Stolen elections have consequences! Radical Christianists appointed to the Supreme Court by the illegitimate orange turd (seditionist sore loser the American people rejected bigly) have allowed an unconstitutional law passed in Texas to go into effect.
Women of child-bearing age in Texas have had their bodily autonomy stripped by the Texas Heartbeat Act. "The act is a de facto ban on abortion in Texas" (with no exceptions for rape, incest, or fetal abnormalities). The Supreme Court refused to act despite the clear unconstitutionality of the law. "Since the law cannot be enforced by state officials, but only by private citizens, there is no precise party to sue in seeking a protective injunction".
"The Center for Reproductive Rights filed an emergency motion before the Supreme Court of the United States on 8/30/2021, seeking to block the Act. In a 5–4 vote, the Supreme Court denied the motion before the 9/1/2021, commencement date, and subsequently the Act came into force" (quoted text from Wikipedia).
In the video below (9/2/2021 airing of MSNBC's The ReidOut) host Joy Reid and guest Frank Schaeffer discuss how Christianists in Texas are imposing their radical Taliban-like beliefs on the rest of America (Pew Research says "seven-in-ten say they do not want to see the Roe v. Wade decision completely overturned").
The "American Taliban" are "in many ways similar to the Middle Eastern Islamists". In that the people who call themselves "pro-life" are actually pushing "fake family values [and] thinly veiled misogyny". This law is about controlling women. Control the Taliban in Afghanistan quickly reinstated when they regained power following President Joe Biden's courageous decision to end one of American's dumbest wars.
By the way, "The name [Heatbeat bill] references the point in time at around six weeks' gestation when the embryo's cardiac activity can first be detected by an ultrasound - which under the new law triggers a block on an abortion. But medical and reproductive health experts say the reference to a heartbeat at that stage of a pregnancy is medically inaccurate as an embryo does not have a developed heart at six weeks' gestation. ...the activity measured on an ultrasound in early gestation is electrical impulses...".
There is no heartbeat. Labeling it thusly is clearly a manipulation tactic designed to fool the stupids. "...it's kind of like using the term unborn child instead of fetus...". The Texas abortion law "is intentionally written that way in order to evoke an emotional response. But what it is in reality is just a ban on abortion at six weeks' gestation, which is two weeks after a missed period. It's incredibly unconstitutional" as per Aimee Arrambide, executive director of the statewide abortion rights group Avow Texas (2 above paragrah quotes: Why "heartbeat bill" is a misleading name for Texas' near-total abortion ban).
This is the real-life Handmaid's Tale. A true cautionary tale for the U.S., which has our own far religious right dreaming of a theocracy that would impose a particular brand of Christianity, drive women from the workforce and solely into childbirth, and control all politics. https://t.co/R1lSCSUVwv
— Joy-Ann (Pro-Democracy) Reid 😷 (@JoyAnnReid) August 14, 2021
Regarding the above video, Dozie D writes (in the comments on the YouTube page), "Good one, Frank. No one, not me, not Billy Graham, not you, not the Evangelical Right, not Muslims, not any government, NO ONE should be able to impose their religious beliefs on another person. America must stand firm in this one truth. Otherwise, Freedom means nothing".
Nor should anyone be allowed to impose their misogynist White Supremacist beliefs on the rest of us. I add this because the pro-autocracy blogger Minus FJ (who might read this) does not identify as Christian. Obviously he doesn't want to impose his Christianist beliefs on anyone, as he doesn't have any. He does wish to impose his White Supremacist misogynist beliefs on the rest of us, however. Through terrorist violence, if necessary (to put a stop to "stolen" elections).
It ain't a done deal -- yet.
ReplyDeleteFrom Infidel753's blog on this subject:
"Notwithstanding the ensuing hysterics in the blogosphere, the Court's decision this week not to "freeze" the law did not constitute a de facto overturning of Roe v Wade. Not even close. The majority opinion clearly stated: "In particular, this order is not based on any conclusion about the constitutionality of Texas's law, and in no way limits other procedurally proper challenges to the Texas law, including in Texas state courts," and it conceded that the clinics filing suit had raised "serious questions regarding the constitutionality" of the law."
"...the law did not constitute a de facto overturning of Roe v Wade. Not even close".
DeleteJustice Sotomayor: "This equates to a near-categorical ban on abortions beginning six weeks after a woman's last menstrual period, before many women realize they are pregnant, and months before fetal viability".
In Texas the Court's decision this week DOES constitute a de facto overturning of Roe v Wade. Or suspension of it until the Supreme Court (or a lower court) enjoins the law (or strikes it down). Meanwhile women in Texas (and other states coming soon) will be denied bodily autonomy. And clinics will close.
"Experts say that even if the law is eventually blocked, the damage will have been done. ... Just allowing this law to go into effect is ending abortion in Texas".
lol! A lack of standing to sue constitutes an overturning of Roe? Who knew?
DeleteFrom MSNBC Reports, 9/6/2021...
DeleteHost, Kendis Gibson: ...this whole thing was done on the shadow docket. Why would the Supreme Court allow something as significant as this happen ... through this process?
Barbara McQuade: Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that, because this case is procedurally complex, this is exactly the kind of case where we should put a stay in. Preserve the status quo, and let us look at this in the normal docket, where we have full briefings, full oral arguments, and lengthy consideration of the issues. As opposed to trying to decide it on the fly, as they did in this case. ...
This does not bode well for the substance of this decision. One of the key criteria when deciding to grant a stay, is a likelihood of success on the merits. I think most people would look at ... Roe V Wade which says you cannot restrict abortions before 22-24 weeks (viability) -- this one restricts at 6 weeks -- it's clearly unconstitutional. And yet a majority of the court -- 5 justices -- did not find that this challenge to that law is likely to succeed on the merits. And so I think that does not bode well for the case that is coming up before the court this fall in Dobbs, a Mississippi abortion case that restricts abortion right after 15 weeks.
Every minute that goes by [with the TX law in place] is an assault on Constitutional rights. Even if [the law is eventually deemed unconstitutional] this means that people who wanted to have abortions in Texas and had a constitutional right to do that will be denied that right. I am not ... confident that these five justices will swat away this law.
The Eugenicists of the DNC sure love aborted black/brown poor/working class babies... all in the name of sparing wealthy white women the inconvenience of having to hire them as "nannies" for the children until they'll eventually send the kids away to boarding schools.
ReplyDeleteThe eugenicists at the RNC love fetuses but hate poor babies. And their "love" for fetuses is politically motivated/fake. If they really loved fetuses they would also love poor babies.
DeleteIf republicans really loved fetuses they'd be supporting legislation that provided funding for prenatal care. Yet the Maternal CARE Act (116th Congress, 2019-2020) had ZERO republican co-sponsors. Proof republicans don't give a shit if fetuses being carried by poor women die. They ONLY care about using abortion as an issue to attack Democrats and to control women.
...because all Health Care Providers need "Implicit Bias Training"... lol!
DeleteLOL!
DeleteSo what alternate legislation was introduced by republicans that funded prenatal care for poor women but didn't include funding for "implicit bias training"? And why didn't Democrats vote for it?
DeleteMeanwhile, in Philadelphia, a Democratically run utopia since 1952, the Democrat's Great Society visions, and those of their expert consultants, have finally born fruit/ bloomed...
ReplyDeleteRepublicans control the state legislature in PA.
Delete"Although Philadelphia voters approved a referendum that would have raised the minimum wage within the city limits to $15 an hour ... the state legislature has blocked the measure's implementation ... a majority of major U.S. cities have higher minimums than Philadelphia's, some substantially higher ... Philadelphia has the lowest minimum wage among large cities when adjusted for the local cost of living" (source).
We could easily afford $20.00 per hour. Simply by cutting exorbitant executive salaries and bonuses, return the corporate tax rate to pre Trump levels, overturn Citizen's United, and increase individual tax rates on those making over $300,000/yr. Bonuses should be taxed at 50%. Bonuses are unearned income. They reward individuals for profit generation, somethind ALL WORKERS ought to share in. Either by meaningful wage/salary increases or profit sharing.
DeleteBut this is America. With the most self centered, egotistical, judgemental, selfish, and ignorant political party on the planet. The Trumpublican republican Party.
Opioid addicts want minimum wage jobs? Who knew?
DeleteMinimum wage workers want a living wage. And opioid addicts (the majority of them, I'd wager) want help kicking their habit and a job they can support themselves on. As opposed to blame and scorn (or worse, prison time). NONE of those "solutions" will fix the problem. People usually use drugs to escape miserable lives. What is more cause for misery that knowing that, no matter how hard you work it will be impossible to get ahead?
DeleteGee, maybe they should start their own businesses. Oh, wait, the CDC would shut them down for Covid. I forgot.
DeleteBut hey, maybe the government would give them a loan while they were shut down.
The US unemployment rate is 100% because all businesses have been shut down for covid? Who knew?
DeleteAlso, starting your own business is really easy and, if you do, you're guaranteed to be successful? Who knew? Surely EVERYONE should start their own business!
Infidel makes a solid point. The SCOTUS may very well be waiting for a direct challenge to Texas' anti liberty, anti American, and anti humane bill.
ReplyDeleteAs we see liberrrated women across America protesting this abomination the SCOTUS will likely make a rational and right decision. It won't be what the anti human right cons like JC and Thersites desire. Those fools are COMPLETELY out of touch with main stream America.
Sure, let's give the "mainstream" what it wants...
DeleteOnly 34% believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases in the second trimester, however, and 19% say it should be legal during the third, including 52% and 28% of Democrats, respectively, and 18% and 8% of Republicans.
Give the majority what it wants? Sounds good to me...
DeleteGallup's latest update on U.S. abortion attitudes finds 58% of Americans opposed to overturning the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, while 32% are in favor. Since 1989, between 52% and 66% of U.S. adults have wanted to maintain the landmark abortion decision. Today's support roughly matches the average over that three-decade period. 6/9/2021.
Surely -FJ, there's some middle ground between the polar opposites of 100% no abortions, even in case of rape, incest and abuse and the side that advocates for zero restrictions.
ReplyDeletePerhaps a compromise? Something like full access during the first trimester, some restrictions on the second and only to save the life of the mother in the third?
I bet you'd see a lot of support for something like that in America.
Otherwise, even legislating access, as Dems clearly want to do now, will only result in continued court challenges designed to push a conservative SCOTUS to overturn.
I can only hope the GOP, conservatives and right leaning folks would be clear to folks like me and explain what they want and how any enforcement mechanisms and penalties would work.
Otherwise all the arguments are nothing more than that... arguments designed to drive wedges between to score political points.
Already fell for that one back in '73. Try again.
Delete"Life of the Mother" has come to mean anything that the Left wants it to mean.
DeleteThe American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 10/19/2012: ...abortions are necessary in a number of circumstances to save the life of a woman or to preserve her health. Unfortunately, pregnancy is not a risk-free life event, particularly for many women with chronic medical conditions. Despite all of our medical advances, more than 600 women die each year from pregnancy and childbirth-related reasons right here in the US. In fact, many more women would die each year if they did not have access to abortion to protect their health or to save their lives.
DeleteAKA republicans are fine with women with ectopic pregnancies dying. They aren't going to "fall for it". republicans oppose abortion even if it is to save a woman's life because they don't care if women die. They just pretend it never happens and that women/doctors who claim otherwise are all liars. Similar to how they pretend women usually lie about being raped.
Unfortunaateky Dave there simply exist folks who have not the capacity nor the desire to think outside their own hidebound confort zones. Truth, or dharma, is for some fruit too high for them to reach.
ReplyDelete"Ignorance means, in another word, concrete. To be caught by a concrete idea is ignorance"
Shunry Suzuki Roshi
Perhaps -FJ is one of many. I hope not.
Damn cell phone.
DeleteUnfortunately... comfort...
You may be right RN, but I believe it's a conscious decision. A simple decision to not desire to see life from another angle.
ReplyDeleteCouple that with a need to win every argument, see the other as an enemy, get our way or feel like we were wrong and we have a recipe for disaster.
There is no desire for middle ground because people do not want middle ground when they believe their position is the only valid way of looking at something.
It's impossible to compromise or find a middle ground with people who view abortion as murder. And think (incorrectly) that their opinion is biblically-based.
DeleteDerv... but isn't that the issue?
ReplyDeleteI think someone somewhere needs to give a little first. If anyone is really interested in getting to some sort of solution.
Can libs accept that any restrictions on abortion? If not, that is as hard nosed as the abortion is murder argument.
On immigration... if we're being honest, a solution will only come when libs accept we need an immigration policy that says we have a right to maintain and protect our borders. Period. And conservatives have to accept a path to legal status or citizenship for those already here.
But like abortion, no one on either side wants to move an inch.
If we are steadfast in our desires to remain hardened, what do we do?
There should, and MUST be SOME restrictionss on abortion. Otherwise sooner or later there will be partial birth abortios.
DeleteIf a significant number in soociety were to succeed in removing any cosiderations for restrictions we would likely see PBA's before much time were to pass.
There really are people with little concern for life beyond their own and their already living out of the womb family members.
Unfortunately, many of the "no abortions for any reason" folks are also against contraception. The Catholic Church considers any form of contraception except the "rhythm" method a mortal sin:
ReplyDelete"The Catholic position on contraception was formally explained and expressed by Pope Paul VI's Humanae vitae in 1968. Artificial contraception is considered intrinsically evil, but methods of natural family planning may be used, as they do not usurp the natural way of conception."
This is a doctrine made up by a man. There's nothing in the New or Old Testament about contraception.
The morning after pill could mitigate this debate, but many of the so-called pro-lifers are against that as well. Also known as emergency contraception, the morning-after pill contains medication that reduces the risk of pregnancy if started within 120 hours (five days) of unprotected intercourse.
For the first 12 hours after conception, the fertilized egg remains a single cell. After 30 hours or so, it divides from one cell into two. Some 15 hours later, the two cells divide to become four. And at the end of 3 days, the fertilized egg cell has become a berry-like structure made up of 16 cells.
The reason anti-choice and anti-contraception people are against this is because many of their religions believe a "soul" is present at the instant of fertilization, therefore, the collection of cells cannot be aborted.
That is a religious idea, not a scientific one. Yet the anti-choice folks want to impose that doctrine on everyone.
As for Dave's idea of some restrictions, I believe that a woman and her doctor are the best for making those decisions.
It is against the law to force a woman to donate, say, bone marrow to save a life, even the life of a child. No institution can force her to give up that part of her body even to save the life of a child, and no one can take ownership of any organ of her body even after death unless so specified by that woman.
Yet the state of Texas and other states want to pass laws to force a woman to give up her body and in some cases her life for a collection of cells?
Shaw... any restrictions I might recommend would be along the lines of health for the mother, to be decided between her and her doctor.
ReplyDeleteYou are correct on the issue of contraception. As I've shared before, here in Nevada, we achieved a 20% reduction in abortions bringing our state to its lowest levels ever. Under a Republican governor!
How did we do it?
As then Governor Sandoval [R] said in his state of the state address, it was because Nevada went all in for the Obamacare [ACA] and because of that, young ppl had better health care, access to contraception and regular check ups.
That, he proclaimed, helped our state have a healthier population, but it also made our drop in abortions possible.
As i shared about this with many of my pastor friends, they were not happy, questioned the data and felt betrayed by a governor they had supported. Because with the ACA and expanded access to contraception, young unmarried people were still having sex.
At the end of the day Shaw, it was all about sex!
"Health of the Mother" is a bad joke. We won't get fooled again.
DeleteWat more rice thersites.
DeleteEat, not wat.
DeleteWhat's a bad joke is Governor Abbott claiming he is going to reduce rapes in Texas to 0. When Texas is one of the states with the most rapes. And when there is a huge backlog of rape kits piling up in Texas.
DeleteAnyone who thinks not having access to abortion or contraceptives is going to prevent unmarried lovers from having sex must have coconuts for brains.
ReplyDeleteFor the hidedound republicans and religionists it really is all about control over what sovereign women can do with their bodies.
The American political and social landscapes are heading south FAST.