Perhaps you don't read your own posts. I can understand why you might prefer not too. It must be embarrassing. However, if you bother to check you will see the self-righteous epistle I responded to was subdivided into three, one section of which had been already succinctly answered by another contributor. I answered the other two. Understand now?

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Copious cope as usual.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Yes, the court is highly politicised....all the institutions are...the left can hardly complain because they have been stuffing their ideology into institutions anyway they can for many decades....we only have to look at teaching and media.

I'm obviously anti abortion in most circumstances.

However, if the court abolish Roe v Wade....and until that's confirmed we don't really know...but if they do I see the left lying about it in much the same way they lied about the Florida bill that they termed the 'don't say gay' bill.

They will claim the court are making abortion illegal when in reality the judgement will throw abortion limits back to the states......So while red states might change laws it wouldn't affect the blue states.....who will continue to kill the unborn to their heart's content.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

This is a direct consequence of the Donald Trump presidency.

He vowed to appoint only Supreme Court justices who wanted to end abortion rights. Three of the five justices who make up the conservative majority on the court were put there by Trump.

A woman's right to choose is fundamental surely.

Yup however it is the President that gets to appoint the SC and as he is political what do you expect. Its a flawed system that both sides will complain has been abused by the other lot.

Perhaps it's greatest strength is that a judge cannot be sacked and so in theory is immune to policial pressure.

Edited by Badger11 (03 May 2022 4.25pm)

One more point

Tips hat.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Which media? The power of the media, or how we understand them in terms of the major news outlets, is diminishing by the day. The likes of CNN or the NYT essentially just look for click-bait from those on the Soc.lib side of things but change nobody's opinion on anything.

CNN in particular are just ludicrous these days. Does anybody even bother watching them anymore? I know there recent attempt to launch a subscription service was beyond farcical.

If there is a danger in this supposed ruling from the Supreme Court, it is that the divide just became more entrenched and we are now a step closer to what is essentially a white civil war going hot. There is no compromise anymore, no middle ground.

Now naturally I would blame the Left for this, given their hysteria over first Brexit and then Trump back in 2016, much of which continues to this day but those of us on the Right are also guilty of ensuring this gully grows deeper and with steeper sides. There will be blood on all our hands when this goes horribly wrong but for the life of me, I cannot see how we can ever reach any kind of compromise position ever again.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Governments here just stuff the House of Lords with people who will support them.

A woman's right to choose is an interesting point.
Dave Chappelle's take on it was by all means have a baby provided you're prepared to pay for it for the next 18 years. If you can kill it surely I can abandon it.

I have previously stated on here serious issues with how frivolously some treat abortion and that there should be clear limits on it. At the opposite end of the argument though several States have laws on the books that would immediately make abortion illegal if this was overturned. As you say, women aren't going to stop being in the same situations, hence backstreet abortion due to unwanted pregnancy (some States already have bills seeking to criminalise out of state abortions, so that likely wouldn't be an option), births resulting from non consensual sex (Alito even cited a jurist who supported marital rape), the unwanted and unloved, those having miscarriages criminalised under an assumption that they caused it themselves [Link] , horrendous Savita Halappanavar situations [Link] ..

There are many valid issues that in an ultra politicised environment will just get fobbed off. Ultimately if you look at foster homes, it seems those passionate about the unborn aren't so keen to get involved once the birth actually takes place.

As per usual in the US there is little room for balance when something becomes a cultural issue. Those whining one day about freedoms are fine with relentless government intrusion into others lives the next. Then the tables are flipped and it's the same in the other direction. There is very good argument that if a fetus is viable it should be treated as such. It's a shame that can't be the codified ruling in place rather than the current loopy mix of extremes this way and that across States. Outside of that, claiming temporary government ownership of someone elses body appears not to be a sensible direction of travel. From how the draft is worded it's likely to lead to several unrelated infringements of rights and freedoms. The usual won't care about that (where it isn't an attack on them), and the wild political pendulum swings from one direction to another will continue ad infinitum..

Edited by BlueJay (04 May 2022 3.02am)