interested
@iSlipKnot Come to my city and most liberal cities in the US. The women are just as thirsty for sex as men and its obvious.
You do realize that the supreme court does not make the laws, right? That's entirely on the house and Senate.
The most the supreme court can do in that regard is kick it down to the states to decide for themselves, and this issue has nowhere near as much support in the public or state governments as banning or restricting abortion does.
You do realize that lawmakers make the laws, right? And those lawmakers are writing laws to ban birth control because they believe it's a form of abortion. So to say that this decision stops at state lines is not understanding the 50 year battle against birth control that is now within reach.
Except that they are not. If you insist on this nonsense, name the Court case, please.
Nor does not subsidizing birth control in a health care plan constitute "banning" it, hysteria from the Leftists notwithstanding. And that is a matter of simple economics: if every routine good or service had to be paid for by 3rd party insurance, the costs of said insurance would skyrocket, as would the cost of the good or service, as consumers no longer shop around for a better deal.
What would your car insurance cost if oil changes and tire rotations had to be paid for by it? And what would the oil changes and tire rotations cost? The answer is a hell of a lot more, both times.
@Curmudgeon How dumb & shortsighted would someone need to be to fail to recognize the inherent benefits of providing free birth control?
@Curmudgeon When unplanned pregnancies happen among poor individuals/communities, who you do you think covers the bill? Your tire center?
While you might prefer to toss these poor people in the ocean, even the righty-wingest gov't will never sign up for that.
Try some critical thinking that goes past your own short-sighted beliefs and instead recognizes the reality of the world around you.
@nachosaresexy Seriously, nothing is "Free", there is always a cost somewhere. Try some deeper thinking yourself. Teaching people to expect Daddy Government to always subsidize them does not work either, empirically it has fallen apart. One only needs to look at a good many housing "projects" to see that.
Of course nothing is free.
Let's use an unplanned pregnancy as an example.
Providing "free" contraception up front would cost taxpayers.
Now how bout the other direction? No contraception, pregnancy happens, and the guy/girl don't have the thousands of dollars to go through traditional birth in an American hospital.
Should I keep going with the ongoing child care costs or are you starting to get the point?
@nachosaresexy Spare me. Contraception is relatively cheap. It is typically less per month than the CELL PHONE BILLS these "poor" people regularly pay.
@nachosaresexy Moreover, given how the welfare system works, each kid is some more money. Try REAL critical thinking yourself, you smug dupe.
@Curmudgeon critical thinking would require you to consider it's less about actual financial cost and more about availability. you right-wing political nuts keep putting up roadblocks to availability and burying your head in the sand about the reality of the situation.
@Curmudgeon i hate wasted taxpayer money. i hate abortion. i just happen to realize there's nuance to these issues outside the fake black-and-white picture that right wing politicians and religious groups paint for their short-sighted followers.
@nachosaresexy you rotten lying leftists keep pushing the same failed policies over and over again.
@Curmudgeon at what point does the rigid political/religious part of the brain just lock up to the point someone loses the ability to offer any sort of logical reasoning and instead dumps out something like your last comment? It's bizarre.
@Curmudgeon but to recap, between these two options:
1. provide easily accessible/"free" contraception
2. don't do that and continue to provide medical/social services that protect young lives
You think option 2 is the way to go, eh bud?
@nachosaresexy Because you are so dishonest. Availability is NOT an issue. Please tell me how people paying hundreds a month for super cell phone service cannot pay for birth control. And your smugness combined with the dishonesty really merits a beating.
@nachosaresexy And they GET money for each additional kid. Just stop already.
Accessibility isn't an issue?
Or in other words, increasing accessibility wouldn't make a difference?
cdphe.colorado.gov/.../colorados-success-long-acting-reversible-contraception-larc
Try dealing with reality.
@Curmudgeon (i understand using real-world evidence is sort of cheating, but just roll with it.)
"We have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”
Its called house cleaning. As many leftist types have stated, you had 50 some odd years to codify this stuff into law, and state constitutions but you didn't. None of this BS in outlined in the constitution and is not under the purview of the federal government, but, was shoe horned into it by activist judges. Case in point, a federal ban on marijuana that states are openly defying, why? Because "None of this BS in outlined in the constitution and is not under the purview of the federal government."
For the media, its much easier to "RWAR religious conservatives!" than to, oh "we fucked up the paperwork, activist judges getting slapped down, we we never changed the laws for 50 years... go loot and burn down the local Foot Locker in protest!"
You should be yelling at your state reps not SCOTUS. Stupid useful idiot kids as usual.
I hope if that Supreme Court bans contraception that they will provide adequate funds FROM THEIR OWN POCKETS to enable those mothers to bring up unwanted children.
Ever considered if child physical and mental abuse will increase? Unless, of course, the kids will be taken into care by the authorities.
Your crazy if you think denying a child's existence on the possibility of physical and mental abuse, isn't cruel.
@monorprise Do you use contraception? Does a partner? You are denying a child's existence.
@Jessica405 we don't
@monorprise So you are most likely to add to the birth rate.
Not gonna happen. Birth control pills have been authorized by the FDA (a federal organization) for use. Plus, birth control pills are sometimes used just to regulate a woman's periods, not for contraception. It's possible the Plan B pill may lose its federal legality and have that determination returned to the individual states, but the Plan B pill has also been approved for use by the FDA.
Not when the people making decisions don't think things through. The abortion bans active in red states do not take into account rape, incest, or health of the mother. The thinking is that birth control is a form of abortion and should be outlawed. Doesn't matter what side-effect benefit it has for anyone.
If you check, many of the states that ban abortion DO have some exceptions. Health of the mother is most common.
It is good that we have at least one Supreme Court justice that believe we should follow the US Constitution. These are matters for the states. Per the US Constitution, the powers of the Federal government are few, defined, and limited to those enumerated. Unfortunately, neither the presidents that appoint justices nor the senate that approves believe in following the US Constitution.
That's horrible, access to birth control should be considered a human right in this country. If left up to the states, I'm willing to bet there would be plenty of places in the US where it's illegal to purchase birth control, as plenty of states are promoting abstinence-only sex ed. Not sure why people will brag about freedom and then try not to defend human rights.
I’ve never believed in taking birth control nor going through with abortion. I remain abstinent/celibate until I am in a longterm loving relationship where I know i’d be okay having sex and getting pregnant. Now once I turn a certain age where I am not trying to birth more kids, i’d prefer to get my tubes tied, but if they ban that too then I don't know what to say
No that would be too much. That´s too far of life. I can understand why banning abortion but that´s actual contra-productive and I don´t see a reason for that in fact I would rather see a need to encourage guys to use birth control options more often and actually they deeper research to find more birth of control methods for guys.
Regardless of whether you like it or not, or practice it or not, you have to admit that abstinence (actual abstinence, not pretending to be abstinent) is the most effective form of birth control there could possibly be. It's 100% effective.
As for the proposed ban on contraceptives, well, you can always move to Canada or Mexico if that's a step too far.
Abstinence is a concept that doesn’t work in the real world.
It works fine for me, it does not work for the sexually immoral who grew up in degenerate families.
@SeekingVirginWife hahah you are right for once
Stop the cap, the court ruling specifically states the right to contraception is different than abortion. These are not considered as situations that go hand in hand. Contraception is not going anywhere, it is here to stay. Stop getting caught up in the media hype and bs and seek the truth.
Judges dont make laws. They didn't even "make" abortion legal in Roe V Wade they used an overly broad interpretation of the 14th amendment right to privacy to make it so states couldnt pass laws to make abortion illegal. De facto legalization.
This is a troll post isn't it?
Pretending that this decision is not part of the conservative agenda is either delusional or dishonest.
I don't care for my own part.. I'll stop having penetration sex until my eggs are gone anyway. Birth control is not 100 % safe, abstaining is really the only way. Luckily I had plenty of intercourse previously so not missing out too much :P. Though I feel sad for those who want to enjoy sex without fearing a pregnancy.
Condoms are 100% safe lol
@LovingLoverReturned what a bad joke
Not everyone is bored by sex, like you are Anonymous.
I am not bored by sex, but by the thought of having to go through a pregnancy and take care of a kid for years, kids are boring after 1 day max.
besides, there is a lot of fun sex to enjoy without penetration/dick in pussy. I am not bored ;)
Reason why, global inflation, lacking of job, as wel as job market is shrinking and population are hiking as well hugely machine, artificial, digital, computer, and robotics machine takeover.
If we do not stop population now than will be confronted catastrophe, lawlessness, and anarchy in the earth, consequence will be WW3.
It is humble opinion.
The birth control ban will be the same as the abortion ban, non-existent. It will just send the decision to regulate birth control back to the states. What I am looking forward to is more bitching and moaning about it. There's something oddly satisfying about people shrieking over things that didn't actually happen.
Sending the decision back to the states is what Republicans are right now working to block. I know this because they said they are doing this. A national abortion bill is coming.
Bruh they literally just passed the abortion ban in South Carolina. Im so confused
@queenimpala Like I said, regulation is with the states now. What people are claiming is a federal ban, which is of course pure ignorance. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization removed the federal government from abortion entirely. That's keeping in line with the 10th Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
That’s fine but I still think the states should keep their hands off my body. They regulate everything else. I feel like men just don’t get restrictions like this. I appreciate your opinion bro I’m in GA so that’s why I’m scared. Thanks✌️
@queenimpala That's an argument between you and the state legislature. Dobbs. v. Jackson Women's Health Organization has only changed the ruling body in which you are arguing in front of, not the debate itself.
What @kiran_yagami is saying is that by intentionally passing body autonomy decisions to states that ban body autonomy they are absolved of responsibility.
The Federal Government including its court has no right to say one thing or the other on the matter.
I would point out however that industrialized countries currently have birth rates soo low they are all headed for demographic collapse and cultural extinction.
Birth control will be banned if not by us, then those wiser civilizations which will survive us.
Just because roe versus Wade was overturned. Does not mean they're going to stop producing birth control methods. If a person wants to have sex go right ahead and have sex but make sure you take your birth control or make the guy wear a condom. Sex is never been in the moment. It is always planned. Take precautions.
It only makes sense given they believe a collection of cells has a soul. I mean where do you draw the line? Every time two people are denied the opportunity to have sexual intercourse, a baby is essentially being murdered. Every time a man jacks off, he is murdering thousands of little babies at once. Mass infanticide!
It's a wonder they don't all break into Michael Palin's "Every Sperm Is Sacred".
I'm looking forward to the festive atmosphere.
I think it’s silly that people defer to old people in robes to tell them what to do. Same with religions, some people listen to those wearing the biggest hats. It’s not a good way to run the world. “The guy in the robes says so…I guess I’m not allowed to do this perfectly sane thing anymore…”. I don’t like it.
They can't ban birth control in America. They can vacate Griswold vs. Connecticut, allowing the states to make their own laws. Anyway, there's nothing that could prevent women from crossing state lines to have an IUD implanted.
You know that SCOTUS is not finished. Cross state lines while you still can.
The Supreme Court of the United States does not have jurisdiction in the case of state government policy
@Jujuman12322 they will when republicans are in control.
Justices don't get to ban contraception--just as they can't ban abortion.
That sits with state and federal legislatures. So it only happens if the majority of elected representatives want it to happen. My guess is, abortion restrictions of various kinds happen in several states while abortion becomes even more accessible than ever in others. Contraceptive restrictions will be very rare.
Let's see.
It’s coming. A nationwide ban on abortion as well. When a system is ok telling women what they can and can’t do don’t think they’ll stop at telling non-red states what they can and can’t do. .
Maybe. But the only way that happens is through the legislative process. And the only way THAT happens is if there are enough votes to support it.
Oh, and by the way--the only way THAT happens is if an absolute crap-ton of WOMEN vote to restrict abortion. So if you don't think women would ever vote to restrict abortion you have absolutely nothing to worry about.
When Republicans gain the majority they will have the votes. This is what they said they would do. They are writing laws that they know the Supreme Court will back up.
Again--maybe what you say happens, but ONLY if a LOT of women want it to happen and vote for it. If you don't believe that to be the case, you should have nothing to worry about.
No. I'm looking forward to unwanted pregnancies due to rape and domestic violence. And then increased suicides and deaths caused by illicit coathanger abortions. And then increased teen pregnancies and mothers on foodstamps, welfare and increased number of drug addicts and prostitutes.
It's actually just one Justice - Clarence Thomas. The other 8 Justices are against him on this matter. There was actually an entire section about this written by Justice Samuel Alito in the decision overturning Roe Verses Wade.
Unfortunate true, Although legally speaking Thomas is of course completely correct about the U. S. Constitution. There is no clause regarding birth control or marriage or really any such issue.
That means this issues like most every domestic one really was an issue for the States to decide.
@monorprise Well then ALL marriages would be illegal.
@NYCQuestions1976 I think you got the Federal Constitution backward. Anything not in the Federal Constitution is reserved to the people or their states, as the 10th amendment says.
All 50 States have their own Constitutions which do in fact usually either address or provide the power for the State legislator to address theses domestic issues.
That is where pretty much all domestic issues including Marriage, murder, contraception, etc was handled and defined for almost all of the last 200+ years.
@monorprise No I mean there's no mention of marriage AT ALL in the Constitution. You can't strike down one type of marriage without striking down ALL marriage. That would mean ALL marriages are unconstitutional, and every state would need to address that separately... or not address it all. The latter would actually be fine with me, since I'm divorced. 👍😂
@NYCQuestions1976 I think you lost me, without any mention of abortion in the Federal Constitution the federal court shouldn't be saying anything at all on the matter one way or the other. It shouldn't even be before them.
The fact that they are doing so anyway just illustrates power entirely unbounded by any law, meaning they could in theory get away with writing any law they want.
The real problem her is precisely the fact that they are NOT being checked or balanced by the other 2 oath taking branches and levels of Government. A constitutional president should have told the court to take a hike and refused to enforce its edicts on anyone that same executive didn't bring before said court.
A constitutional Congress should have similarly told the court to find its own money and resources for enforcing its edict.
A constitutional State legislator should have told the court to get their own police force to compel compliance with their orders.
A legitimate court by all rights should have no power beyond deciding innocence or guilt in the case brought before them by the elected executive under the laws of the elected legislator.
If that means finding someone innocent by virtue of the law or executive act they are being charged with disregarding is unconstitutional then that is upholding the Court's own oath to the Constitution. But they don't get to order the State or federal executive to do anything.
This was well established in Marbury v. Madison (1803) the original case in which the court claims its own power to interpret the constitution. Marbury never got his writ even thou the court thought he was entitled to it because the executive in the form of Madison didn't agree he was under the constitution and didn't have to take orders from the judicial branch.
Stop believing what you read in the news. That is one out of 9 justices that wrote in a concurrent opinion about it which was dicta. 1 won't do anything. And the supreme court doesn't ban things. Legislatures do that. The Supreme court only rules on whether laws are constitutional.
Contraception is in the same legal bucket as Roe was.
Not even close. Roe was about due process extending privacy rights to your body. Contraception would be under Obamacare which is along the lines of what the government can force you to do by threat of taxation. Very different parts of the constitution.
Here's an article discussing the laws that are being written now that removing Roe was a success. A national abortion ban and a contreception ban is coming. Many Republican lawmakers believe contraception is abortion.
www.washingtonpost.com/.../
I am an attorney. I don't need the washington post to explain it.
Then you understand what it takes to overturn civil rights.
I understand that it wasn't a right to begin with. So no rights were taken away. If you can show me where it says "abortion" "body autonomy" or anything close to that in the constitution I'd like to see it.
Um, you do realize that there is no court case in support of banning birth control? So the court can't just ban it. The legislature would have to do it.
The Supreme Court said this is on their agenda. Don’t think it won’t pass when Christian nationalists are taking over judgeships and government seats. What do you think Mitch McConnell has been doing for four years?
"The legislature would have to do it."
Yes. Republican lawmakers said they are now writing laws to ban birth control and to make the abortion ban national. This is what they said last week at the National Association of Christian Lawmakers conference. And they know the Supreme Court will back them.
I’m 100% against abortion, however I think birth control should not only never be banded but given away.
They can ban the abortions. It they try for the birth control they’re asking for a full blown revolt.
We were too busy oppressing every other race on the planet with our whiteness and by merely existing to dance.
We didn’t even have music. We did it cheap in the backyard.
I’m not Pentecostal and I have major doctrine issues with Pentecostalism.
I don’t. Seriously.
i think that's fear mongering bullshit. they're not gonna ban birth control.
From the Supreme Court:
"For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all
of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is “demonstrably erroneous,”
www.supremecourt.gov/.../19-1392_6j37.pdf
- Griswold, aka contraception
- Lawrence, aka same-sex intimate relationships
- Obergefell, aka gay marriage
birth control isn't murder. the fact that they'll "reconsider" it won't change that.
@leighbee yeah. they won't.
Anti-abortion lawmakers said they are writing a bill to ban birth control and make the abortion ban national. Christian fundamentalists (including many Republicans) believe birth control is a form of abortion.
"lawmakers" aren't some sort of omnipotent beings. they can not just change laws as they please. they "may" genuinely want to try that but they have no shot at doing that. media is just using the wave that the roe vs wade overturning creates. this is media making money with your attention. not something you shoud take seriously.
SCOTUS does not have the power to do that, and neither does Congress. That ruling did not legalize contraception, it prevented states from making it illegal. It was already legal in a lot of states.
No they aren't and they don't have the authority to do so. At best they could rule that a state had a right to legislate weather or not birth control is legal.
Seems most people don't realy understand how the supream court works.
The same "weak argument" used to overturn Roe is what protects birth control.
From the Supreme Court:
"For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all
of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is “demonstrably erroneous,”
www.supremecourt.gov/.../19-1392_6j37.pdf
- Griswold, aka contraception
- Lawrence, aka same-sex intimate relationships
- Obergefell, aka gay marriage
Again though it can only send the decision back to the state on the legislative level they can't ban anything. Over turning roe did the same thing it sent the matter back to the states.
Republican lawmakers said this week that removal of Roe is just the first step. They said they are working on a birth control ban, and a national abortion ban, because they know the Supreme Court will back them.
All the supream court can do is allow states to set the laws on these issues nothing more.
This is ridiculous birth control not only reduces pregnancy (obviously lol) it helps to stop the spread of sti's, it helps with to regulate women's periods, helps with their ance, mood swings etc.
Stis sure...
I have.
Birth control (with the exception of condoms and which is the only one that can really prevent StIs)... more harm than good... not all women are lucky.
why do you think side effects are listed rather than benefits listed with the official product.
Does not change anything I said.
It is totally up to a woman if she has options and she choose the one with more risks than the one with less risks. I agree.
That’s a terrible idea! But luckily I don’t think it will ever garner support among a majority of the justices.
No one no matter what their political persuasion is would support this.
It would be the only time you’d see both sides of the isle in an active revolt…. working hand in hand for one cause for the first time in history.
@Exterminatore agreed 😊
Mitch McConnell has been appointing judges for four years. Christian nationalists are winning elections and leadership roles. The Supreme Court just made it clear that it’s open season now.
@asker
I reject the term Christian nationalists. There are just Christians.
If these Christian nationalists are winning elections, why do you perceive that to be so? Do you think maybe people aren’t so interested in Woke ideology and reject it?
What’s open season? On abortion?
@Exterminatore - open season on reversing human rights.
@asker
👎👎👎
I look forward to my tax dollars not funding abortion.
by the way, this decision isn't making it illegal, it's putting that decision into hands of the states, as it should have been all along...
And 26 states are on board. You think they want to stop at just red states?
That's understandable for tax-dollars. I feel like it should still be allowed as a medical procedure tho, for individual payments. A 10 year old girl came into my friend's clinic the other day they had to turn her away
@queenimpala at the state level, it will allow the various states to vote on it and hopefully listen to their constituents, pro or con... the way it should be.
I just wanna know which retards said contraceptives are bad. If you hate abortions then why be against something that prevents it from happening at the root cause. Yikes
Can you give me a link to this contraception ban stuff... I have not heard a peep about this like at all and it keeps getting brought up.
There won't be any abstinence. Clarence Thomas will make it his mission to impregnate every woman in America.
Oh you didn't hear? They're going to legalize rape as well.
When I see those smug motherfuckers in their black robes they look like the KKK in reverse. All that's missing is the pointy hats.
Not you Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan. You libtards are all right. How do you work with those asshats every day is beyond me.
I really wish you idiots knew how the government works.
Sometimes the only way forward is to push back so far people are forced to realize how terrible things have gotten.
I love watching Liberal Heads explode over fake news.
I am looking forward to people being more responsible about sex, but not to the thought of a birth control ban. I don't believe that will actually happen though.
There is NO ban on birth control. The USSC decision simply turned the law back over to the States.
Anyone who opposes contraception is a backward fool who needs to go back to the Middle Ages and die there.
Clarence Thomas is one person. The other 8 do not agree with him. This will not happen. Period.
I'm looking forward to a whole generation of unwanted kids breaking into conservative people's houses and stealing their bibles.
Most people use electronic Bible's lol... only the old ones may suffer or just learn to adapt
@LovingLoverReturned the Necronomicon cannot be digital! 
No idea what that is
Why not?
You said stealing their Bibles.. in modern world Bible is only referring to the holy book of Jews (partial book) and Christians
@LovingLoverReturned bible means "book" and the Necronomicon is a book. THE book.
The Necronomicon Ex-Mortis doesn't exist because Ash Williams destroyed it.
that's what the Dark Ones want you to think. The Necronomicon cannot be destroyed!
Just stop the scaremongering. It’s not going to happen.
I could care LESSSSSSSS lol.
Is abortion Illegal Now?
This is what happens when there isn't a separation of church and state. Let a cult designed to control large populations be in control and that is exactly what they are going to do.
they already banned abortion, so they gotta be retarded to ban birth control too
How would the Supreme Court ban contraceptives when they don’t make laws?
Erm... no they aren't
Hence your question is moot.
If that's true as long as condoms are still a thing I won't care
Why would I look forward to it? Nothing was won. This wasn't a fight. Now murders of innocent childrenare going to be prevented because of it. And that's a good thing.
When you say children will be saved are you talking about abortion bans or gun control?
I didn’t believe RVW would be over turned this seems intense but I don’t trust the integrity of the court at this point
Biden should have expanded the Supreme Court by 2 justices the day he was elected. Fucking idiot.
Supreme Court expansion is not the answer. Putting an actual law on the books is the answer.
The Democrats currently have the majority in the House Of Representatives and Vice President Harris is the tiebreaker as the President Of The Senate, which is currently 50-50. Joe Biden is the current President. If Democrats wanted to get something done, they can do it now. It'll pass the House, it'll pass the Senate (or Harris will break the tie in the Senate), and Biden would sign it into law.
However let's be realistic. We both know the Democrats aren't going to do anything. They could've done something starting January 20, 2021, long before this decision was ever handed down, once Biden was inaugurated. Anger and discord gins up political money. There's no political fund raising money to be made on either side when issues are actually resolved.
@NYCQuestions1976 Your point is well taken. Perhaps the strategy was to wait until now and THEN do as you suggest prior to the mid-term elections. Or, wait and use it as a major selling point in both '22 and '24.
That's the problem. On both sides. It's always about money and selling points. Not solutions. There should be a reasonable pro-choice law and demarcation in place. Somewhere between 12 and 16 weeks (most European countries are set between 12 and 14 weeks), with obvious allowances for medical issues and emergencies beyond that set demarcation. Instead, now we have states that won't allow any abortions, and we have states that will allow third trimester abortions, no questions asked... and now the money flows even more on both sides. It's a "perfect" circle.
As another example, the government can fix the illegal immigration issue by streamlining the legal immigration process, which would significantly reduce or even virtually eliminate illegal immigration. They don't, because both sides want illegal immigration. Then conservatives use them for cheap labor while simultaneously complaining that they're here, and liberals harvest them for votes and complain that they're mistreated. It's a "perfect" circle.
Actual political solutions mean nothing, and have no cash value. We all exist and live our everyday lives in a giant DMV building.
https://youtu.be/Yz3bDON9bNo
@NYCQuestions1976 I'm in agreement with your analysis. The funny thing is, however, that all those illegals could be here legally, but not permanently, with a little temporary work card. It wouldn't mean they get to work for more money, it's still an employer's market. But it could end some of border nonsense. Of course, as you said, any sort of "solution" doesn't really benefit either party at the polls, does it?
Two things, why do leftists think presidents make laws but have no control over foreign policy and international affairs that cause supply chain issues and ridiculous gas prices?
The fact that you don't even understand basic civics like what each branch of government is responsible for explains so much.
But also, no they can't pack the court. The Republicans will filibuster that for 4 months and we all know they are taking a huge majority in both houses come November. Also, a lot of democrats don't support it. Manchin already said he won't vote for that so you don't have the majority to do it now.
It's childish. "Democrats" want to rewrite the rules so they can get their way without going through the democratic process and they say anyone who wants to put it to a vote is destroying democracy.
But, jokes on you, democracy works. You don't have the votes in congress and you won't get them because your policies are so bad an 80% Hispanic district just went red for the first time since the 1800's.
Its like a pack of 4 year olds who have to wait in line for the waterside trying to tell daddy to fix it for them. Jokes on you, Biden doesn't singlehandedly make laws. That isn't how democracy works.
He can try. But the court is there to protect the rest of us from tyrants and they are doing a fantastic job.
They didn't ban abortion. They gave people the right to vote on it.
You can elect a state legislation to pass laws saying all babies must be aborted at 33 weeks if you want. But only if the majority votes for it.
@Lost_in_the_Woods I agree (neither side can pack the Supreme Court, because it's a never-ending spiral) and disagree (it's about money and politics, not solutions and democracy).
Oh absolutely, both sides want money and power.
But the decision to place the legislative power to regulate abortion back with the (state) legislators is restoring a semolina of democracy to that one particular issue.
Laws shouldn't be decided by any number of life long unelected officials. Laws should be made by the representatives elected by the people.
I feel like it's pretty obvious that most people in Texas think abortion should be illegal and most people in California think it should be legal and maybe even subsidized.
So I feel like common sense says if democracy worked, it would be illegal in Texas and legal in California.
And hey, now the reality looks a lot more like a functional democracy.
It's not men vs women. Many women strongly oppose abortion. Many men strongly support it. It almost always effects one man and one woman. It's an issue that should be decided by the majority vote. And, I think that, and most other laws should be legislated on a state level.
My point is simply that people who want to disassemble the system just so they can force or prevent legislation in Texas that the majority of Texans don't agree with aren't supporting or protecting democracy. They are blatantly trying to ignore democracy and force their personal beliefs on someone else.
My personal belief is that abortion should be allowed. But that is superseded by my philosophical belief in democracy. Texas should get to vote for the laws they want. Killing your unborn child isn't a universal human right. It's controversial and against a lot of people's moral and religious beliefs.
I think we should abolish speed limits and have far stricter punishments for harming someone else with a vehicle. But that's my opinion. I don't think anyone should circumvent the democratic process to enforce my will on the nation.
Both sides want what they want. But I see an outcome where the people can vote on what they want and majority can rule on both sides as the best possible compromise. That is democracy working how it was intended to.
The people who have a problem with that need to understand they are not supporting democracy, they are trying to disassemble it to kill a fetus and I'm 100% more concerned about the fact that they think they should be able to dictate the law than the fact that they want to kill a fetus.
Packing the court is a non issue. It won't happen. Same goes for banning birth control.
The issue is there is a huge number of people who think people I'm Texas voting for a law they want and that law going into effect is "destroying democracy" and the solution is to have a single person force the entire nation to be governed by a law that is hugly controversial and was not passed by means of democratic legislation.
That would be the death of democracy. Not people voting for the laws that they want and the majority opinion being passed by local legislators.
I'm not pro life.
I'm pro democracy.
I also want all the woke liberals to move to California and New York so we can have some places where common sense is common again and they can see how their policies work out without ruining my life.
@NYCQuestions1976
"The Democrats currently have the majority"
It's not a majority when Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are Republicans.
@Asker No, they're traditional Democrats, not liberal
and socialist woke fools. Both Manchin and Sinema would vote to codify a pro-choice law. What they won't vote for is an illogical and unnecessary expansion of abortion laws. No country in Europe allows non-emergency abortions beyond 14 weeks.
There's no reason the demarcation can't be close to the same here. Crazy pro-abortionists in this country want the demarcation set at 24 weeks or higher. That's ridiculous. No normal person in a non-emergency situation needs 24+ weeks to figure out what choice they're going to make.
@Lost_in_the_Woods The fact that you even "think" that a single person has control over a supply chain COMPLETELY invalidates your views on economics. Good Lord. It's laughable.
The transportation secretary has absolutely no effect on national transportation, the DoT and the port authorities have no control over shipping, and provoking a war with Russia has no effect on fuel prices which in turn have nothing to do with the cost of shipping.
And hey, it's not like the DNC funded lab that created the covid 19 virus had anything to do with the shelves going empty.
But yeah, the fact that you think the president is one person and don't understand they appoint an entire cabinet that runs the whole executive branch of the government tells me you must have gone to one of those city schools where kids leave without knowing basic math.
And that explains a lot. Especially your desperate need for validation to keep your feelings intact.
But hey, honestly question...
If Pete doesn't have any control over the supply train, what exactly are we paying him for?
Because we sure as shit agree he isn't fixing any of the problems, and we could all use the extra cash to pay for fuel.
#FireMayorPete.
Because even smooth brain leftists agree our transportation networks are out of control and he is too incompetent to fix it.
@Lost_in_the_Woods I find it funny, as in "funny pathetic", not "funny ha-ha", that something like the nation's transportation system can be so fucked up for years and no administration does a thing to improve yet. But when someone of the party you don't approve gets appointed to a position, the whole thing becomes "their fault" overnight.
When no administration did a thing since FDR to try and improve Health Care, which is beyond a Herculean task, the Clinton Administration tried and Hilary got bitch slapped by the industry and the Republicans and it went nowhere. The Bush's did nothing, then Obama pushed throught the Affordable Care Act. Definitely far from perfect, but something better for millions and millions.
Instead of making it better, the Repubs solution was tear it down and replace it with - nothing. Same old shit. Status quo, but still, they have no workable alternative and for the most part are unwilling to improve what's there.
The whole system, the whole attitude of misinformation and disinformation, is just pathetic.
No one is going to ban birth control. That's just a story people are making up to get people pissed off at SCOTUS and fuel the fire.
You should read the Supreme Court opinion about that and read what Republican lawmakers SAID they are going to do when they regain control. It would be helpful for you to look at what people are really saying before making comments about how it will never happen.
The amount of assholes that voted yes is scary. It shouldn't even be a 22% yes result, live your life and fuck off other people's.
I hope not because so far birth control is the only thing keeping me alive literally…I have pcos and it helps me keep a regular period
You can also add your opinion below!
Holidays 
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
