Polls: Society & Politics

Because we all use abortion providers. No matter how much you blubber.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/roe-v-wade-supreme-court-overturns-ruling_n_628b65b9e4b01a50ab5ac869
Roe v. Wade: Supreme Court Overturns Landmark Ruling Protecting Abortion Rights

The Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade on Friday, dismantling the half-century-old precedent that protected abortion rights and giving states the go-ahead to dramatically limit access to reproductive health care. Simultaneously, the court struck down Casey v. Planned Parenthood, a later case that affirmed Roe with some exceptions.
“The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives,” the court stated.

The ruling in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case, written by Justice Samuel Alito, was not a surprise. A draft ruling was leaked to Politico and published in early May. Reports indicated at the time that fellow conservative justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett also supported the decision, while Chief Justice John Roberts favored a narrower approach.

https://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-says-americans-carry-151253544.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall
Supreme Court says Americans have right to carry guns in public

The US Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a fundamental right to carry a handgun in public, a landmark decision with far-reaching implications for states and cities across the country confronting a surge in gun violence.

The 6-3 decision strikes down a more than century-old New York law that required a person to prove they had a legitimate self-defense need to receive a permit to carry a concealed handgun outside the home.

Five other states, including California, and Washington, the nation's capital, have similar laws and the ruling will curb their ability to restrict people from carrying guns in public.

I'm Half and Half (Neutral). I have no problem rejecting laws that are stupid, go against the people, or only set up to help corporations or there purely for greed.

most of these users have thousands of comments and tens of thousands of "likes" on other people's post, which this website tracks. i think they might be bots are just really mentally disturbed.

And if the public would react with backlash or demonization, is that bad for society? To oppose scientific research that results in something we don't like?

To be clear, I'm not suggesting I believe this to be the case. I have no objections with interracial dating, procreation, etc. I just thought about how society might react to hearing something scientific they don't like.

Pick on the liberal democrat leaders all you want... they know when guns are opened up in their city, it's gonna be... ugh oh. They were looking for ways to limit "crazy" city people from getting guns... but it's not constitutional. So they'll try to come up with another way to restrict gun rights...

But we have rights to be armed without obligations to be good citizens. The constitution was written for a bunch of hard working, independent... rebels whom respected each others property. It's a different scenario in the city.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-slams-gov-hochuls-anger-over-scotus-gun-ruling-sorry-constitution-happened