RSS
From Politico:
Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows
“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft circulated inside the court.
By JOSH GERSTEIN and ALEXANDER WARD
05/02/2022 08:32 PM EDT
The Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO.
The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes.
Here is Politico’s posting of what they say is Alito’s draft.
Leaks of drafts from inside the Supreme Court are highly rare. Norms and all that.
Personally, my main contribution to the abortion debate over the decades has been debunking U. of Chicago economist Steven “Freakonomics” Levitt’s famous theory that crime fell between 1985 to 1997 due to Roe v. Wade by pointing out that crime actually went up first, with the teen murder rate among the cohort born in the years immediately after the January 22, 1973 Roe decision being dramatically higher than in the cohort born in the years immediately before Roe. A half dozen years later, two economists documented that Levitt’s celebrated result was due programming errors made by Levitt in his code.
Here’s the 1999 debate between Levitt (essays 1 and 3) and myself (essays 2 and 4) in Slate. However, Slate has stripped our names from our contributions and now attributes them only to “Authors.”
But, let me point out, this historical pattern doesn’t prove much about the ceteris paribus effect of abortion, especially not a half century later. My goal was not to show that the alleged Freakonomics effect on crime couldn’t happen, just that it didn’t happen.
Instead, I merely remembered in 1999 what Levitt and, evidently, most of the prominent economists he presented his theory to failed to remember: the Crack Wars of c. 1990. Crack drove up the murder rate dramatically in the late 1980s and early 1990s, especially among black teens (e.g., see The Wire), before it plummeted in the late 1990s. Whatever the all-else-being-equal effect of Roe was, if anything, it was overwhelmed by the crack trade during the gangsta rap era.
This history doesn’t tell us a lot about 2022. Making predictions is hard, especially about the future. Famous economists like Levitt and David Card tend to have a hard time just making accurate predictions about the past, even pieces of history made famous by TV shows like The Wire and Miami Vice.
Now if only they could get rid of the McClure-Volkmer ban on new machine guns!
Good news for the unborn. Bad news for the GOP in the primaries.
This leak sounds to me like a shot over the bow to try and force the Court not to overturn Roe v. Wade.
If it’s true, the happiest person must be Joe Biden. One of the few things that could revive his re-election chances.
No abortion? Know negroes!
Oh great. Now the democrats keep the house in November. And the new flood of illegals into the country will have more babies.
Nope. Abortion will continue to be legal. Just regulated differently by the states.
Of course it is. America descends further into Banana Republic territory. I wouldn’t be surprised if next someone leaked the addresses of the Supreme Court judges as well as the schools their kids go to. I mean, a reporter from a mainstream news outlet tried to follow the jurors on the Kyle Rittenhouse trial and the media ignored it. There are no rules anymore. The only rule is: does it benefit the DNC?
As for what this means, well, I wouldn’t buy real estate in Republican run cities with a significant black or Hispanic population.
The right wing kids are meeting in the treehouse, missing one member, discussing their recent defeats and concerns, and feeling the synergistic energy of the widely-involved planning of plans likely to work. The meeting started dark but ends like early dawn. Then there is a sound from outside. Did the reds regroup? Is it weather? Then the roof collapses! The kids are not especially hurt, but gasping and gawking through curling sawdust they see, on top of the destroyed roof, that member who had been absent. The special one. And he crows, “Hurr durr, all life is say cred!”
Roe v Wade is the canary in the cold mine for the left. If that can be overturned, what about Times v Sullivan (the monopoly on slander)? Griggs v Duke Power (monopoly for universities to test IQ)? Heaven forbid, Brown vs Board of Education?! Oy vey!
You have two parasitic classes (bottom 20% and top 1%) who are entirely dependent on a dozen supreme court cases. They’re not giving up their gibbs without a fight.
God be praised.
Now do Affirmative Action.
If there is any chance at all that this could once again make people serious about sex and human relationships it won’t be a bad thing, but I suspect we may already be well past the point of no return on that matter.
How many human lives will it actually save? Probably not many.
The downside is that it weaponizes the abortion issue at a time when Democratic prospects otherwise were looking particularly bad, and gives them something to campaign on that may win them some votes.
The upside is that it makes people aware of the fact that the only thing Democrats have going for them is that they are in favor of letting people murder unborn children.
You are ignoring the 800 pound gorilla in the room, which all of the babies that are about to be born fo fentanyl addicts, illegal aliens, homeless women, poor and stupid women, and last, but not least… 800 pound gorilla women.
Look up the statistics of women who have abortions. They’re not the kinds of women we want breeding.
If it’s a real opinion, the Justice who wrote it is perfectly correct in saying the Constitution does not grant the right to abortion. It never occurred to our founding fathers to even think of such a thing.
However, the Constitution doesn’t have to stay that way. We could vote for a Constitutional Amendment granting the right to abortion, and that would settle the issue once and for all.
In the short-term, if abortion disappears, more unwed women are going to end up on welfare. It would be a financial burden on Blue states which they can’t afford. It will spike the number of babies given up to adoption agencies, and create a large generation of unwanted children who are psychologically messed up and probably criminally minded. It will be a societal disaster.
Be warned, if abortion is struck down, more Blue states are going to start trying to make after-birth killing of a baby legal. That’s the new fad law among liberals.
I also want to slap the Justice(s) who decided to take up this case before midterms. What an utterly retarded thing to do.
In a legal sense, Roe is about as bad as it gets. A sane society would have shut down the Supreme Court altogether after that jumble of nonsense. In an individual practical sense, it won’t matter at all. A woman can still get all the abortions she wants, even if she has to ask one of the possible fathers for bus fare out of Tulsa. In a larger practical sense, it’s very bad because legal abortion (along with mass incarceration) is one of our only eugenic social policies (despite what our host might say about it.)
In a political sense, it’s bad. It gives the cat ladies something to spit about.
Of course, legal abortion is eventually doomed for obvious reasons of natural selection. But it would be nice to put it off.
Assuming this is accurate and the final opinion adheres to this purported draft, I predict little change in the midterms – there just hasn’t been any real outrage among voters about the prospect of overturning Roe. There will be lots of sound and fury by the progressives, but ultimately it will signify nothing.
But whoever leaked it should be disbarred if it is a lawyer (e.g., a Justice’s clerk) and publicly censured. This is a bitter, partisan attack on the Court and the leaker must be made an example of.
Shhhhh.
If you listen quietly right now, you can hear Jewish women across the country going, “Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!”
Weird timing, to be honest. This probably helps the Democrats a lot just as the right was seemingly gaining some cultural clout.
Abortion is the holiest sacrament in the progressive religion, since it frees women to have work and sex lives like men. It’s created millions of the chardonnay slurping cat ladies the Dems depend upon for votes.
Can someone explain how banning abortion will benefit me?
Thanks in advance.
Left-wing busybodies don’t want anyone telling women what they can do with their own bodies.
They have no problem telling men what they can do with their own heads. So long as left-wingers oppose abolishing motorcycle helmet laws, I’m strongly anti-abortion.
They have no problem telling other people’s kids what they can do with their own heads. So long as they oppose abolishing compulsory school attendance laws, I’m strongly anti-abortion.
“Abortion is the holiest sacrament in the progressive religion, since it frees women to have work and sex lives like men. It’s created millions of the chardonnay slurping cat ladies the Dems depend upon for votes.”
Would you rather those cat ladies be single mothers raising more juvinile delinquents? Unless you expect a reward from some kind of deity I don’t see the benefit from this.
This leak will also work to distract the warring plebes from noticing that the vassal state they are citizens of keeps dragging them closer and closer to nuclear apocalypse.
One of the dumber, concern-troll takes.
Middle income women will become a hell of a lot more discriminating in who they hook up with. Right now, they’re already quite discriminating about social status and height. Now they need to think about if the guy is going to stick around.
Biggest winners out of this — dorky Asian men.
So every time a couple of gametes bump into each other something sacred has been created? Since most pregnancies end in natural abortion early on, does this mean God is the ultimate murderer?
Why do you like killing things so much, man? You sound weird. Do you look like Satan? Stay away from my kids. You might kill them or something. Anyone ever peg you for Lucifer IRL?
Speculation at Powerline is that the leak came from one of the leftwing justices – probably Sotomayor, who is by far the dumbest and most political of the nine justices – because any law clerk leaking an opinion would be kissing his or her legal career goodbye (though perhaps that norm has gone out the window, as well).
If so it’s likely to cause a lot of contention between right and left. It could solidify divisions on the Court and make conservative justices – including Roberts – even less likely to work with the liberal ones. The liberal justices may have lost their swing vote in Roberts.
This.
If this is real, it will drive even more of these she-demons berserk.
Professional Democrats across the country are rejoicing, no doubt. All those issues that supposedly heralded a big Republican wave this fall – forgotten.
If this leak is real, the November election has now come down to a single issue: how do candidates stand on making Roe v Wade’s protection for abortion into law?
Eighty percent of men and women support at least some forms of legal abortion.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/245618/abortion-trends-gender.aspx
Not if you’re liberal. You’ll get a book deal out of it.
About those economic predictions, you can do very well if you predict medium-long-term happenings based on basic principles. I was reading a thread under a (2 posts ago) Ron Unz economics article, and Mr. “Truth Vigilante” put an old video with a few clips of Peter Schiff talking fundamentals in the year or so before the big housing crash in ’07-08. Everyone else was against him. He was dead right.
Then, there was another with a couple of TV talking heads asking Ron Paul (right after this crash) “how in the world did you know?!!” Duh. Ron Paul could see this because of his knowledge of the very simplest principles of economics. Anybody else could have too. Neither Bill Clinton with his stroke-of-the-pen/law-of-the-land crap nor even the whole 9-robed-member SCROTUS crew (speaking of them) can overrule these basic laws, not in the long run.
When I tell you all this economy is going to crash hard, I don’t need to be a statistics analyst or one of those notice-everything guys to know that. You can’t fool Mother Nature for but so long, and that’s what the basic supply/demand/elasticity stuff is, just human nature.
The word you’re looking for is “putative.” Jeez.
In the mid-terms you mean. This would be a colossal disaster for them, and the Dems will be able to dine out on it from here to eternity.
Hmm. I wouldn’t have predicted that it would be the Catholics on the Supreme Court that would be the ones to seal the fate of the Stupid Party, but apparently there it is.
So we shall instead be ruled by the Evil Party forever more. And the Pope, apparently.
One way or another, evangelicals’ prayers have been answered. Roe V. Wade has been overturned, handing the Democrats a winning issue in ‘24. What’s that old saying about answered prayers?
The people you don’t want breeding… blacks! A cold sweat just went across the forehead of every big city police chief. My god, if you think it’s bad now, wait 12 years when the devil spawn that used to be snuffed out en masse in the womb takes complete control of the streets…
If you talk to any couples who are trying to adopt, trying to find a white American baby without any birth defects is like finding a needle in a haystack
Has Jumanji been sworn in yet? It could have been her… timing is right.
who leaked it and when.
an obvious sabotage attempt, probably by one of the leftist justice’s clerks.
a red flashing light that the country is breaking down. not that we didn’t know.
OT. Does anyone know why the google picture for the last few days has been nothing but blacketty black black.
I’m sure the MEN OF UNZ will rejoice if Roe is overturned. So many black and Hispanic babies saved to further overwhelm and destroy White Americans.
This woman of UNZ wants the affirmative action act of 1968 and Griggs and Kaiser rulings overturned. Because I have White descendants.
Conservatives are as contemptible as liberals.
“Look up the statistics of women who have abortions. They’re not the kinds of women we want breeding.”
I know two very conservative women who are die-hard foes of terminating any pregnancies, including those resulting from rape or incest. Their absolutepro-life stance on an individual basis precludes encouraging quality-of-life for society as a whole.
A good quality of life for society generally is my main concern. This is why I would willingly give up my right to vote tomorrow if it meant all women were disenfranchised. But these pro-lifers at any cost are just plain nuts. Their maternal instincts or whatever may suit them to working with children or raising them. But such women are patently unsuited to have any say in the formulation or maintenance of public policy.
Abortion or lack thereof should be a state issue. If your state doesn’t allow it, go next door or wherever. However, the odds of R v W being overturned are slim and none, imo – leftards will never allow it.
I don’t know if it will have much effect either way. Yes, the screaming cat ladies who never got abortions will scream, they would anyway. Chelsea Handler, proud of her multiple abortions, will scream. She would anyway.
Most people are economically pressed. Their living standard goes down every week with every price rise. There is a shortage of chickens, due to increased feed costs, Avian Flu, forced culls, and increased energy costs for transport. Eggs too, and the same with pork, beef, you name it. Food shortages are predicted in the next six months, here. Not in Tunisia. In America.
There is already talk of rationing. People Magazine for the Davos set, the FT, is already calling for rationing.
Contraception is so widely available, that abortions are mostly for: gross birth defects, upper class women who got stupid, women with lots of kids already. Wiki has abortions at 11.3 per 1000 women of childbearing age with breakdowns of 49, 33, and 13 for black, Hispanic, and White respectively.
Given an open border, abortion restrictions in some states like Oklahoma or South Dakota are not going to impact black or Hispanic populations much compared to mass immigration from Africa or Latin America. Meanwhile the gain among Whites now born will be small, but every extra White person is another wearing your uniform. Indeed restrictions by states on Abortion could lead to places like California being even more insane as every cat lady moves there, and places like Oklahoma, South Dakota, or Indiana getting more sane as their cat ladies move from there even if at age 75 their ability to conceive is zero.
Abortion matters to upper class White women who form the core of the Abortion protests, the Pussy Hat wearers, etc. They were already Brandon team members for life so that does not matter. Abortion is a luxury good for luxury times.
And yes everything is going to be leaked from now on. I figure it was Justice Jumanji Jackson who leaked it.
If Roe is overturned all the idiot conservatives, men and women will be just soo happy. Meanwhile, their own children and grandchildren might end up homeless because all the jobs contracts and business loans are given to non Whites.
As a whole, Whites are idiots. Especially in the causes they pick to fight. The result will mean more blacks and Hispanics and more single moms and their kids on welfare.
Enjoy dam fool idiot conservatives.
“By Authors”. That’s funny. Slate probably would have been happy to leave Levitt’s name up there, but then they would have to put yours up to, and that they will not do. Perhaps they could just substitute some other name for yours, Steve – like “Emmanuel Goldstein”, or “Voldemort”, or “Beelzebub”.
” if abortion disappears, ”
clown if Roe goes the states decide abortion as they should see amendment 10
No one gives babies up for adoption now days. They keep them and go on welfare Which the workers pay for.
It’s 2022, not 1922.
JimB: you are missing that overthrowing Roe will unite and energize the Left even if few if any states actually close down an abortion clinic. The Left will be united and care little about inflation, recklessness with RU over the Ukraine etc Also many suburban Republican women may vote Dem now.
But I agree with the other commentator that this may be a shot across the bow to the SCOTUS not to dare to reverse Row after they see the reaction.
In the mid-terms you mean.
You’re right. My bad.
Won’t reversing Roe versus Wade merely free the states to outlaw, legalize, or regulate abortion as they please?
If so, it’s just taking the federal government out of the loop.
At the very least, it will help with their fund-raising.
Are all those liberal suburban soccer-moms not paying attention to what the Democrats are doing (with, as usual, the Republicans signalling that they will follow along like poodles)? Sure, they may want to keep abortion legal, and do not understand the principalled legal arguments against Roe, but they must see that the Dems are pushing the tranny-agenda hard. Those women have children – surely they can’t be cool with the normalization of this flagrantly insane degeneracy, which can have immediate consequences for their children.
It’s difficult to guess how this plays out. Some thoughts:
– The short term effect is that Republicans lose a clean sweep advantage in the mid-terms. Maybe?
– This will resonate with boomers more than young people, who are increasingly chaste and prudish. This affects some swing states.
The elephant in the room is demographics. More bluntly, blue states are dying. Red states are growing. This will speed up this divergence.
In blue states, it means more unwed minority mothers. In red states, it means increased cultural conservatism, and probably, an increase in middle-class birth rate over time. The left will be absolutely apoplectic over this.
In another time, this would be a reason not to live in a red state. But with blue state wokeness and deindustrialization, it probably won’t matter.
Homeschooling is not a right that is spelled out in the Constitution. It’s in the penumbrae that right-wingers very foolishly laugh at.
Compulsory schooling will mean that the Left’s cultural stranglehold will be even stronger. No long term change for the better will come of this.
You’ve just explained why the timing is not weird.
This decision — if real — would not “outlaw” abortion but the media will duplicitously feed that panic amid a summer of pussy-hat demonstrations.
Blue states would move even further left on “reproductive rights” and compete for abortion tourism. And how many Red states would seriously “outlaw” abortion, beyond perhaps some time limits or parental notifications? Look how leftist the state U’s have become even in conservative regions — my old dorm is probably a tranny closet by now.
Abortion is blue state cultural imperialism. I would bet most of the sound and fury will come from blue states, where abortion laws are unlikely to change. The blue state abortionphiles just want to rub Christian noses in this abomination, even (and perhaps especially) when the Christians live in deep red states. Can’t we all mind our own businesses? Let New York be New York and Utah be Utah.
I’ll quote another anon:
I can’t speak for all prolifers but I think the hope is without legal abortion people will be more likely to view sex as what it is: a potent force that has the potential to create new life and therefore, shape society and its future, unlike today’s prevailing view that it’s somewhere between casual recreation and an extreme sport.
In any event, if Roe is overturned it doesn’t ban abortion nationally, just punts to the states. Women in blue state metropolises can still abort up until the water breaks
“Homeschooling is not a right that is spelled out in the Constitution.”
clown See Amendment 10.
Is legal abortion eugenic or dysgenic?
Rumor has it the leaker is Amit Jain, one of Sotomayor’s clerks. The reporter who leaked the draft has quoted Jain in the past about legal items, so Jain has a contact with the reporter.
OT: I was looking through the current list of clerks on the Supreme Court’s website, and noticed that:
Breyer has 3 women clerks, 1 man
Sotomayor has 3 women, 1 man
Kagan has 3 women, 1 man
Kavanaugh has 4 women
Coney-Barrett 3 men, 1 woman
Gorsuch-3 men, 1 woman
Roberts-3 men, 1 woman
Thomas-4 men
Alito-4 men
The intellectual lightweights seem to prefer a larger percentage of female clerks, maybe because they don’t want to be outsmarted by their clerks? Whereas the more intellectual justices prefer male clerks.
As for Kavanaugh, if he’s really voting to overturn Roe vs. Wade, maybe he’s taking revenge for almost being lynched by Christine Blasey Ford. If he’s voting like that with 4 female clerks in his office, he’s going to take some brickbats from them.
Dysgenic. The smart cull themselves. The dumb just pop ‘em out like rabbits
“Speculation at Powerline is that the leak came from one of the leftwing justices – probably Sotomayor, who is by far the dumbest and most political of the nine justices”
Yes, Sotomayor is dumb, but so is Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Who needs bumping into each other?
Every Sperm Is Sacred; Every Sperm Is Good.
Look it up.
Tenth 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.
“But whoever leaked it should be disbarred if it is a lawyer (e.g., a Justice’s clerk) and publicly censured. This is a bitter, partisan attack on the Court and the leaker must be made an example of.”
Agree. An attempt to sabotage ‘our democracy’ (copyright pending). Should be in prison with the democracy protestors.
I really thank God for this. What a great day and time to be alive.
This is epochal. The portent of this news will not be grasped for a very long time, but future generations will look back on today as the day when sanity began returning to the Western world. The progressive agenda is being undone by reality, and it is marvelous to behold.
Blue Cities in Red States. That’s where the pressure will be the worst.
But frankly, I have more faith in Red State legislatures and state police authorities to resist this heightened pressure than I have in Blue State authorities managing under the lower pressure created by permissive abortion rules.
Is public order better right now in Dallas or Portland, Ore.?
Maybe this is just the replacement for the Ukraine War.
In case you haven’t noticed, for the last several years we’ve been distracted from addressing any of the more substantial, perfectly soluble problems plaguing this country — blacks, illegal immigration, vagrancy — by a succession of more or less manufactured decoys. Transsexual nonsense, ‘systemic racism,’ the Corona Virus, the Ukraine War.
As we lose interest in one and cease to be diverted by it, they come up with the next. So now maybe we’re to have a fine uproar about abortion. In the meantime, the illegals will keep pouring across the border, ever-increasing packs of vagrants will roam the streets, blacks will just be their black selves — and nothing will be done about it.
We’ll fight about abortion. And when we tire of that, something else will be thought up.
Stronger families, saner women, economic parity between capital and labor, less politicization of medicine, and a generally more salubrious society, for starters.
‘Would you rather those cat ladies be single mothers raising more juvinile delinquents? Unless you expect a reward from some kind of deity I don’t see the benefit from this.’
So get your state to legalize abortion.
Killing is not against God’s law: murder is. The best argument against Roe isn’t that abortion is killing, but that it’s actually totally illegitimate. I cannot now perfectly reconstruct the argument but have heard very good law talkers on the radio do so. Roe is essentially the government saying, because of one thing, we’ll now create an entirely new thing, without a Constitutional basis or attention to the states, not because the law leads you there but because we want it.
But the argument for it is the Most Important Graph in the World.
If the Christians were serious about every child a wanted child and could make it work, I’d take them more seriously. It is beyond proven that they don’t have a solution. This is a Democrat election scheme, along with the hilarious teaser targeting all those generous souls who bought Bernie Sanders a mansion, that Joseph Robinette Biden the bankster’s water-carrier would ever reform or forgive student loans (didn’t he tease this last election? And people are still talking about it seriously). It won’t make society better, but it might trick some fools into voting for Democrats.
Needs one more criterion to be either. Not allowed to say but don’t need to because it’s obvious.
Also, this is not 1973. With easy availability of Plan B and RU-486, what does it even mean to “Overthrow Roe”. It seems like overthrowing Rotary phone (or Landline phone for the younger folks).
… sorry, I missed the part where they also banned the pill.
Politicians on the right pandered to the most extreme Holy Rollers on this issue, thinking it would never matter. It turns out, it does.
Keep that in mind when people talk of regime change in Russia and claiming nuclear war ain’t no biggie cuz Russia all incompetent and shizzle.
Careful what memes you push.
A few nights ago I was looking at a Letterman show from around ’05 with guest Chevy Chase, who was involved in something at a theater on 112th St. in NYC. Letterman urges the audience to check it out, and Chase says, “yeah, drive your car on up there – it’s a good neighborhood – leave your left side window down.” Letterman said, “now, now.”
Do Asian girls get many aborts? I’d think they trail the pack significantly.
Or are you saying white,black and Mexican gals will flock to Charlie?
If this IS true, I never thought I’d see the day. The baby-hackers and Antifa will riot, for sure. Good, let them.
No matter what a person believes about the morality of abortion, the idea that the Constitution mandates it in all fifty states is so absurd that it beggars belief. No greater sham as ever been issued by any court anywhere at any time in the U.S.
The proper answer to the question has always been that it is up the individual states under the Tenth Amendment regulatory and police powers, period.
Legally and rationally, this will be the correct decision under the black-letter law of the Constitution. Nonetheless it will hasten the demise of this country, there are so many people who have rejected or ignored the Constitution for so long that they are simply going to refuse to accept this under any circumstances.
And it cannot be said often enough that although Trump failed to deliver on most of his promises, the one promise he did deliver on was the Supreme Court, and it is about to start paying off in spades.
OT: The USPS believes that Postal theft increased over 600% from 2017 through 2020. But they’re not quite sure, because they don’t really keep track.
Current advice is no longer to use the blue USPS mail collection boxes you may see along streets and sidewalks.
Stealing mail is the latest “entitlement”…
See also:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/don-t-waste-your-money-man-loses-93-000-after-check-is-stolen-and-washed/vi-AAWPrnJ
And ignore advice from media sources. They’re idiots.
Life worth protecting doesn’t begin at conception, but it does begin well before birth.
Bet you haven’t seen this question before:
Is the internet making us too literate?
If he’s voting like that with 4 female clerks in his office, he’s going to take some brickbats from them.
Who’s to say they aren’t a bunch of Coney-Barrett types? There are a LOT of pro-life women. More than 40%, I think?
The Tenth Amendment does not prevent the states from banning homeschooling, moron. Or did you miss that day in law school?
Lol. Men have zero intellectual advantage in the law so STFU, troll.
If I had been born retarded or with major health issues that would imposed misery on my family and people, I would’ve preferred termination.
Wouldn’t you?
Back before modern technology, such decisions were made by nature anyway. A child born with major problems died quickly.
It’s still quite rare. Not common enough to cause backlash to that degree. Most white women still care more about scoring social media points and being invited to the right parties and being in the good books of the HR ladies.
They are biological weapons. Blue cities in red states will have the worst murder, rape, you name it rates ever in history of any civilization if this really goes through. Think about it, 85 IQ high propensity for violence african american blacks (the worst kind, it seems the slight European admixture is like too much baking powder in a cake) with a 4.5 birth rate and unlimited access to guns and drugs. Perhaps that is God’s will. He is punishing America for having enslaved blacks. He created the continents and deserts and oceans and put the most violent and stupidest far away from everyone else for a reason. You should’ve picked your own damn cotton.
I’m failing to see the connection between abortion and any of those things. Abortion in 2022 is generally the last resort of the most derelict types of women. The clock isn’t going to magically roll back to 1971 with overturning of Roe. With or without the small numbers of abortions in the US, you’ll still have affirmative action, pronoun exchanges, obesity, SSRI dependence, bloated military-industrial complex nonsense, social media addicted teenagers, ESG scores, CRT lingo in academic and professional settings, etc
Yes, the real reason this is taking place, is that so now all the wahmens are going to vote Democratic
The largely male audience here does not understand how this issue burns in the soul of the female voooter
Nothing else will matter, not crime, not immigration, not gas nor food prices
THEY ARE TAKING OUR RIGHTS TO ERASE UNWANTED PREGNANCY
THEY ARE VIOLATING OUR BODIES, RAPING ALL WOMEN
WE NEED TO VOTE DEMOCRAT TO MAKE THE COURTS RESPECT US
And … child support often starts at 1/4 male income … Pay up, Mr white cishet male!
Have you ever actually read Justice O’Conner opinion in Roe?
Except that you are reading the 9th Amendment right out of the Bill of Rights.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
That can’t be right.
Occam’s Razor–it was probably the black one.
All those Reconstruction Amendments would like a word with you.
Let’s not kid ourselves; the Constitution has been heavily violated since the beginning. And why are we making a Holy Idol out of it, anyway? We are supposed to be loyal to our people not a piece of paper.
You hardly ever see Down Syndrome people anymore…..probably because of prenatal testing followed by abortion if the abnormality is detected. So expect Down and many other abnormalities to make an enormous comeback. The hate-your-neighbor chrissie cult and smug cuckservatives revel in the pain and misery of others.
I’m not trolling. I’m being quite sincere. If you want to hire a top-tier lawyer, most people will hire a man with good reason.
Women have been active in the law business in respectable numbers since the 1970s or so. Yet in the last 50 years, how much top-tier legal scholarship have they produced? Not much. Nobody hauls a book off the shelf to read some woman’s Commentaries on the Law. No woman has ever written such a tome.
How much top-tier scholarship do women produce in academics that isn’t busywork? In the liberal arts, most of what women write is junk.
Look at the opinions of Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan. Ugh. They’re smarter than the average person, yet they mostly went directly towards the conclusion that was the most out of touch with reality. They are/were not the match of the best male legal minds that have sat on the Supreme Court.
In the 1800s, the entire population of male lawyers was likely no bigger than the entire pool of female lawyers living today, yet the best male legal scholars back then were still better than the best female legal scholars today.
Justice O’Conner’s opinion in Roe?
Nonstop birth control meds are not good for women’s sanity. And more unwanted kids among the lowest classes will not lead to stronger families.
Good news for Black bodies.
You are by far the most insightful unz commentater.
You are by far the most insightful Unz commentater.
‘…He is punishing America for having enslaved blacks.’
The blacks were already enslaved. Some of the lucky ones got to come here.
The freaks are already ganging up around the SCOTUS building.
It’s going to take some time for the democrat’s antifa mob to arrive in significant numbers. That little fence the police erected won’t last long. Maybe then we’ll see what an authentic attempt at an insurrection looks like…
Day O’Connor was the co-author of Casey, not Roe. Harry Blackmun authored Roe.
As an aside, I didn’t realize that Roe passed 7-2. One of the dissents was future chief Rehnquist, but the other was a surprise to me; it was
The evangelicals finally got what they wanted. We’ll see how it plays out for the Republican coalition in November.
Cuck island is doomed.
Sotomayor had a clerk named Amit Jain (he looks exactly like you expect down to the proprietarily homosexual mouth posture and artfully tousled hair) who worked with Joel Gerstein (co-author of this piece) to attack Kavanaugh during the nomination fight. Jain is now an attorney in Brooklyn but his whole career was left-wing projects.
Yes, that’s right. I’d forgotten.
Anyway, I am flabbergasted by the credulous enthusiasm on the Right for giving more power to leftist governments on the theory that they’re going to use it to promote conservative causes rather than woke progressive ones.
America will become more magical in the future.
Why is it important to make people serious about sex?
Or even better. If it’s a woke law clerk who leaked this memo, whoever it is may well have sights set on more power and glory than a boring legal career — e.g. she (I suspect it’s a she) will be hailed as a hero, and will be launched, to choruses of you-go-grrling, on the fast track to becoming the new AOC or Stacey Abrams, or more.
No, both realized that the Vatican was right all along.
If the Vatican isn’t right, then Jews are. Pick your side!
All of those freakonomics guys supposedly random conclusions all seem to turn out proving that libertarianism is the bestest. Funny how that works.
In 1973, the strictest abortion laws were in the Northeast. Even New York’s touted 1970 legalization was repealed by the legislature two years later, a few months before Roe, and would have been signed by any normal governor, which unfortunately the state lacked at that time.
Daniel K Williams wrote an excellent history of the era leading up to the decision. Born after Roe, he knows more than most who lived through the period.
Making it illegal will not stop it. Not one bit. It never does. The rate stays the same.
Moreover, I don’t understand why the “realists” on here are all joyful about abortion becoming illegal. You know what that means.
What’s this new devilry? Arguentum ad Judaeum?
Let’s just debate the issue, m’kay reg.
Conservatives relying on black women to keep the black population down … is this one of those famous triple bank shots?
Meh. Does the abortion issue really resonate with people in an era of demographic collapse?
Didn’t we just go through that grand electoral sham with Biden? Did we learn nothing?
Classic misdirection. Whine and moan and demonstrate over this demonstrably non-issue while we edge closer to WWIII while starving to death.
I believe, one thing Roe v. Wade did do/cause, was probably to prevent the U.S. median age from keep declining, after the Baby Boom caused the median age to decline from around 30 in 1955 to about 27 by 1976:
Source: http://www.crmtrends.com/ConsumerDemographics.html or https://archive.ph/p8nc2
– 1960 Census: Supplementary Reports: Age of the Population of the United States, by States: 1960 https://www.census.gov/library/publications/1961/dec/pc-s1-11.html or https://archive.ph/Alc63
It’s been one of my favorite my pet political theories that this decline in the median age caused all types of left-wing societal and political phenomena like the Weather Underground et al. during the late 1960s and most of the 1970s, especially. Roe v. Wade most likely caused the U.S. median age to rapidly reverse its then recent and rare decline and continue on its previous trend of incline. And this brief dip in median age probably also helped Jimmy Carter to be elected into the White House as the 39th POTUS, but, ironically, Ronald Regan likely was a two-term POTUS thanks to Roe v. Wade. If the “Republican Brain Trust” were smart and not “notoriously innumerate” https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/22/the-race-realist-theory-of-how-trump-can-win-explained/ , they’d keep Roe in place:
Do we become more conservative with age?
Are younger generations really more liberal?
By James Tilley
– https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/10/do-we-become-more-conservative-age or https://archive.ph/1qDVZ
Orationes catholicas significas censeo.
The decision would merely allow to stand statutes passed by legislatures elected by their citizens. In other words, it’s far less radical than Roe itself. If radical at all.
How would it affect policy in any other state? There may be a few, such as Wisconsin, that have never adapted their codes to Roe and would thus default to whatever pre-1973 law is on the books. Otherwise, this is a big yawn.
If you think Roe is radical– and you’re nuts if you don’t– consider Canada’s Morgentaler decision some 15 years later. It threw out all existing abortion law and instructed Parliament to rewrite it from scratch for them to review. Parliament has never done so, leaving the country with no law on the subject at all. Other than maybe medical licensing.
How nice. Let me know when you have some facts to back up your bullshit.
The Declaration of Independence stated that everyone is equal and everyone has a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The Constitution was an attempt to design a government to protect those rights. It was imperfect, since it was created by humans who are not perfect, but it was a major advance over what had come before it. The free society it created led to the U.S. becoming the wealthiest society in history. This wealth did not just benefit a small group of elites. Average U.S. life expectancy went from 35 in 1800 to 75 in 2000.
Anything it is likely to be replaced by now is likely to be worse because of the widespread abandonment of the 18th century Enlightenment ideas that were predominant at the time of the creation of this country. Most of the recent problems in this country come from moving away from the ideas of the founders, which includes the ideas expressed in the Constitution.
Casey, whatever, it’s been a long time. The question is: has anyone here actually fucking read it?
Exactly.
That is precisely what New York (City) won’t allow so long as it holds the cultural reins. NYC won’t even let upstate NY be upstate NY. They have no intention of leaving the rest of us alone. Never have.
Please add to the list Baker v. Carr, the “one man one vote” decision that subjected state legislative apportionment processes to the “equal protection” clause, nullifying state efforts to give rural areas somewhat greater influence in legislatures. (No state legislative apportionment resulted in the wildly disproportionate representation of small states in the U.S. Senate.) Not a well-known decision, but possibly the worst Supreme Court infringement of state powers of self-government.
Agreed, and its maybe also not a leak but a fake.
Illegal, when a friend I knew was a resident adviser at a very elite New England university during the late 60s. The plan of procedure was, if an advisee messes-up, the RA friend, + the advisee, and the advisee’s friend, go to the associate Dean together, and that Dean had, well, a contact. I wonder what that associate Dean is doing now; a busy second career awaits, at age 80 or so. No, not needed in New England; but in Red states, yes.
If Roe is overturned, abortion will still remain legal in most states. Maybe 12 states will eventually ban abortion. It will have little effect on abortion rates. All the blue states will continue to allow on demand abortion. In states which outlaw abortion they will not incarcerate abortionists , nor punish the women who get abortions.
Whites went from something like 90% of the population to 50%, and that trend will only accelerate. That really is all that matters, the leftists arguing that “conservatives” not going away is really just saying that they need this utterly useless and powerless group to make it look like the country is not run by a one party totalitarian regime.
Ah yes the Vatican. Soon to be surrounded by several hundred million Africans and Middle Easterners. I’m sure they’ll be fine. Angels will defend them.
LOL LOL
I’m fairly conservative, and I’ve always believed abortion should be legal up to the 120th month. This gives the mother time to decide if the child will be loved, and if the child will have a fair chance at life.
It’s the only way to be really sure.
I will give Trump some credit here. The GOP was afraid to overturn Roe v Wade because they were afraid of losing the educated suburban female vote. But Trump’s personal grossness has driven most of those women out of the GOP anyway over the last few years so the GOP has no reason to cater to them anymore. Better to get the rural base fired up. The young people who are going to get angry at the GOP live in Blue states anyway so their increased turnout doesn’t really matter. Blacks and Hispanics in Red States aren’t rabidly pro-abortion and are going to be angrier at Biden for inflation than they will be at the GOP. In fact, many minorities will respond well to the GOPs more explicitly Christian messaging.
Unfortunately what the GOP is doing is not in the interests of Americans. Longer term restrictions on abortion are just going to accelerate America’s demographic and dysgenic decline. It is not higher IQ women who are getting abortions.
Most women who have abortions come from middle class backgrounds. Poor women who find themselves pregnant just go on welfare if they are not already on welfare.
If you look at the putative Alito decision, you can see it was intended for release last February, so—if authentic—this thing has been churning behind the scenes for at least three months already as a “decision”. Most likely the lefties justices are stonewalling so that if they can’t get a majority, at least they can get the decision released when it is more politically inflammatory.
The statute at issue was passed in 2018. Injunction issued 2019. Fifth Circuit upheld it, and petitioner appealed to Supreme Court in 2020. Certiorari granted and oral arguments in 2021. So we’ve already been through two Federal election cycles during this thing. But the “leak” is almost certainly with an eye to election-bending, even if the past four years of legal wrangling were not.
As other commenters have said, the actual legal ramifications of dropping the defective Roe precedent are not really that large, as states will simply adjust their laws to what their citizens want, indeed most already have … you know, like in a democracy—just not Our Democracy™, which is what the left’s screaming mimis are complaining about: states might choose “wrong” so everything must be decided by executive fiat in Washington.
Incidentally, while the “decisi0n” is 98 pages, the first five pages are a very cogent, mildly-stated, Scalia-esque introduction. Alito doesn’t shy away from pointing out the Court’s absurdities and hypocrisies. Recommended reading.
Potentially offensive but iSteve-themed cartoon below the fold.
More bluntly, blue states are dying. Red states are growing
This is not really what’s happening. People are moving for economic reasons. You can say Massachusetts is dying and New Hampshire is growing if you just look at population change, but the net result is that New Hampshire is increasingly becoming a blue state and Massachusetts is not any less liberal. The outflux of New Yorkers to Florida or Californians to the Mountain states will probably have a similar effect over time.
Blue cities in blue states have already figured out that you can push the black population into the red suburbs with the right mix of property prices and incentives to young urban professionals. Washington DC could give a master class on that. If people in Texas, Tennessee or Missouri think the new criminal class is going to stay confined in the urban areas they are in for an unpleasant surprise.
Abortion is the resort middle-tier women who didn’t avail themselves of the contraception or chastity of upper-tier women. Derelict-tier women bypass contraception, chastity, and abortion entirely and just go straight to the delivery room.
https://www.unz.com/isteve/what-drives-crimes-rates-up-and-down/#comment-1461548
Agree. This SC decision, however it is released, will change little. The reaction is a tempest in a teapot. The Left, however, excels in turning teapot tempests into massive moral outrage campaigns and even Color Revolutions™.
Plus Bush 41, so really a three-term POTUS, and it could have easily been four terms; “read my lips” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read_my_lips:_no_new_taxes
I just looked up some abortion statistics and from the the mid-1970s through the 1980s, the “live births, estimated” to “abortions, reported” ratio was consistently around roughly 2.5 to 1.
In the 1990s it rose (meaning fewer relative abortions to births) to 3 to 1.
In the 2000s it rose again to 3.4 to 1.
In the 2010s it rose again to about 5.6 to 1.
Historical abortion statistics, United States
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-unitedstates.html or https://archive.ph/oVQdi
Some fond memories from back in the day when Trump was still a “common sense conservative” (which won him the primaries, IMHO), and not yet a part of the “notoriously innumerate” “Republican Brain Trust”:
Trump Says He Supports Much of Planned Parenthood
Mar 2, 2016
A few things:
The slaveowners who wrote the Constitution didn’t believe that. Read what even Jefferson said about Blacks. It was also a wartime document intended to appeal to the French elite who were in the thrall of these ideas. Maybe a bit cynical (and clever).
America was probably the richest nation on earth per capita at the time and had been for many generations. Americans in 1690 were better off than Englishmen.
Of course, those numbers are heavily skewed by child mortality being high. But anyway, the same trend occurred all over the West. Europe had the same increase with no Constitution.
You’re busy with a technical analysis which is almost irrelevant compared with how this issue will be played in the mass media. I’m sure I don’t have to explain how that will go.
Then there’s this:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/lets-talk-about-the-black-abortion-rate-1531263697
It’s almost as if the “Conservative Majority” of Justices aren’t.
Great. Justice Witch gets more Fentanyl Floydz.
Here’s the reasoning:
a) Cities lost their shipping and small manufacturing, which was their primary economic base, during the 1960s. Cities were undercut by container yards and corporate manufacturing in the country, where costs were much lower. By 1970, big MAC time had come, and the cities were bankrupt. Not just NYC and similar, but all the cities, right down to the capitals of counties.
b) The New Deal was dominant after about 1932. It was a coalition of labor unions, big city political machines, and the Solid South. After 1970, it was gradually reduced to a coalition of big city political machines. These machines relied on Federal funding, largely for welfare, after the 1970 era bankruptcies. To keep their political influence, the big cities encouraged inflow of recent immigrants. The previous reliance on employed ethnic minorities (European immigrants, 1840-1926) became impossible after the jobs that had employed these minorities were eliminated by the events of (a), above. The new immigrants and previous Black immigrants (from the Great Migration) displaced the ethnicities that had previously run the big city political machines.
c) American decline (which I won’t describe here) has made it impossible to continue supporting the unproductive big cities (a). They will be left to rot, and their populations with them [1] . Worldwide, the combination of COVID and the Russia/Ukraine war with US failures and demographic changes will lead to a famine that will kill from 1 to 2 billion (10^9) people.
d) The failure (really, irrelevancy) of our current political system will lead to many changes. Suburban mothers will find themselves lucky to keep their jobs / working husbands, and will find that the US government cannot help them.
So:
Yes, people are moving for economic causes. The refugees I’ve talked to are strongly against the politics of the States they have fled, but perhaps that isn’t the general case. However, (d) says that they will not remain liberal, once liberalism cannot ensure employment or social status. What they will become, nobody knows.
1] For a general overview of the present economic/demographic situation, see: https://youtu.be/nYZGlmX6HXY?t=302
Minorities as a group are on average much younger than Whites. Once those minority groups also start aging due to lower fertility rates than they had in the past/historically and higher life expectancy, they will also start voting more conservatively/status quo. This doesn’t necessarily mean that they will vote Republican. But what it does mean is that the Democrats will have to be more moderate/conservative (more like Biden than AOC, for example), which I think is good and healthy thing and development for the country as a whole.
The most common age among whites in U.S. is 58 – more than double that of racial and ethnic minorities
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/30/most-common-age-among-us-racial-ethnic-groups/ or https://archive.ph/g8oRx
There are no ideas expressed in the Constitution, and no connection between it and the Declaration of Independence except in the imaginations of social reformers. The Constitution was an attempt (ultimately a failed one) to create a central government without sacrificing the sovereignty of the member states. Its failure is precisely the reason why it needs to be replaced, unless we’re happy with the creeping totalitarianism it has bequeathed us.
What’s weird? Doesn’t the SC work to some schedule? When is another election not around the corner?
People really do overestimate both Abortion’s popularity and its reach as a galvanizing issue on the electorate. It animated the right and a sliver of the left. Problem for the left is that it needs more than this sliver to win elections.
Cole is spot on here: https://www.takimag.com/article/aborting-trumpism/
…who will now be extra motivated to vote!
“Look up the statistics of women who have abortions. They’re not the kinds of women we want breeding“
Exactly. Think of all the new nigglet recruits for the Democrat vote banks and the net tax eaters. But rich GOP women and their daughters will still be able to get one through underhanded means. Seems fair to me.
The babykillers are REEEING and threatening violence. Reminds me of the Obamacare decision, where the marxists were threatening violence and screaming loudly —one Yale professor said if the SC had voted Obamacare down, it would totally delegitimatize the S.C.
Then Traitor John Roberts put his head down and bowed to the mob and saved socialized medicine.
Clearly, this was leaked to intimidate the Supreme Court into backing down and to change the subject from Joe Biden’s failures — with an eye to saving D’s in the midterms. Would not be surprised if Traitor John Roberts or Turncoat Brett Kavanaugh did this leaking, both are compromised swamp rats.
The SC justices are weak, evil, corrupt people. Remember, they supported Biden’s illegitimate “win” by stopping all challenges to the rigged vote. They idea that they would be brave in the face of the mob attacks coming now and the condemnation from their corporate media friends is laughable.
(Now I don’t actually believe this to be a real leak, but a fake leak to inspire outrage; I fully expect Amy Barrett to be the one to write any decision that overturns babykilling, not Alito. Optics and all.)
lmao. Poor Corvy and his rich friends, always so concerned about not being able to murder more people.
Are you implying that the occasional abortion is better for a womans’s health than constant birth control meds?
Indeed. One of the greatest canards of the pro-choice movement is that the abortion issue is men vs women.
The pro-life cause would have died years ago if it weren’t for the support of women.
ALSO: are we sure this “draft of the reversal of Roe” is genuine? And not just a hoax to raise money or votes for the Democrats?
I’m so cynical I didn’t think the Republicans actually had the balls to reverse Roe tbh.
Talking of leaks, UK twitter is promoting this
https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/05/01/human-urine-could-be-an-effective-and-less-polluting-crop-fertiliser
Looks like we’ll be living in our pods, donating to the night-soil truck, eating our sewage-grown plant diet, drinking our soy milk, owning nothing but our huge content-delivery screens and loving it.
IMO abortion on demand, for lack of a better term, should be illegal. I would have exceptions for rape, incest, the good of the mother’s health and severely disabled fetuses. But that’s just me
Shades of Russiagate! Here’s the new feint!
In Disinfoland, “true” often ain’t.
Timed to turn the girls blue
With elections in view.
Czar Jankowicz isn’t a saint.
Hm, what’s next? Horror movies and series where the souls of the unborn seek revenge against their killers?
Coincidence that neither group is capable of rational thought?
I’ve grown to despise the culture war debates for this exact reason. A bunch of total morons on the right with no interest in economics.
The largely male audience here does not understand how this issue burns in the soul of the female voooter
Last I checked, the number of women who are anti-abortion is actually higher than the number of men who are.
How will forcing the stripper to have a kid out of wedlock strengthen your family or my family? Is the stripper going to magically transform herself into a trad-wife once blessed with a pregnancy she doesn’t want?
This is just as retarded as thinking passes laws against guns (which is not the same thing as getting rid of guns, mind you) will transform all those thugs into Rhodes scholars.
Wouldn’t surprise me to see Kavanaugh switch his vote. He strikes me as a bit spineless and wishy-washy. He did vote to keep one of Biden’s two Covid mandates.
I’m not a lawyer, but think mostly yes. But that is not what pro abortion people want. Liberal states free to maintain their status quo. Conservative states would be free to enact strict statewide limits on abortion (could be different state by state and would still have some limits as required by SCOTUS decisions, such as the 15 week limit in MS).
I’m one of the relatively few people with a middling kind of position on abortion. Would not make my top ten list of issues the country
“Middle income women will become a hell of a lot more discriminating in who they hook up with. Right now, they’re already quite discriminating about social status and height. Now they need to think about if the guy is going to stick around.”
Middle income women hardly ever get abortions. It’s almost exclusively for the poor and stupid.
“I can’t speak for all prolifers but I think the hope is without legal abortion people will be more likely to view sex as what it is: a potent force that has the potential to create new life and therefore, shape society and its future, unlike today’s prevailing view that it’s somewhere between casual recreation and an extreme sport.”
In other words “everyone except celibate priests needs to have kids, no matter how stupid, irresponsible, and violent they are.” No thanks.
I’m aware of that. As I said, the sentiments expressed in the Declaration of Independence and by the founders in general were in advance of what had come before, not that they were the equivalent of modern-day beliefs. They were the first steps in a trip leading from a belief in the superiority of a tiny minority of rulers that had existed all through history to a belief that increasingly large segments of the population should have freedom and equality under the law.
The rise in life expectancy started in Great Britain in the middle of the 18th century, not America. The Industrial Revolution and a rapid increase in wealth started there too. See The Great Escape by Angus Deaton.
These countries did not all have constitutions. They did all have the same European Enlightenment ideas circulating. The Declaration of Independence and Constitution were expressions of these ideas. Ideas about the right to life and liberty started to first circulate among English writers like Locke, were then adopted by Americans, and then later were the basis for our founding documents. America was the purest expression of these Enlightenment ideas and it was the use of these ideas in the formulation of our government that led to us becoming the wealthiest country in history. European countries that had the same ideas circulating, whether they adopted something like our Constitution or not, were also successful. This was primarily Great Britain, France, Holland and Scandinavia. Spain and Italy had a brief burst of freedom earlier but had turned repressive by the 18th century and the rest of the world continued to have the same tyrannical governments they had always had, with brief historical exceptions. If we dump our belief in these Enlightenment ideas and dump the U.S. founding documents that these ideas led to, we will return to the type of tyrannical government that existed for most of mankind throughout history.
Perhaps the Democrats will eschew the race and trans nonsense and actually elect competent legislators who will focus on passing a federal law that ensures abortion – perhaps they could pair it with a “total women’s health” provision and provide free OBGYN, mammography and pregnancy/well baby checkups. You know – a compromise that betters all sides generally.
Nah. The dems will run trannies, terrorists and trillionaires who sell out unions, working people and wave in enormous numbers of immigrants.
As someone who is pro choice, I am enjoying this. The democrats deserve it.
needs to deal with.
Bob Dole during his run for president muttered that if an alien came down from Mars all anyone would care about would be its position on abortion.
Abortion and Prop 2 have been thought about as some of the few single issues that affected voters. Wonder if Prop 1 and government restriction of free speech will rise to that level.
Why are white people such retarded universalists incapable of looking out for their own good?
Whites have the lowest rates of abortions.
This is true, although ironic that most of those rushing to the polls over abortion probably have never had one and are past their childbearing years anyway.
“The downside is that it weaponizes the abortion issue at a time when Democratic prospects otherwise were looking particularly bad”
Which is exactly why it’s been leaked. It’s on the Guardian front page.
You’ll now find a campaign to persuade every girl that they are at risk, and every girl’s parents that their girl is at risk.
“most of those rushing to the polls over abortion probably have never had one and are past their childbearing years anyway”
Agreed, but they can dream, can’t they? Talking of which, great article in the Guardian problem page:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/apr/30/what-ive-learned-from-10-years-of-therapy-and-why-its-time-to-stop
“Next to the front door is a small, typed sign with the details of a psychotherapist. I draw myself up, feeling both grown up and childishly nervous, and ring the buzzer. It is June 2012, and I am nearing 38.”
My unmarried-and-childless alarm went off. And I was right!
You’ll have to forgive Rosie. When her female emotions get all stirred up it is hard for her to think straight.
Well put – casual/consequence-free sex has been a disaster for society, and ‘feminists’ have told young women for several generations that getting railed by a procession of guys in your 20s and 30s is liberation when in reality it’s an express train to spinsterhood or raising a kid conceived in the twilight of your childbearing years with no male support.
My first thought too was that this was a stupid thing for the leaker to do and that increased the odds of it being one of the Liberals: short term gain and damn the long term consequences etc.
It does make Roberts look bad and people on the Right should be rubbing his nose in it to increase the odds of Roberts finally seeing the light.
I’m not J. Ross, but I am pro-abortion. No one’s pegged me for Lucifer, though some thots have called me “creepy.” The slippery slope argument is fallacious but it’s all you’ve got since you don’t have an argument for why it’s good to force the stripper to have a kid. The stripper must be forced to have a kid she doesn’t want because otherwise your kid might be randomly killed in the park for no reason. I hope your kid doesn’t get stabbed during a mugging by one of the Lives You’ve Saved.
The ninth is a prohibition on government action. It demands the federal government remain silent in areas in which it is not specifically empowered to act. Government cannot disparage rights by remaining silent on them.
A judicially-enacted nationwide prohibition of abortion bans, overriding states’ 10th amendment powers, is certainly a violation of citizens’ ninth and 10th amendment right to create their own laws in an area in which the Constitution grants no federal power.
Now that the putative opinion has leaked, will it be stillborn or aborted?
Self-termination is always an option you can take for yourself.
No. Next question.
It’s amazing you babykillers are so enthralled with murdering children you make these ridiculous “I would rather have been aborted, therefore, abortion for everyone!” arguments. Truly, you are deranged.
lmao. Classic DC Swamp rat logic: “Don’t ever ban babykilling, otherwise the D’s might take an election!”
Tell us, do you work for a lobbyist, Planned Parenthood, the RNC, or DNC, swamp rat?
Alito means “male chicken wing” in Spanish.
Is he now the leader of the chicken wing of the Supreme Court?
Here’s a prediction for you Steve: a fight to preserve abortion will galvanize the gender-critical feminists in their intra-feminist fight against the Ex-men.
I’m not a biologist, but has anyone else noticed that the group of people who need a right to abortion almost perfectly lines up with people “assigned female at birth”? It’s uncanny. Perhaps someday science will discover the reason why.
Abortion is a classic sex-based (as opposed to gender-based) right. The radical feminist take used to be that women are a class defined by reproductive ability and oppressed precisely because of this. Michelle Goldberg had a good NYT column in the last year about this, bemoaning how feminism had moved away from that understanding. With abortion illegal and/or limited, I think it’s likely that middle class women like her will become more receptive to the gender-critical arguments as reproductive issues become more salient. Conversely, transwomen have no need for a right to abortion. If Progressive Inc gears up to fight for abortion, that implicitly means demoting transwomen to the back of the bus. But how will they feel about this?
An enterprising GOP strategist might try to channel any post-Roe-repeal Democratic energy into an intra-feminist fight and split the opposition….
More than “all the races are the same” sacrament?
You people are beyond retarded. No one is going to be more likely to view sex as a potent procreative force if abortion is restricted in their state.
Most white women who want abortions will spend a few hundred dollars extra and travel to a state where abortion is legal and get one. The ones who don’t will be the most stupid and drug addicted ones.
Most black women will make no changes in terms of getting pregnant or getting abortions. They will generally lack the foresight to go to another state to get an abortion. The black women who have abortions tend to be the poorest of them, who already have multiple children by different fathers. They will just have more kids which they don’t want. Lacking access to Abortion will not make them more discerning about sex because they are an r selected people who lack an instinct to be long term discriminating about sex partners. Black fertility will become substantially more dysgenic as many more black babies will be born.
The amount of unwanted offspring aborted vastly outnumbers the amount of children that come here through illegal immigration. What is the sense of opposing the latter while restricting abortion? Oh right…sex is supposed to be speshull!!!
The statistics on abortion patients disagree.
Am very surprised RW has been overturned. Didn’t think it would happen. That said, just as well. It was a terrible decision (even the archliberal, Dershowitz, acknowledged this from the very beginning). When the decision was originally handed down in 1973, the Chicken Littles among the lib media forgot that around 16 states allowed abortion and that RW only certified a FEDERAL right–it had nothing to do with the individual states who could have done what they wanted. Now, almost fifty years later, the number of states who will certify abortions will probably turn out to be at least double the 1973 number, if not more. When the dust finally settles, the vast majority of the states will allow abortion.
Much ado over nothing,
The leak will only end up severely hurting the Democrats and the Left.
The leaker will be discovered. If it turns out that a Justice was also involved, that Justice will be impeached and removed to protect the integrity of the court. The Left miscalculated very badly with this one.
It’s strange how all the armchair legal scholars here are yowling about how this will throw the November election to the Democrats. Not only have they prescinded from the actual substance of the decision in order to sail on the high seas of meta-politics which they do not understand, but they also seem not to be aware of the fact that a majority of the American electorate is actually prolife.
The depravity, not to mention the stupidity, on evidence here in this thread is now enough to close the book on iSteve and its commentariat. You people understand nothing, deserve nothing, and are good for nothing.
Nice.
First- you’ll get more & more coloreds (they hardly can control themselves in this area). If you want that, fine…
Second- if you are concerned about killing- well, killing is what we usually do, all our lives. Why would a fetus be an exception? Why would a lump of flesh be given a chance to experience the human condition, which Anatole France described as: “They are born. They suffer. They die.”.
Third- if your concern is about some immortal soul & afterlife… Most world religions are not for it, but don’t consider it to be something extremely important. Even Catholic Christianity was not of uniform opinion, especially St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. One could say they relied upon antiquated medicine, but those advocating ban of abortion usually do, too, on the contrdictory combination of theology & modern biology.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_hist.htm
St. Augustine (354-430 CE) reversed centuries of Christian teaching in Western Europe, by returning to the Aristotelian Pagan concept of “delayed ensoulment.” He wrote that a human soul cannot live in an unformed body. Thus, early in pregnancy, an abortion is not murder because no soul is destroyed (or, more accurately, only a vegetable or animal soul is terminated). He wrote extensively on sexual matters, teaching that the original sin of Adam and Eve are passed to each successive generation through the pleasure generated during sexual intercourse. This passed into the church’s canon law. Only abortion of a more fully developed “fetus animatus” (animated fetus) was punished as murder.
……………………..
St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) also considered only the abortion of an “animated” fetus as murder.
So, a bunch of popes didn’t offer any argument that would refute Augustinian-Thomistic line of reasoning.
Curious, and no one’s ever explained. Can you? I certainly can’t expect an answer from theologians. But if God created these stupid and violent creatures and put them far away for a reason, as you say, exactly *why* did God bother to create them in the first place? The existence of Homo africanus is the most persuasive argument for evolution that I’ve personally come across.
I agree. This is an opportunity to become a folk hero on the left. Speculation I have read is that it is a Sotomayor clerk (big shock) named Amit Jain. He blasted the Kavanaugh confirmation when he was at Yale and has previously given quotes to the reporters from Politico who wrote this.
Right, but female pro choicers are much more excited about the issue than male ones.
It turns out the Dem base (specifically the feminist part) if nothing else.
wow, that could be really scary. The blood of the slaughtered unborn comes to take revenge against their killers and all the enablers! Like Abel, their blood cries out to God from the ground for justice.
You have two parasitic classes (bottom 20% and top 1%) who are entirely dependent on a dozen supreme court cases.
They’re not and they’re not.
I am shocked that a Supreme Court justice has never been assassinated. I hope the five putative votes are locking themselves in a bunker until the decision is released.
Since most pregnancies end in natural abortion early on
They don’t.
I wonder what the left would think if they saw this entire comment thread on this topic. Here all these people are utterly pro-abortion because they think it will benefit them politically and racially to have unfit people kill their unborn babies. The cynicism and amorality surrounding this discussion is shocking.
Does the left think this way too? “Please, please stupid poor people. Please get abortions for the health of the future.”
The secular right and left could switch positions on this overnight and no one would see any break in the logic.
That’s the thing. Abortion is an impossible issue because you want it for blacks, but not for whites. Since whites, even conservatives, are still stuck in “everybody is equal and the law can only dumb because of that”, this can’t be solved.
I dream of a wily politician who goes “Ok, I accept that abortion is a wonderful right, so I propose we give it only to women of color, as a form of reparations”.
You could add a little known but very impactful 5-4 SCOTUS decision from the early 1980s pertaining to immigration: Plyler v. Doe, which mandated that all public must admit illegal aliens free or charge, no questions asked. Plyler v. Doe is the decision that in large measure (IMO) spawned the problem of so-called “Dreamers” (illegals brought as young kids by their invader parents). If one state can allow its public schools to deny admittance to illegals, then that would in no doubt cause many of these folks to scurry off to other states that don’t ask about immigration status, subsequently putting pressure on receiving these states to enact similar laws.
As for the two frequently concerns raised re: an overturn of Roe:
How this would impact demographics
-and- The upcoming fall elections.
Blacks (and browns) are disproportionate users of abortion services and the states with the largest black populations (the Deep South) are the ones most likely to outlaw/restrict abortion. The states most likely to enact bans in the event of a Roe overturnal and have large black pops are: SC GA AL MS LA and AR. TX is the only one I’d put in the large brown (and black) category to likely to outlaw abortion. But keep in mind this isn’t 1973 when we didn’t have contraceptive injections/ implants, and something usually overlooked is that a SCOTUS that strictly followed the Constitution would allow states to mandate use of birth control in exchange for government benefits, since technically no one has an inherent right to welfare to begin with.
You want welfare for your (usually ilegitimate) kiddies? Fine. We’ll give it to only if you agree not to have any more children (you’re clearly incapable of supporting the one you have now). Otherwise DCS will come in, charge you w/ endangering the life of a child, (having kids you can’t feed) and either lock you away till you go through menopause or you agree to undergo a free-to-you tubal ligation.
As for the Fall elections, this could be a boost for the Dems in what otherwise would be a disastrous year, but once again states where abortion would be instantaneously banned are already deep red. The Nice Suburban White Ladies are concentrated in states where abortions will remain largely available for the time being and this may have the effect of demonstrating to them that legal abortion isn’t contingent on Roe being upheld anyways (I bet a lot aren’t aware of this factoid ). The more pressing issues of spending \$100 to fill the tanks of their Suburbans and empty grocery shelves may win the day
I haven’t read the comments, but Aldey’s gonna be apoplectic!
Easy fix.
Require modern birth control use (which is largely foolproof and easy to administer) in exchange for any welfare benefits.
Otherwise DCS comes in, charges the mother with child endangerment (having kids she can financially or otherwise take care of) and gives her the choice of being put away till she goes through Menopause or undergoes a free-to-her tubal ligation.
National Socialists permitted Jewish women to abort. Republicans by-and-large oppose this. Therefore, Republicans are even more “anti-Semitic” than the homo with the ‘stache.
That’s their logic.
They were also much closer to universal health care. What’s a Jewish progressive to do?
https://www.personaldefenseworld.com/2021/04/states-nullify-federal-gun-control/
Remember: assault weapons (5.56 mm, 6.8 mm) for home defense are a bad idea in built up areas due to overpenetration, and full auto 12 gauge shotguns can’t be controlled due to recoil.
Full auto is useful during assaults and ambushes, when intense fire can compensate for lack of time to aim or targets to aim at. Full auto might be useful for home defense in the country, where there is a more or less safe backstop and you might have room to room contests, but even in the country full auto would only be useful if the house has some cover (that would stop invader’s rounds) that you can hide behind.
Full auto favors those who have a tactical plan that replaces numbers of defenders with firepower. Preferably, you want an alarm system and some obstacles that alert you and keep the home invaders at a reasonable distance while you discourage further probing by signaling that the house is tenanted and defended. Your goal is to hold out until the relief force arrives (police, neighborhood watch of some kind if there aren’t police, failing that a good burial plan).
And remember, the home invaders can have full auto also. They can even have plans.
Between incels and the reject rate of men on dating apps not very many people in the amateur group are having intercourse any more. Inconvenient pregnancy, abortion, and abortion rates are plummeting. Do a google image search. The most interesting feature of this topic: every single image showing U.S. abortions and abortion rate by year is a thumbnail. I tried 10X to get an image to show you all and not one had over 1 point font on the little axis labels. Even three years ago this would definitely not have been the case. Nudge in action?
I also am curious to know how Supreme Court confidentiality got blind sided here. There is some egregious bad faith in action here to nobody’s surprise I guess.
Maybe, but the effectiveness of leaks on elections is not only a function of content, but also of timing.
For maximum effect, the leak should be done closer to the election. Moreover, the leaker should have taken the Project Veritas approach — a little leak here, then another leak, there — and then BOOM before the opinion is finally issued, let it out.
But the leaker — rumor has it a clerk from Sotomayaor — is probably a naif, in addition to being a leftoid numbskull.
There are three possibilities:
1) This is a complete fabrication.
If that’s true, just look at what it has done already. It has completely dominated the news cycle, and has taken attention away from Biden’s many flaws and mistakes, and will refocus the attention of the public on a side issue. Just like other Democrat hoaxes; it’s a classic disinformation ploy. Progressive left democrats have feared this for fifty years; even if the fabrication is debunked, they’ll still remember these days of fear, and vote accordingly.
2) This is an actual leak of the preliminary work of one Justice.
If that’s true, it doesn’t say anything about what will happen, because the Justices often disagree at this stage of internal debate. It still works as a hoax, in that it moves public opinion and refocuses public debate right up to the election.
3) This is an actual leak of what will be the majority opinion of the SCOTUS later this summer.
If that’s true, the leak still accomplishes an early refocusing of public attention away from Biden and his flaws, onto a subject that the Democrats can probably win on.
I’d like to see the Chief Justice make a statement today. He can certainly clarify if it is a fake, or if it’s the preliminary work of one Justice and they’re actively considering the case in question. He won’t address #3 above, obviously.
Who listens to mass media anymore? Nobody goes to YouTube or TikTok or anywhere online to be hectored. BDSM is a niche (rhymes with “bitch”) market.
The near-38 year old then confesses
“it is during one of these tearful moments that I acknowledge how much I want to be a mother, despite the fact that I am single”
I wonder if the therapist’s waiting room had a loudly ticking antique clock?
Be nice if they overturned Disparate v Impact.
Dorky men in general. When you might be forced to raise a child with the men you have sex with, a man whose strength is providing becomes a lot more valuable. Even if you can still go to the state next door to get your womb vacuumed, even if the government is still playing provider, it will still be a consequence of some kind, and therefore good to the kind of men who make a civilized society rather than an uncivilized one.
Don’t expect science from pro-choicers.
“that could be really scary. The blood of the slaughtered unborn comes to take revenge against their killers and all the enablers!”
They could use the footage from these films.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silent_Scream
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eclipse_of_Reason
It would be really scary, because it would resonate with the female audience. Which is why it’ll never be made.
2 comments:
Yes, this was done to intimidate any Justices who might be thinking of signing on to this draft opinion. The leaker was probably a liberal clerk, but possibly one of the national “security” agencies who spy on pretty much everyone, or perhaps a liberal clerk acting in concert with one of said agencies. There will be no negative consequences for the leaker or for agency, if it was one. They can get away with anything (See Hunter Biden, the Clintons). And I believe the intimidation will work. Just watch.
Second, this could have major repercussions unrelated to having abortions. As we’ve seen with the MLK holiday (a long time ago), transgender bathrooms, the confederate flag, and with the baseball Allstar Game in Atlanta, GA, the Powers That Be, specifically the college sports cabal (NCAA), will come down hard on any states that restrict abortion right up until the moment of birth or even a few minutes after birth (wink, wink). Pass a “heartbeat law?” No NCAA tournament games for you!
Copied from comments on previous abortion-related posts here at Steve’s blog:
Original data source at the CDC:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/ss/ss6907a1.htm#T5_down
Right, the next phase is choking down the food supply………a great time to let hordes of third worlders pour across the border…..all planned .
You cannot compare existence with non-existence. It is categorical nonsense to do so.
You cannot claim “I would have been better off had I not been born.”
You would not have been better off.
You would not have been worse off.
You merely would not have been.
He cites “the stability of our law.”
Even leaving aside the abortion issue, my God these people are shameless.
Which Supreme Court decision made homeschooling a personal right?
Expected recurring headlines in the MSM for the foreseeable future:
Look, a squirrel … with an unplanned pregnancy!!!
Wrong. Compare:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
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.
As you can see, the 9A does not mention the states. That is because it is a negation of the usual rule that lists are exhaustive. The Bill of Rights is a list of individual rights, and the 9A was included specifically to preclude your argument that there are no unenumerated rights.
Your attempt to interpret the 9A and the 10A together renders the former superfluous, which is the same as taking a black marker and blotting it out.
The Bill of Rights was originally seen as restricting only the federal government. That is no longer the case. I sincerely hope you don’t have a problem with that.
Odds that they actually invade the court building: 10-1 against.
Odds that if they do, the invaders are nolle pros: 100-1 for.
Or maybe it has something to do with better birth control.
You are a buffoon.
There is no such thing as “delayed ensoulment,” nor can there be any such thing. The very definitions of the terms involved do not permit it. “Ensoulment” itself, delayed or otherwise, is an asinine category mistake, which you would know if you understood the first thing about metaphysics.
The soul is not a complete substance. The soul is of itself and per se the form of the body. The soul cannot preexist the body nor can there be a body without a soul. The very idea is a contradiction in terms. The soul and the body come into existence at the same time.
Moreover, it was defined as de fide teaching at the Council of Vienne that the rational soul in man is one with the vegetative and sensitive principle. The term “animated fetus” is an absurdity and quite appropriately appears nowhere in the world of St. Thomas at all.
The discussion is not complete without the “banging pots and pans” factor. I remember when Mitch McConnell experienced this on his street. Also megaphones, and flashlights. Mitch, looking stricken (well, forget that, he always looks stricken) apologized to his neighbors; I am sorry I brought this upon you. If a draft can be leaked, home addresses can be leaked. “In your face” noise during the middle of the night might determine the final legal opinion.
And the female prolifers are much more excited about the issue than male ones, too. So what?
https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/civil-rights/266470-pro-life-movement-has-always-been-driven-by-women/
Abortion is an issue where Whites do the bulk of the fighting on each side while Blacks and Hispanics are getting the abortions.
Holly Roller Whites line up to battle on the streets.
On one side we have the Christian men that will never need an abortion.
On the other side we have the unattractive liberal dog moms that will never get pregnant.
FIGHT
As soon as I read the supposed quote, “… “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled, …””, I was suspicious that this is a fake. Judges tend to use extremely temperate language in all their written opinions. They are even more likely to do so when ruling on contentious issues. I suspect that this “leak” was the product of some exceptionally incompetent court employee.
You don’t need full auto.
You don’t need a 15 round magazine.
You don’t need free speech on the internet.
I honestly don’t see the difference for any of these statements.
It’s not about needs but rights.
Liberals have convinced themselves that abortion is a right but they can make endless rules about guns. NY actually tried banning magazines with more than 6 rounds. They don’t even make 6 round magazines.
If liberals want to enshrine abortion as a right then they need to get the votes. Having a bunch of left-wing judges try interpret abortion as a right from document that has nothing to do with abortion is the pinnacle of left-wing dishonesty. The typical liberal can’t even explain the decision. Just look at Biden and his plead of “fairness”. Liberals don’t want to debate the constitutional basis.
That contradicts your screen name.
(Of course, my innate antiïmperialism contradicts my own.)
It’s already reached comic-horror form.
The problem is that while, according to honestly conducted opinion polls, a substantial majority of Americans favor severe restrictions on abortion, e.g. only in the case of rape, incest, or to the preserve the health of the mother, only a small minority of Americans realize that the current legal interpretation of Roe v Wade prevents any limits such as these on abortion.
Most Americans, if they truly understood the the ramifications of Roe v Wade as it is currently applied by the courts, would be in favor of overturning it. Those in favor of abortion on demand have worked tirelessly over the years to confuse the issue by suggesting that the only choice is between Roe v Wade and essentially outlawing abortion.
Thanks.
The maternal instinct applied to public policy has given us mass immigration; expanded welfare; expanded healthcare; expanded schooling; expansions that degrade us long term.
My argument is not at all that there are no unenumerated rights. My argument is that government refrains from infringing on rights by refraining from acting. The constitution as a whole is a leash on federal government power.
The Bill of Rights was originally seen as restricting only the federal government. That is no longer the case. I sincerely hope you don’t have a problem with that.
I do indeed have a problem with that, because upending the entire structure of federalism over one poorly-worded clause of an amendment is indefensible. It has caused massive warping of the balance of power between the federal government and the states, allowing the federal government to impose activist kritarchy upon the people in the name of a couple poorly-conceived sentences.
If the people in each state wanted the protections of the Bill of Rights in their own states, they were well able to include it in their state constitutions, and in fact most states did.
The concept of the incorporation of enumerated rights on the states has been implemented haphazardly and selectively since the 14th was ratified precisely because no coherent system can be derived from it. In fact no attempt has ever been made to incorporate the ninth amendment on the states because it renders all state lawmaking nonsensical: the constitution never defines what state powers are, so according to the constitution the states have no powers, because any attempt to impose laws and regulations on citizens necessarily limits unenumerated rights.
The ninth made sense under the original constitutional order because the federal governments powers were specific, limited and defined, so there was little tension between Article I and II powers and broad, unenumerated rights — it was simple to conclude that Article I gave Congress no power to legislate in an area therefore that area fell into the broad ground of unenumerated rights on a federal level.
States were free to carve out their own powers in their constitutions between the powers reserved to the federal government and those that would be reserved to the people, but then the 14th came along and suddenly the states were not free to carve out their own powers, but exactly when and under what circumstances they were not was nearly completely up for grabs. The 14th never even specifically says that the Bill of Rights now applies to the states, it’s simply an inference that courts have made in the face of the criminally vague language of the amendment.
The fundamental legal chaos introduced by the 14th amendment has been an important factor in the devolution of rule of law in this country and the growth of federal government overreach. It has made the law into a subjective and ever-hungry beast.
If Roe is overturned, abortion will still remain legal in most states. Maybe 12 states will eventually ban abortion. It will have little effect on abortion rates. All the blue states will continue to allow on demand abortion. In states which outlaw abortion they will not incarcerate abortionists , nor punish the women who get abortions.
The question is how many women on the fence will cross state lines.
White women that really want an abortion will get one.
I wonder how many Black women will take the attitude of “well y’all took away the clinic” and use that as a justification to have a child on welfare.
I really don’t know. Black and White women may do what they are going to do regardless of the law.
My guess is that the overall effect will be dysgenic. Lazy women will wait too long to plan a trip and will keep the baby. Women with drive and forethought will concoct some California or NY weekend vacation.
White people yet again fighting each other for a dysgenic policy that works against them.
I’m not obsessed with Jews, but a lot of commenters are, convinced that they are out to destroy us.
If that view were valid, Jewish support for legal abortion, and legal contraception, would be Exhibit A. To paraphrase Patton’s favorite trench joke, no dumb bitch ever won a demographic war with her freedom to choose. You want the other poor, dumb bitch to be free to choose.
I think there is at least one Hong Kong film like this, plus, though it is not like this, the very disturbing film Dumplings which is expanded out of a short segment in another film, Three Extremes.
Really, though, I am not sure why exactly people who don’t find abortion itself disturbing would find the plot of Dumplings or the original short disturbing, but apparently they do.
The most interesting aspect of the sex difference in opposition to abortion on demand is that besides women in general being more opposed to abortion on demand than men, older women are more opposed than younger women. This is an age effect, not a cohort or period effect. Poll results universally find that as women grow older their opposition to abortion on demand increases monotonically with age . This suggests that as women experience childbirth and child rearing on the one hand and abortions on the other, these experiences turn them against abortion.
This is well written…
…but,
IMHO we already have returned to tyrannical government, only it’s somewhat different and arguably worse than what existed for mankind throughout history, since the historical tyrant was limited by his physical reach, but modern technologies have enabled vast dystopic surveillance states staffed by minutiae-scrutinizing legions of soul-police backed by the network-extracted wealth of the globe.
Point being, while agree with your sentiment, I increasingly question what there is left to preserve.
Conservatives are having trouble conserving non-fraudulent elections. The DHS is fixing to make free speech, excuse me misinformation, illegal.
The Constitution was nice while it lasted. The alternative to a society of law, and it is upon us, is pure who-whom.
Wow, your president legitimised that leak by commenting on it, bad show.
But he has a Gender Policy Council which will no doubt agree with his actions.
(Only joking, guys a cabbage)
White women in old South Africa could leave the country to get one. Non-white women were less able to.
Legal abortion is dysgenic. It frightens thinking women away from responsible as well as irresponsible pregnancy.
Contraception is even more so. It takes forethought.
That’s basically Griggs v. Duke Power.
The likelihood of New York state passing abortion restrictions in the near future because Roe was overturned is literally zero.
I’m taking a libertarian position here: it’s my body and I have the right to defend it as I see fit. Yeah, the ladies have a point there for sure. You go, Girls!
The number of full-auto Glocks in America must be increasing at a prodigious rate, due to the number of conversion switches being produced without portfolio. With a will, there’s a way, and people are willing full-autos into existence.
https://cults3d.com/en/3d-model/tool/ez-glock-auto-sear
Remember, if full automatic weapons are so damn dangerous, then why did the USA allow Iraqi civilians to retain select-fire AK-47s after knocking over Saddam Hussein in 2003?
The Cosmopolitans in America consider their citizens LESS trustworthy than Iraqis.
Look at cosmopolitan Michael Bloomberg’s Cat’s Paw Gun Controller propaganda outfit The Trace going nutso:
https://www.thetrace.org/2022/03/auto-sear-gun-chip-glock-switch-automatic-conversion/
And the voters are too stupid to see that.
the best music video on the topic
When are you, or anyone else for that matter, going to address the fact that the doctrine of substantive due process protects homeschooling families with 10 kids as well as the right to abortion?
You have yourself admitted that the effect of overturning Roe v. Wade on abortion rates will be limited. Why then are you ignoring the very dangerous precedent that is being set by a denial of the existence of unenumerated rights?
The #Metoo pink pussy hat crowd will be galvanized into mass annoyance.
You are kidding yourself if you think legal abortion is having a dysgenic effect via the trepidations of marginally fertile minorities like thinking women.
Yeah, I’m just not seeing it.
It is amazing how so much discussion about abortion ignores the history of abortion.
The inhabitants of Ireland fought what amounted to a civil war for decades over issues like whether people should be forced to do without contraception or abortion according to the prevalent Roman Catholic doctrines enforced by law in the Republic of Ireland.
The Supreme Court gradually moved towards legalizing abortion, or finding a right to abortion, after events like the thalidomide disaster, or the outbreak of German measles in the early 60s that left 15,000 babies in the US with severe birth defects.
Completely ignored in the discussion is the fact that legal hygienic abortion is a great deal safer than childbirth, but that illegal “backstreet abortions” are a great deal more dangerous than legal abortions.
Also ignored is that only 30% to 50% of conceptions actually pass the first trimester, with many being lost spontaneously, usually due to chromosomal abnormalities.
Another issue that really needs to be discussed is the difference between chemical and surgically induced abortions. Medical abortion regimens using mifepristone in combination with a prostaglandin analog are the most common methods used for second-trimester abortions in Canada, most of Europe, China and India, in contrast to the United States where 96% of second-trimester abortions are performed surgically by dilation and evacuation.
If the 9 Asperger syndrome justices of the Supreme Court are concerned that 18th century slave-owners G. Washington and T. Jefferson did not specifically address abortion and that the states ought therefore to decide for themselves what kind of laws they should have regarding abortion, I see no harm in it, even if some of those state laws are going to look awfully like establishment of religion.
The trouble with religion is that really you cannot choose whether you believe in God. Either you do or you don’t, and if you do, you cannot possibly understand the difference between what is religious doctrine and what is secular thought.
However the legislators in states with atavistic voter registries need to do more to educate their populations regarding safe and humane alternatives to current abortion laws.
A great deal could be done by switching the emphasis to chemical abortions within the first 9 weeks, rather than 6, before “quickening” takes place, which was originally regarded by the Church as the cutoff point, and thereby eliminating messy dilatation and curettage procedures that many people find distasteful.
By making contraception as widely and cheaply available as possible, giving easy and cheap access to early pregnancy testing and chemical abortifacients, it should be possibly to further reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, and thus reduce the number of abortions.
Perhaps there should be laws mandating machines to dispense condoms and RU-486 pills in student bathrooms and advertising campaigns like “Don’t Ride Bareback in Texas”.
I’m someone who wants the 14 words. Banning abortion will lead to more poor black and mestizo women having kids on our dime while middle class white women will just go to Canada or whatever. And lots of swing voters who might either be open to Republicans on crime, immigration, and inflation who would just stay home will now be motivated to vote Democrat.
Everyone pops a big raging blue-veined boner when nattering about fighting off home invaders, but the great majority of home invasion victims are people involved in the drug trade.
This is kind of the main idea of everything.
Hard core leftists don’t actually care about getting what they want, what they care about is forcing it on others.
Here in Texas, I could give two shits what craziness California inflicts on itself as long as I’m left alone, but California cares deeply that it also gets inflicted in Texas.
In the mind of a leftist, there is no right to be left alone because they are always right and you are always wrong.
Part of me worries that in a couple of years or so you’ll have white, Christian couples adopting hood kids because as pro-lifers they felt it was their responsibility.
On the other hand, if it helps to drive a wedge between liberals and conservatives in America, it could be for the greater good.
But as a non-American, I don’t know how likely either are (I know that British Evangelicals are very race-blind and prone to ‘abortion is like the slave trade/abortion kills black baby’ types.
I’d agree. Older women might also be more able see the life-or-death duty society imposes on young women to “focus on their careers” as the horseshit that it is. In reality, second and third wave feminists fought for contemporary young women’s right to have a lot of different kinds of sexual experiences rather than having babies. That kind of lifestyle doesn’t make women happy. Just the opposite.
Perhaps it’s a paradox, but two seemingly conflicting things can be true at the same time.
First, it could be true that an overturning of Roe would create political problems for Republicans running for office in the short term. It could also be true that these political problems have been overstated, or that the parties have realigned, and the States in which the parties have structural advantages have shifted to the point that overturning Roe will have no negative impact, or a positive impact for Republicans. (Do not underestimate the morale boost of delivering a long term wish list item to a party’s base in driving participation).
Secondly, it stands to reason that having had a direct challenge to Roe refused by SCOTUS would be a short and medium term political disaster for Republicans. Republicans have been running on reforming the Court by the appointments process (i.e., selecting better jurists) for 30+ years now, with a lot of that energy directed at Roe. Having six of nine justices appointed by the GOP after this movement began in earnest only to see its hopes dashed would seal electoral underperformance and outright losses for several cycles in the future.
Third, if you look at the 2022 U.S. and ask the question “how did we get here?” you’d be compelled to conclude that so much of it is the product of Courts arrogating powers of social engineering to themselves as questions of law, and Roe is a centerpiece of this. You’re reversing cause with effect if you think that Empowerful Career Women of Modest Suburban Affluence and their daughters Urban Cat Mother slash Affordable Oenophiles created Roe – in reality, they were made by Roe and the social conditions that resulted. Atomization, extreme individualism, loss of religiosity, elite overproduction, wage depression, late and absent family formation, below replacement fertility leading to demographic collapse, high rates of immigration (excused in part to paper over the low fertility), gender bending/grooming and Rainbow Alphabet People domination, etc. are all in differing proportions caused or accelerated by Roe. These are people who have generationally diminished stakes in the established order of the United States because of the social conditions downcurrent of Roe and similar – they became much less likely to vote in ways that supported or improved the established order. Forty years later the bizarre, luxury political obsessions of this class of people who used to define themselves as wives and mothers should tell you that there is no way back but through obstacles like Roe.
Wouldn’t that make you an idiot– supporting the elimination of fetuses rather than the much more efficient elimination of their fertile mothers? You should be pushing the latter.
Perhaps you are, and Steve isn’t letting those comments through.
Reminds us, again, that the Left views politics as war.
Soldiers are allowed indiscretions and excesses. Awards and forgiveness are handed out at the victory party.
The suggestion in your penultimate paragraph has always made by far the most sense. Can’t help but musing, though, that given the availability of contraceptives, one would think that the whole subject of abortion should have long ceased to be an issue. And yet–here we are.
People appear to be “retarded universalists” because these abortion-by-race charts are only half the story. The other half is that abortion stimulates “lazy pregnancies” that don’t get aborted, also varying by race. The net of the two halves of the joined-at-the-hip abortion-lazy-pregnancy syndrome is that the worst part of each race procreates more than the best part.
This is a good example of how democratic politics corrupts us, turns us into liberal consequentialists, and gets us all to participate in evil: sacrifice anything (including literally babies) for the sake of a meaningless election.
I think it would be a hoot to link a few things.
1. Democrats support de-funding the police to focus on the “root causes of crime”.
2. Blacks commit violent crime at a rate of about 8 times that of other races.
3. Democrats support all “Abortion Rights”.
4. More black babies were aborted than born alive* in NYC.
Is this the Democrat’s secret anti-crime policy?
Some Republican asshole somewhere should raise this issue.
*Just because you’re born alive doesn’t mean you’ll make it out of the delivery room.
No matter the ultimate decision, I’m willing to bet serious money that it won’t now be penned by Justice Alito.
Because babies with no ability to be self-sufficient are a potential result.
Because people get jealous and hurt.
Homosexual men and women aren’t really engaged in sex, so I don’t care whether they’re serious or not. That’s another team, in another ballpark, off on a different planet.
That’s very possibly true, but the effect won’t be a 1:1 substitution. Women in every demographic group (including those where abortion is currently rare) will become more stringent about avoiding pregnancy. When Trump was elected my SO at the time immediately got a hormonal IUD. The psychological impact of ending Roe will be bigger.
‘I’m one of the relatively few people with a middling kind of position on abortion. Would not make my top ten list of issues the country’
My feeling about it is that (a) there are arguments for both sides of the issue, but (b) Roe versus Wade was indefensible. The Supreme Court had no authority to prevent states from legislating on the issue as they please.
Or as Justice Roberts did, bend some rules and get your self a fair-haired Irish kid.
Justice Black dealt with the perversion of the Ninth Amendment in his dissent in Griswold v. Connecticut:
“That Amendment was passed not to broaden the powers of this Court or any other department of “the General Government,” but, as every student of history knows, to assure the people that the Constitution in all its provisions was intended to limit the Federal Government to the powers granted expressly or by necessary implication. If any broad, unlimited power to hold laws unconstitutional because they offend what this Court conceives to be the “[collective] conscience of our people” is vested in this Court by the Ninth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, or any other provision of the Constitution, it was not given by the Framers, but rather has been bestowed on the Court by the Court. This fact is perhaps responsible for the peculiar phenomenon that, for a period of a century and a half, no serious suggestion was ever made that the Ninth Amendment, enacted to protect state powers against federal invasion, could be used as a weapon of federal power to prevent state legislatures from passing laws they consider appropriate to govern local affairs. Use of any such broad, unbounded judicial authority would make of this Court’s members a day-to-day constitutional convention.”
Ironically, the New York state legislature did pass restrictions– more precisely, returned to the previous tight restrictions by repealing te 1970 law– a few months before Roe. The creepy governor was abroad at the time, but flew in specifically to veto the repeal.
New York was the birthplace of the
prolife movement:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_State_Right_to_Life_Party
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellen_McCormack
The Empire State has gone rapidly downhill since then, but they did hold off no-fault divorce until 2010.
‘Nice.
First- you’ll get more & more coloreds (they hardly can control themselves in this area). If you want that, fine…
Second- if you are concerned about killing- well, killing is what we usually do, all our lives. Why would a fetus be an exception? Why would a lump of flesh be given a chance to experience the human condition, which Anatole France described as: “They are born. They suffer. They die.”.
Third- if your concern is about some immortal soul & afterlife…’
I’m afraid you can’t make it all nice and tidy.
For example, a fetus that’s eight months along is already essentially a baby; it’s just in one place (the womb) rather than another (outside).
On the other hand, a new-born baby can’t even see. Yes, its eyes detect light and dark — but it can’t interpret them. Go ahead: move your hand close to a new-born baby’s eyes. It won’t blink. It doesn’t even perceive the reality of matter and space.
It has no understanding of much beyond warmth, pain, food, etc. It’s really in no way radically distinct from that eight-month fetus.
So why would it be an inalienable right to suck the brain out of the latter but a heinous crime to stomp in the skull of the former?
e.g. only in the case of rape, incest, or to the preserve the health of the mother,
It is the last of these three that is the massive can of worms. Childbirth is much more dangerous to the health of the mother than abortion, and the term “the health” may include mental health. What if the pregnant women tells her doctors that she is depressed and will kill herself if she has to go through with the pregnancy? And additionally taking antidepressants may have some potential health hazards for the fetus.
If the mother is denied an abortion, what is the risk of her seeking an illegal or amateur abortion or taking an overdose of birth control pills or medicinal herbs that are supposed to help woman to miscarry? It is a good thing that most legislators are board-certified obstetricians or psychiatrists, and they know of what they legislate!
You would think the President of the United States of America could call the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to verify whether this draft was genuine. But the Biden White Hosue once again surprises us all with their rank incompetence.
What’s interesting is the majority invoking the rationale of racial bias, which is an argument many black conservatives have been making (including Clarence Thomas). From the original Politico article:
This reminds me of an essay I recently read which examined disparate impact in the context of medicine (note that I’m not saying I agree with this perspective): https://geraldrogue.substack.com/p/medicalization-and-colonization?s=r
(ctrl-F to the section starting “This process of medicalization, and its implementation here in the form of disproportionate racial culling, is naturally intrinsically related to the eugenics movement.”)
You know it. I know it. Most of the Steveosphere knows it. The normies still do not know it.
I think Ron DeSantis, Tulsi Gabbard, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Glenn Greenwald, James Howard Kunstler, Michael Anton, Victor Davis Hanson and others have gotten the memo, however.
Give us a call when they apply this doctrine to Internal Revenue!
As if there were no White single moms… (many with bi-racial children, too).
I doubt the abortion law will be overturned. But if it is, great. Only feminists and sluts benefit from abortion.
But don’t worry, abortion will continue going strong. The fact that this is a “leak” is the giveaway. It’s just another tactic to distract people and rally progressives around an issue, like the fake “Don’t Say Gay” bill, then things continue in the same path towards decadence.
An important point here is that if the decision about abortion is thrown back on the states, only the most conservative states will ban it. Liberals states with a lot of blacks like New York, Illinois, and California won’t ban abortion. That will help keep the black population down. The only states that are likely to see an increase in blacks from a ban are southern ones.
From a moral perspective, I’m against abortion. From a practical and reality based perspective…. I don’t want more wild, thuggish black kids running around assaulting, robbing, raping and stealing from innocent white people. If abortion keeps an already out of control racial group’s population from expanding…. it can’t be all bad.
Right. The problem is that state governments are governments, too.
Oy vey! And now we see that you just don’t like the 9A and want to pretend it isn’t there, despite your earlier attempt to conflate it with the 10A.
In fact, there is nothing remotely “poorly worded” or “poorly-conceived” about the 9A. It is crystal clear. It purports to and does in fact negate the application of the expressio unius canon.
This is nonsense. Laws and regulations on citizens can only conceivably infringe on unenumerated rights if some constitutional interest, such as privacy (in the spatial sense) or freedom of expression and religion. Penumbral reasoning is not going to open the floodgates to willy-nilly invention of rights, and if it does, you have an out-of-control government against which a piece of paper is not going to help you. Indeed, the ground is pretty dry where I’m standing. Where is this flood of overly-restrictive caselaw limiting state police power that you fear?
This is totalitarian thinking that assumes the only rights that exist are the ones that somebody writes down, which is a mode of thinking that is completely contrary to the whole spirit of Anglo jurisprudence.
IOW, before Incorporation, the 9A could be ignored because it was toothless and meaningless. If the 9A had no effect beyond what was outside the scope of enumerated federal powers, why was it in there? The argument that the Constitution was so perfect that a BofR was not needed was heard and rejected. And if you have a BofR, you need a 9A, lest the government use any oversight or omission to impose a one-child policy or some such outrage.
It has made the law into a subjective and ever-hungry beast.
How so? I’m not seeing it. Substantive due process has largely been restricted to issues relating to marriage and family. The Commerce Clause is the major factor contributing to federal micromanagement, not substantive due process.
You are right that Incorporation is not really all that well supported by the 14th, but I’m not really bothered by that, because I see the Bill of Rights as a mere enshrinement, so as to leave no doubt, of rights that already existed and cannot be alienated from the individual by any document.
On a more practical note, if our right to have and raise children, or not, becomes a state-by-state trench battle, who do you think is going to win? Countercultural Christian homeschooling families or liberal nonprofits with bottomless war chests?
People here – and I don’t mean this as a criticism – are often unable to inhabit the mind of other people so divorced socially/racially/etc from them and impute their own thinking.
Urban black women don’t get pregnant by accident as if they’ve just never made the causal connection between intercourse and pregnancy.
Girls and women who get pregnant truly by accident are probably most likely making an attempt at sexual continence for some delayed purpose like religious beliefs about sacramental marriage, being a good candidate as a wife to an upstanding man, etc. Because they’re not planning to have casual sex outside of a certain context, they’re not planning to avoid pregnancy by the readily available means. They’re not using prescribed pharmaceutical birth control and prophylactics because they’re planning not to have sex rather than planning to have sex without getting pregnant. They’re purposely eliminating the fallback provision so that they can’t be cajoled or coerced by the reduced stakes of sex outside of their intended context. They “slip up,” and a truly unplanned pregnancy results.
If urban black women were as stupid as many here make them out to be you wouldn’t have to worry about their advanced skills in chiseling maximum welfare benefits like those “extreme couponers.” What sort of culture of sexual continence do you think there is in those places? There is none, so they’re not worried about being called sluts, or that other men won’t want them, or even that they’ll get a disapproving look from old ladies at Church. In that world, the serial course of exclusive dating leading to engagement leading to marriage leading to making a home leading ultimately to having children doesn’t really exist. They get pregnant often as a claim on a man – it’s an analog to an engagement ring that, in these cases, a woman gifts to herself. (White women have been known to “pull the goalie” for the purpose of eliciting a commitment like an engagement ring and wedding date, but the phenomenon we’re talking about here is beyond even this). If the pregnancy doesn’t elicit the desired response or if circumstances change in the months after and the man becomes less desirable, an abortion is a readily available remedy – like breaking off an engagement would be in the white world.
Seems a bit too much enthusiasm in that clip.
Or maybe women will use a different form of birth control than killing their children.
Excellent point.
I used to take solace in that at least criminals will find it harder to ply their trade.
But we can’t even get that out of this deal.
Category error.
Source you’re giving is Steve speculating on the conditions from 1970-1990, based on statistics from that era. The statistics have changed. Birth rates have declined for everyone, it’s no longer very common for the welfare mother to have 5-7 children, usually she has 2-3. The simple fact is this: the women getting abortions are below average in the metrics you care about. The next generation will do worse on those traits without legal abortion. Even if there was a group of derelict-tier women going straight to the delivery room, banning abortion would do nothing to solve that problem. It’s the fallacy of throwing away an imperfect solution in favor of nothing at all.
That had always been the problem with Roe v. Wade. The original backers didn’t think it could ever happen but it did.
Don’t know if you are a woman who might be a candidate at some point for abortion.
But good question.
One fairly minor point is that it may tend to shift extreme liberal voting women/feminists and their male counterparts (who obsessed with abortion) to states which will continue to sanction the practice.
Of course you don’t have to move to another state just to get an abortion. But there may be some tendency for extreme left Dem females to move to or stay in abortion friendly political states.
Fewer Californicans moving to more sane places like Texas, etc. would be a benefit. Those more conservative states may revert to making this illegal again. That might concentrate these BadThink voters in states where they are already dominant.
Like legal marijuana, if you live close to a state that has legalized it you merely have to drive across a notional state line.
Personally I am in favor of keeping it legal, but under a federalism theory of America.
Having unwanted babies thrust into the welfare state is not good.
It’ll never happen. The person in question is a brave soul speaking power to truth. He or she will get positive publicity and book deals galore.
I’ve read that there is s similar effect amongst men as well. As men age and experience fatherhood (or regret never becoming a father) their attitudes to abortion grow less friendly.
I read somewhere where someone analyzed survey results from the last 30 or 40 years. Their conclusion was that Americans have grown ever more sympathetic to premarital sex, contraception, gay marriage, and various other sexual matters, but on abortion, we’re still split roughly 50-50
I agree with your sentiment. I used to cross that out. But they later made it an automatic \$500 penalty and subsequently, most returns are filed electronically.
I am not aware of anyone ever being prosecuted for “perjury” but there are other penalties for “deliberate” or “willful” omissions or supposedly misleading statements.
This wording is for intimidation purposes only.
“Shoot 100 and millions will tremble.” Attributed to some unknown communist or fascist.
Akin to why “the (birth-control) Pill” is never rumored to be the cause of autism.
Yeah, it’s the one MMR vaccination a baby receives that causes autism—not—mommy’s two decade history of taking “the Pill.”
“When the bloods and crips are fighting you have to pick a side.”
No I don’t.
Liberals: Americans don’t need high capacity magazines. Do they even need semiautomatic rifles?
Also liberals: Every Ukrainian adult should be given an automatic rifle.
I am not sure how that logic is supposed to work, but even with lowest rate of abortion, Whites end up with most abortions since they are the largest racial group. So, if you rewrite the chart for a population of an average sized city, say, 100,000, for 2014, it would be (assuming 15% Black, 20% Hispanic, 20% Other non-Hispanic, 45% White, non-Hispanic)
Abortions for Year 2014:
Blacks: 405
Hispanic: 362
Others: 326
White: 450
So, those who may somewhat narrow-mindedly, don’t want 450 abortions, don’t look like white people who are such retarded universalists incapable of looking out for their own good
The NY Times is trumpeting this in the usual template of “World Ends – Women and Minorities Hit Hardest”. But they accidentally tell a little too much truth:
At least they are still calling them women. Today on NPR they kept on talking about “pregnant people”, careful never to say the W word.
Given the demographics of the aborted, I say: abortion now, abortion tomorrow, abortion forever!
Constitutionally the Court is of course right. Abortion was always a matter of state law. The “right” to abortion is not a right that the Framers intended to give to the pregnant people of America. The Court in Roe just made up that “right” out of thin air. The Framers would have clearly understood that this is properly a matter for the legislature of the several states and would have been horrified at this attempt of the Supreme Court to legislate for all the states from the bench. They would have moved to impeach any Justice who tried to do so.
But that being said, I tell the legislatures that you are making a huge dysgenic mistake if you prohibit abortion. In fact, because of the historic oppression of People of Color, I think there should be a special rule for Pregnant People of Color and they should be permitted to have abortions right up to the moment of birth. Dr. Kermit Gosnell was rendering a service to the good people of Philadelphia by performing late term abortions on obese crackheads who didn’t even notice they were pregnant until the 24th week and should have been given a medal, not a conviction.
I don’t think so. Oh, Biden might be happy, but only because he’s detached from reality in his woke delirium. Those near him who are paying attention wouldn’t be happy because his chances of reelection wouldn’t be improved. Nominal pro-life candidates are elected to a variety of positions all the time (president twice in the last 20 years.) In other words, I don’t really think the cultural divide surrounding abortion is leaning in favor of pro-choice. The only advantage pro-choice candidates might have is the public’s general inclination towards shying away from dramatic change. That social inertia is no small thing, but it can only last for so long.
Chief Justice Roberts got right on it; good for him.
So #2 above seems confirmed, that this is a draft majority opinion under the signature of one justice. “Trust” means nothing to the Left; they’d like nothing better than to take down all our institutions.
This is a shot across the bow for the Court, which up until now was assumed to be doing the work of the progressive Left, or close enough for government work. Now that that is in doubt, let the Court beware. Court-packers, you’re back in business. Leftist fear-mongers, start your engines.
I wonder if Biden will express his hope that the court votes the right way, like he did in Derek Chauvin’s trial.
So the pro-choice left shouldn’t be upset by any of this, right? Yet they seem to be.
Three o’clock here in WNY and I just signed in and there are 263 comments already on the board. I will try to read them all later with a Manhattan. This is a hard topic for me. I had 16 years of Catholic education and as I get older I think “indoctrination” not education. I personally don’t want any woman to have a child that she didn’t plan for or wants to care for. Motherhood is hard. So, we can hear the old farts saying…”if you didn’t want to get pregnant you should have kept your legs closed.” Yeah, well fuck you too. Sex is an essential part of any relationship. America supports millions of children, born in this country, that the parents (sperm squirter and sperm catcher) had no intention of raising. Is abortion morally wrong? Who is the arbitrator of morals?
Comment number two. How does a draft of a ruling that is so divisive get leaked?
In a way, overturning Roe v. Wade would at least take away some power from the Federal Gov’t to impose a sweeping statuary across the states.
Just kidding.
This is merely the shiny object needed to distract and occupy the public conscience for the time being. With record inflation, low approval polling and other ongoing issues for the Biden administration, this news is like manna from heaven.
No more close inspection on Hunter’s laptop revelations, or scrutiny of the billions being spent (and sent) on Ukraine while the USA falls apart.
This will re-energize the Dems for the midterms, giving the elections a single issue voter boost for their side. Nothing excites barren white middle-aged cat ladies than the fear of abortion on demand going away.
I don’t buy at all that this translates to a midterms loss. How many voters are really so gun-ho on killing babies that they care more about that than the soaring prices of everything, child grooming agenda, and race war hangover? A fair number, but they’re the ones who would vote Democrat anyway.
The birth– and marriage– rate has plummeted among thinking women. Roe was very effective psyops against normal civilized life.
In the meantime, the bastardy rate has exploded. It’s higher among today’s whites than among the blacks of 1960. So much for the promises of the early 1970s!
Your ratio stats are interesting.
Any data on % of breeding age women who are hispanic over those periods?
Preach,brother,preach!!
“@Kylie
Thanks.
The maternal instinct applied to public policy has given us mass immigration; expanded welfare; expanded healthcare; expanded schooling; expansions that degrade us long term.”
Omg, thank you! I’m not a lone voice in the wilderness after all. Somebody else gets it.
I am not, as I am often accused of being, anti-female. I am female and glad to be. I acknowledge female strength and intelligence wherever I see it (okay, yeah, including in the mirror). But the maternal instinct let loose on public policy has been an unmitigated disaster. I’ve come to believe that Western patriarchy wasn’t established to repress women and degrade them. It was purely a defensive measure–and one necessary to a civilized society. Nothing is more determined and less amenable to reason than the maternal instinct–and rightly so. It is the guardian of a society’s future, its children. But it is a destructive force when applied to abstract concepts and theoretical threats. This is why, though I consider myself able to weigh public policy issues dispassionately, I would give up the vote in order that all women be disenfranchised.
Anyway, thanks!
Are you aware that the birth rate has plummeted in every country outside of sub Saharan Africa, regardless of whether or not abortion is legal?
Joe,
Thank you for your good common sense, as always.
The law (which rightly should be in the hands of the 50 state legislatures, not the Supreme Court) should take a balanced approach. If women don’t want to carry a pregnancy to full term, they should be required to obtain abortions as early as possible. It’s ridiculous that at the same time we spend millions to save the lives of preemies and murder other babies that are almost the same age.
On the other hand, there should be generous exceptions for genetic abnormalities that can only be detected thru amniocentesis and for women who are irresponsible – these are exactly the kind of women who should NOT be having babies (nor is it a good idea to have others adopt their little cuckoos instead – these are the kind of genes we should be weeding OUT of the gene pool).
In short, the legislatures should be looking at this from a eugenic POV, not a religious POV.
I think Steve either stated this or alluded to it in his debate with Leavitt years ago:
The pro-Roes seemed to think legal abortion would lead to unwanted children never becoming children at all. This would leave a society full of wanted, well adjusted children.
In practice, sexual mores kept getting looser, and accidents kept happening, maybe even at a higher rate, because legal abortion incentivized sexual mores to get looser.
There are a lot of voters who don’t have a strong opinion on abortion even if it’s a hot button issue. It doesn’t affect them personally the way the economy does. If inflation stays near this level or gets worse I still think the Republicans will have a great off year election.
have you read about his antics during the Vince Foster “suicide” investigation?
The vast majority of abortions obtained after viability are on fetuses with significant genetic problems. A few more are for reasons of the mothers health. It’s not even worth the effort to legislate limitations on who can get them because only a few thousand late term abortions a year are not done for explicitly eugenic reasons.
You know damned well that isn’t true, Jack, and you have no excuse.
Of course, current law provides that the parent-child relationship is constitutionally protected such that a parent can’t be denied visitation unless he’s a proven axe murderer. Is that also a right made up out of thin air? Please, enlighten us, Jack. Where does it spell out in the Constitution that noncustodial fathers have a right to visitation with their children?
Don’t come crying to me when bad fathers are denied not only custody of but also visitation with their children.
Meanwhile, here on planet Earth, the most highly-educated women are the most likely to marry.
Yeah so maybe you should shut the fuck up and stop calling millions of White people “bastards.”
Isn’t your arm tired from all that fist-shaking, res? Or maybe you’ve been at it so long your fist-shaking muscles are especially well-developed.
Maybe this will help: The women least able to support children are having fewer and fewer children all the time. I suppose you’ll be satisfied when working-class Whites stop having any children at all.
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/05/10/record-share-of-new-mothers-are-college-educated/
The elimination of the spoils system during the progressive era might have made government more “efficient”, but it also made it more permanent and therefore more inclined to constant growth and fortification.
I think it will hurt Republicans, but they could still have a good off-year election. Prior to this, I thought that one of the things that would benefit the GOP in the midterms would be Democrat voter apathy–low turnout. This will increase Dem turnout.
“The leaker will be discovered. If it turns out that a Justice was also involved, that Justice will be impeached and removed to protect the integrity of the court. The Left miscalculated very badly with this one.”
You really think the Democrats are going to impeach their own justice? What retardation.
“but they also seem not to be aware of the fact that a majority of the American electorate is actually prolife”
“About six-in-ten Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases” – https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/05/06/about-six-in-ten-americans-say-abortion-should-be-legal-in-all-or-most-cases/
“The depravity, not to mention the stupidity, on evidence here in this thread is now enough to close the book on iSteve and its commentariat. You people understand nothing, deserve nothing, and are good for nothing.”
Sorry we aren’t eager to jump on your morality-means-dysgenics bandwagon.
Yet, these abortion monomaniacs are willing to hazard the dangerous, totalitarian precedent that the government is entitled to a say in individual reproductive decisions for the sake of those few thousand, assuming your figure is correct.
Already been happening for decades here in the US.
Totally untrue:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/minority-women-affected-abortion-banned-limited-82599673
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3780732/
That’s just sad, Spangel.
“It should be noted that varying definitions of medical necessity for abortion have ricocheted along a continuum with consideration of a “broad range of physical, emotional, psychological, demographic, and familial factors relevant to a woman’s well-being” at one extreme and “conditions which place a woman in danger of death” at the other. However, while the occasional politician or news reporter will still indicate that late-term abortions are most often performed in the case of “severe fetal anomalies” or to “save the woman’s life,” the trajectory of the peer-reviewed research literature has been obvious for decades: most late-term abortions are elective, done on healthy women with healthy fetuses, and for the same reasons given by women experiencing first trimester abortions. The Guttmacher Institute has provided a number of reports over 2 decades which have identified the reasons why women choose abortion, and they have consistently reported that childbearing would interfere with their education, work, and ability to care for existing dependents; would be a financial burden; and would disrupt partner relationships.”
“A more recent Guttmacher study focused on abortion after 20 weeks of gestation and similarly concluded that women seeking late-term abortions were not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment.”
1. Yap, yap, yap. The problem with the abortion issue is that the people who are emotionally invested never change their minds or quit talking about it endlessly. So here we are again.
2. My own view is that this decision, if and when, won’t affect election turnout this fall much. Perhaps only in a few states where the legislatures are narrowly in favor of banning it or legalizing abortion. Otherwise, the theory of vote turnout rides on an assumption that every federal (and only presidential elections) will be key to overturning whatever the current SC decision says.
But SC majorities are slow to change. so immediate federal elections (mainly the House, only 1/3 Senate) will have little ability to affect outcomes. Left feminists already are the main Woke stalwarts.
3. Off topic: But I hope iSteve will have something soon. The REAL news now is the many rumors about V. Putin having cancer and Parkinson’s disease. Also rumors about cancer surgery.
That could be a real X factor in the heretofore monopoly on news being Ukraine-Russia.
Vlad wasn’t looking too well, and seemingly has suffered histrionic personality disorders. “Great Russia” thinking is all about Great Leader (him) and possibly, some Great Legacy for Vlad.
No update on this, but yet silence is telling.
I don’t think Kremlin # 2’s will want to continue the Crusade for Greater Russia much longer. Why would the want to double down on a losing hand?
I look forward to the discussion. As for the A topic, yeesh. Enough already…
Visitation has nothing to do with abortion. Ultimately, all controversial Constitutional issues involve balancing of interests – my right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins. If nobody’s important interests were being stepped on then it wouldn’t be controversial in the first place.
Child visitation doesn’t involve ending another being’s life. Abortion does. Therefore the mother’s “right” to an abortion has to be balanced against the fetus’s “right” not be be murdered. This sets a much higher threshold than other “privacy” or “family autonomy” type cases. Sitting on the other balance pan of the scales of justice is not just the inconvenience of the custodial parent or the interest of people in upholding the traditional definition of marriage or whatever. Human lives are literally at stake – this is a very heavy burden to weigh against the “right to privacy”.
The draft opinion makes clear that the Court intends to overrule Roe and Roe only. They are not going to take away your right to consume the cheese of your choice or whatever other parade of horrors that the Leftist activists are conjuring up out of thin air.
I agree that illegitimacy has exploded but I’m not sure if abortion has much to do with it one way or another. I think the expansion of the welfare state, starting with LBJs War On Poverty played a bigger role. In the late 80s I started hearing women (mostly less educated women) crying out for a “real man”. As soon as I noticed that trend (which never stopped) I had a very strong feeling illegitimacy would rise to the point of becoming the norm in the working class and below.
“Real men” are toxic to the core, subscribe to a cartoonish view of masculinity, are often in trouble with the law and have substance abuse problems. They certainly weren’t going to be good stable family men.
Predicting doom in November because voters love abortion is classic GOP loser talk. The communists hate America and themselves but at least they don’t worry that a victory will hurt them in the next election. They keep charging at the next target.
Abortion used to be a loser electorally, it’s true, but that was back when Democrats could pretend they wanted abortion to be “safe, legal and rare.” This is not a position any Democrat can take anymore. They must claim abortion up until the moment of birth as a woman’s right and choice with no moral ambiguity. Only Hillary’s boomer coven and frazzled neurotic prog grrrls insist abortion is as natural and healthy as getting your teeth cleaned. Everyone else knows it’s horrible and disgusting, even if they think it should be legal. One issue pro-abortion voters never vote GOP anyway.
“The soul is not a complete substance. The soul is of itself and per se the form of the body. The soul cannot preexist the body nor can there be a body without a soul. The very idea is a contradiction in terms. The soul and the body come into existence at the same time.”
I’m assuming you are Catholic; I’m a convert and missed out on a lot, but this position of the church has always seemed out of whack. It isn’t really that far from the current scientific position, and therefore the atheist position, which is that ideas about “ensoulment” are theistic beliefs; consciousness merely arises from matter, and ceases to exist with the death of the body. How can the same, or similar, positions argue both for the sanctity of life of the human fetus, and also be used to argue that the fetus, not being ensouled, is therefore not independently alive until viability or even birth since consciousness cannot be present without enough brain cells. What am I missing here?
First of all, you know damned well that abortion is not the equivalent of child murder. So, we’re not talking about balancing one person’s right to life against another person’s right to control their own reproductive destiny. We’re talking about balancing the right of a potential human being to be born against the right of a fully-fledged, indisputable human being to not have a child against their will.
That said, I don’t necessarily disagree with you that, in the case of a healthy fetus, the overall balance of interests comes down on the side of the right of the potential human to be born. Of course, in reality, you’re not going to be able to restrict the fetus’ right to life, supposing it exists, to healthy fetuses only. Moreover, I don’t even know how you’re going to restrict the fetus’ right to life to fetuses which (1) can be born without killing their mother or (2) we’re not conceived as a result of rape. Suppose there is a 30% chance a fetus will kill its mother? Does that fetus not still have a right to life? And how does a fetus being conceived in coercion affect its right to life? If you can demonstrate that a fetus so conceived does not in fact have a right to life, how is the mother to prove rape?
Still, FSA, I’ll go ahead and set all that aside. You have now said that the fetus’ right to life takes precedence over a woman’s right to privacy. That is a whole different argument, and a much more palatable as well as plausible one, than you made before: that the right to privacy is a fabrication invented whole cloth by the Supreme Court. When laymen make such extreme, thoughtless, irresponsible statements, it’s understandable. You should know better.
I was also wondering if Roberts didn’t join the majority after this draft was written for the sole purpose of assigning the ruling to himself so he could water down the language overturning Roe and Casey.
Supreme Court marshal Gail Curley will be investigating the leak. She seems okay – – military background – – but she will need help from Moe and Larry on this one.
Why leak now? It’s time for the primaries, and there is no better time to weed out the potential candidates who don’t really, really support abortion.
Yes! And to see life as a gift of God to be great full for because human life serves a divine purpose beyond our understanding, even disabled or malformed humans. As a society , having mere mortals decide some lives are worth less darkens each soul.
Huminae Vitae by Pope Paul is a work of inspired beauty, even as a non-Catholic .
I’m a cynic because I want my children to inherit a first world country. What I see from your comment is that you just want to support things that SOUND GOOD. “Every life must be protected” sounds good. “Everyone is fit to be a parent” sounds good. And what about the crackhead who doesn’t know who the father is? Well, just turn your head away. So long as it sounds good, sounds moral to you, that problem will resolve itself. What you know for sure is that your solutions sound better than the other guy’s, that’s what really matters. You can put his words in your mouth and, wow, that doesn’t sound good.
The irony is that the saving grace may be the fact that pro-lifers are more concerned with sounding good than preventing abortion. They’ve already sworn off any punishment of women for getting abortions. Because while “protecting babies” sounds good, “sending women to jail for having abortions” doesn’t sound good. So they’ll be able to openly announce they’re going to Canada for an abortion and the pro-life movement won’t do a thing.
When Trump was elected my SO at the time immediately got a hormonal IUD.
Was she afraid Trump would literally come to her bedroom?
This is precisely what several people upthread were predicting would happen: the Dems will “weaponize” the story and make continuing and indefinite political hay out of it. Which ultimately translates into votes. A gift from the gods for them.
Idiot Republicans (including several here) instead cite this Glorious Victory over Evil. The sad part is that we don’t have a Smart Party.
Here’s a novel about Planned Parenthood v Pennsylvania, the Casey decision that upheld Roe v Wade in the Supreme Court last time around: https://www.amazon.com/LIFE-RIGHT-Novel-Works-Strickland/dp/B09B36MQ2L/
Middle income women will become a hell of a lot more discriminating in who they hook up with. Right now, they’re already quite discriminating about social status and height. Now they need to think about if the guy is going to stick around.
They are already overly discriminating. I used to work on an office floor that was filled with college educated White liberal women. They were all basically waiting for the same man that was already married. Meaning the man they idealized had already been picked off in college by a much more cunning woman.
By the time they developed realistic standards they were competing against younger women that were also out of college. Modern dating is a mess.
Biggest winners out of this — dorky Asian men.
LOL I wish. I really feel for those guys. A lot of them work hard only to see cute Asian women married off to boring and annoying White guys.
What will happen is that middle income women will be more careful with the few “one offs” they sleep with in college and never intended to have kids with. They really aren’t the women that are getting abortions anyways. Birth control is cheap and easy to use. It is Lafonda that thought Tyrone wouldn’t care if she got pregnant. That is who gets the abortion.
Stability of the Law is a paramount virtue in any society.
Except for the laws you don’t like, of course.
Legal abortion is dysgenic. It frightens thinking women away from responsible as well as irresponsible pregnancy.
No it is eugenic if used for deformities and as birth control for irresponsible women.
Thinking women can figure out how to use a daily pill.
Self-control has already been liked to genes with a heritability of 60%:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763418307905
White people are idiots if they think banning abortion will benefit them politically.
A single crack baby costs the state around 2 million dollars. That is in direct costs to the government.
I get the moral revulsion to abortion but we live in a society where egalitarians have declared that the Bantu are actually just Europeans with a tan. I don’t see conservatives adopting Bantu babies so they don’t seem to buy it on a personal level. However their push to ban abortion means that the worst Blacks will have children that they can’t afford. How many crack babies can we put you down for?
I would be fine with banning abortion as birth control if we lived in a world where White people weren’t total morons about race. That world doesn’t exist and conservatives aren’t interested in absorbing the costs of all these unwanted Black chilllun. So here we are.
It literally is the killing of a child.
The real issue is the spiritual burden it places on a society that normalizes this, same with same-sex marriage, fornication and divorce.
The woman will be haunted the rest of her life unless she has no conscience. That is not a nice thing to do to anyone. Young women should be warned about the consequences
The mask seems to have come off among the Unz commentariat: the preponderance appear fully to support the basic principles of the leftwing revolution and have revealed themselves to be utilitarian sexual degenerates who evidently think that murdering black babies is the reason we can have nice things.
The cluelessness this attitude reveals would be funny if it weren’t so evil.
State based abortion laws mean that anyone can drive to Michigan or one of the many coastal liberal states to get an abortion. So everyone will be within a day long drive of an abortion. Mexico offers abortions as well.
This is why I always thought conservatives were idiots for spending so much time on abortion.
Yes Roe was questionable but flipping it just means that everyone drives out of state to get one.
The women they really don’t want getting abortions (White Christian women) will definitely be getting them. Women in college will just take an end of quarter trip with a girlfriend.
Not to mention that all kinds of chem versions will be sold on the internet.
Really not thought out which is par for our doofus conservatives. Their brains have been damaged from free market worship and race denial. That is the real problem. They cannot put down the free market crack pipe and think critically about what is in the best interest of the majority.
Thanks for posting links to those books and that scholarship that Anon said didn’t exist.
Indeed.
You’re so kind. We wouldn’t want to complicate your sex lives, either, would we?
You’re welcome.
Agree.
Roe gives us an ugly world filled with ugly people with ugly motives.
I get it. But the pro-life people have been at this for almost fifty years. Roe v. Wade is one of the most retarded legal decisions ever made by the US Supreme Court. So I’m happy to let Charlie Brown finally kick the stupid football. In terms of legal foundation it’s as stable as a quadriplegic with vertigo. Sure, it kept the black population in check so something good did come of it. But overall American women became entitled skanks soon after its passing. Roe v. Wade killed plenty of whites as well as blacks and it’s time the white birth rate finally goes up however slightly. I can’t see how much will change with pro-abortion states. If you were pro-abortion, Roe v. Wade was a continuous quagmire that bled backers dry politically as well as financially. A Pyrrhic victory if ever there was one.
Abortion rate increased dramatically in the first few years after Roe.
They too suffer from excessive slippery-slope phobia. You see them already concern trolling Affirmative Action may be on the block, then Brown ….
Reality is market will adjust accordingly. The entire power of United States Government can’t seem to do a damn thing with Opioid, Fentanyl, meth, heroin, cocaine etc., availability when they are all illegal. It couldn’t do much with alcohol also one time. What can the government do with perfectly legal medicines being sent across State lines and used? Also, which State government has the will to prosecute an abortion provider or receiver without creating a national or international boycott/cancel threat? This decision is just a test of political will and influence.
Kylie, thanks for being a consistent voice of reason in this forum.
Killing a healthy, viable baby that poses no risk to the life of the mother is murder. These murders happen, regularly, whether you will admit it or not. In cases of actual rape or incest, if those factors don’t inspire the mother to get an abortion immediately, too bad for her–and if no papers are filed with legal authorities connected to the alleged rape/incest? Once again, too bad.
I find some black humor in the fact that even the “Snopes”-type “correctors” of so-called “myths” about abortions still articulate the horrors starkly:
‘Northam was referring to “third-trimester abortions” that are done in cases “where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that’s non viable” he said. “If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother,” Northam stated.’
What a load of horseshit. But that’s par for the course:
“No woman seeks a third trimester abortion except in the case of tragic or difficult circumstances, such as a nonviable pregnancy or in the event of severe fetal abnormalities, and the governor’s comments were limited to the actions physicians would take in the event that a woman in those circumstances went into labor,” Ofirah Yheskel, Northam’s spokesperson, wrote in the statement.
I don’t have particularly strong feelings about abortion, as such. Different cultures have had different approaches. I mean, the ancient Greeks & Romans regularly exposed unwanted infants at birth & left them to die. Were they morally inferior to us? I dunno.
What I do know is that the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade was the single most wicked & foolish power grab in the whole history of that grossly over-rated institution.
Alito’s draft is almost as brutal as it ought to be.
I’ve never killed a baby or a child and it is beyond any norms of debate for you to hurl infective like that at people who have a different opinion about abortion laws. You can’t answer counterpoints so you engage in the lowest form of name calling.
You’re not an Avenging Angel standing up for babies. You’re simply lashing out like a vicious animal.
Aren’t those exactly the people you’d want to benefit from it?
Roe v. Wade was the best thing that ever happened to Republicans. They could posture “pro-life” all they wanted to please their base and raise funds without ever having to deal with the real world consequences of banning abortion (more people of color).
Post hoc ergo propter hoc – After this, therefore because of this – a fallacy. The Pill had a lot more to do with this than abortion.
“You know damned well that isn’t true, Jack, and you have no excuse.”
He’s correct, of course.
Was the report leaked as a way to create a distraction to the fact that the Democrats are imploding, we are heading toward WW III, our country is in financial danger etc. ? “The purpose of the newspaper in a society is to keep one group of people fighting another group of people” – Czar Nicholas II
Well put. Greenwald laid it out very plainly. The original decision was the faulty one; this is the proper course correction. Regardless of your political views or beliefs, this is the way that the Supreme Court should work.
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-irrational-misguided-discourse
But don’t expect plain reason in the debate; for most people, it will be the same old false dichotomy of Federal Mandate Dems vs Misogynist Conservatives. Pick a side and tailor your emotional arguments accordingly.
And everyone who was 100% in favor of requiring masks and vaccines for the past 2 years will go right back to demanding bodily autonomy as a fundamental personal freedom without any sense of self contradiction.
I agree with what you wrote, but I don’t see the connection with what I wrote.
Every race, blacks included, has a better part and worse part. There are black women who aspire to “exclusive dating leading to engagement leading to marriage leading to making a home leading ultimately to having children”. Perhaps not proportionately as many as in other races, but they exist.
“The birth– and marriage– rate has plummeted among thinking women. Roe was very effective psyops against normal civilized life.”
There is a massive stream of propaganda trying to convince women that marriage and child-rearing are drudgery that is best avoided. The problem is that calling it by the term “Roe” will do nothing to eliminate it once Roe goes.
“In the meantime, the bastardy rate has exploded. It’s higher among today’s whites than among the blacks of 1960. So much for the promises of the early 1970s!”
Problem is it was already exploding before Roe. Society made a collective choice that it was going to shrug at what it previously stigmatized.
The disproportionate effect argument always makes me think of taxes on alcohol and tobacco. Maybe liberals really don’t think about who is most impacted; maybe they justify disparate financial impact on the poor as a creepy sort of concern for their health, and maybe they’re in favor of it for more characteristically “right-wing” reasons that they’d never admit in public.
Likewise, while the typical proponents of abortion take the “women’s rights and health” tack, and of course some just want to be able to easily discharge their indiscretions, I’m fairly certain that quite a few are secretly thinking that the world could only be better if so many poor people didn’t have so many babies.
When you get right down to it, everybody believes in eugenics to some extent.
Nothing detailed or specific. The following is all I could find, which shows that the total number of abortions actually fell the most for Whites (-70%), some for Blacks (-25%), and for Hispanics they doubled since 1980, which means that the Hispanic population in the U.S. has grown mostly via immigration and not via high birth rates, if I understand it correctly. Once foreign-born Hispanic women are in the U.S., even if they are of child-bearing age, their fertility rate drops compared to their country of origin like Mexico, for example. The effect is even more dramatic among U.S.-born Hispanics (see below):
Hispanic fertility, immigration, and race in the twenty-first century
2012 Feb 25
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3467019/
Data Snapshot: Hispanic Population of Child-Bearing Age Grows, but Births Diminish
Abortions by race/ethnicity, United States, 1965-2017, estimated:
March 7, 2019
The fertility reductions have been greatest among teenagers and women in their 20s, so some births may be delayed rather than foregone. The Hispanic child-bearing age population will continue to increase, so how many children Hispanic women eventually decide to have will significantly impact future U.S. population growth.
Abortions in the United States by race
https://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/usa_abortion_by_race.html or https://archive.ph/x5pen
Live births by race/ethnicity, United States, 1965-2017, estimated:
Hispanic women no longer account for the majority of immigrant births in the U.S.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/08/hispanic-women-no-longer-account-for-the-majority-of-immigrant-births-in-the-u-s/ or https://archive.ph/7m6oh
There’s never a good time politically, The preidential campaign begins when the midterm results have come in.
No, it isn’t. Have you ever had an early-term miscarriage? Did you cry for the rest of your life like you would for a child you lost? No, you didn’t. There are good moral reasons to oppose abortion. The idea that a fetus is the moral equivalent of a child is not one of them.
I’ve five early miscarriages. I did not cause them so I feel loss but no guilt
Percentage of white babies being born would decline, and crime rates would increase in the future.
Higher than the highest mountain is above the lowest valley are His thoughts above our thoughts, His wasys above our ways.
R.G. Camara is obsessed with controlling women. He thinks women don’t want to marry creeps like him because they can go out and have consequence-free sex with every Tom, Dick, and Harry that comes calling.
This is, of course, sheer nonsense on so many levels and for a bazillion reasons. Women are not motivated by casual sex. Men are. The pill has made it very hard for women to say no and keep a boyfriend long enough to have any hope of it developing into anything more. RGC blames women for this, as he does everything else.
A mild form of this type of situation happened when Roe vs. Wade was decided, a slightly premature leak of the result, not any text of any opinion. Warren Burger was furious and it was found that one of Powell’s clerks was the leaker. He offered to resign but Powell let him stay. This leaker might be fired but I don’t think she or he will be disbarred. It might be an activist who doesn’t want to work in Big Law anyway, and will fit right in at Planned Parenthood or the ACLU.
I don’t know if these murders happen on a regular basis or not, but I have never expressed any opposition to a ban on late-term abortions, even in case of rape.
Yes, you are correct. I have been saying this for years.
The Sailer-sphere consists of disaffected, intellectual-yet-idiot white men who are quite dissolute in their personal morality and who are all mentally stuck in 1992 reading old National Review articles. The only difference between them and the neocons is their intense personal dislike of blacks and (sometimes) Jews. Their political theories amount to little more than a demand for their own personal sperg preserve where they can build Dutch colonial neighborhoods and debate golf architecture, unmolested by reality.
Yeah, and my point is that Biden’s political party for decades supported the remaking of society through instability imposed by the Supreme Court, including Roe v. Wade.
Lawyers get a lot of ignorant grief in the best of times, but if this person gets away with this, after what our law talkers have expected us to accept over the past seven years, with the de facto legalization of arson, assault, shoplifting, and obstructing the flow of traffic, the theft of the election, the obviously fake punishment-prosecutions and the Russia hoax and the imprisonment without trial of the January 6th victims, it’s time to stop pretending we have a legal system.
‘This gives the mother time to decide… if the child will have a fair chance at life.
‘Indeed.’
But what the hell is ‘a fair chance at life’?
There are so many problems with that that I won’t even bother.
OK here:
Christopher A. Cotropia & Lee Petherbridge, Gender Disparity in Law Review Citation Rates, 59 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 771 (2018).
And this despite that men are more likely to cite themselves!
Now GFY!
I replied to you in Comment #319 FYI.
‘…Christopher A. Cotropia & Lee Petherbridge, Gender Disparity in Law Review Citation Rates, 59 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 771 (2018).
And this despite that men are more likely to cite themselves!’
This strikes me as pretty lame.
If I find a source that supports my point, I’ll cite it — whether the author is Chris or Christina.
I really won’t give a damn.
Lawyers don’t care about reality: to a lawyer, being able to do something under current law is the same condition as that thing happening every twenty-five seconds. They also imagine that, once they change the law, they will have changed the reality.
That doesn’t fit with the people that I know who vote Republican but lean Libertarian. For them, it is the Republican opposition to abortion that makes them most uncomfortable with the Republican party. For many Americans, a decision like this will serve as confirmation of the backwardness of conservatives.
Right. His dissent, meaning he lost, and for good reason, to wit: he read the 9A in such a way as to render it a superfluous “assurance” concerning the other provisions of the Constitution. The Ninth Amendment concerns rights “retained by the people.” The states have nothing to do with it.
Middle-income women can afford to fly to a different state for an abortion. If there is any change it will be at the bottom of the social scale.
Furthermore, in 2000, 35% of Asian American pregnancies ended in abortion, compared to only 18% of pregnancies among White women.
http://reappropriate.co/2014/01/im-in-the-78-asian-americans-and-reproductive-choice/
What if he’s masturbating? I’ll end up on a wall!
No it hasn’t, it was already pretty much where it is today. Nevertheless, the marginal fertility of a niche minority can’t have a dysgenic effect on the whole. Dysgenics is about what’s happening in the middle.
Why Jewish women? Jewish women don’t generally have abortions done on themselves.
Who gets jealous?
I’m one of those anti abortion absolutists, and certainly not because I’m excessively fond of children (I’m not). To my way of thinking, there’s no determining when an embryo or fetus makes that magical transition to full-fledged baby, and therefore no point at which we can say, “this is not murder for the sake of convenience . . . yet.” And yes, there’s a religious element to my thinking.
I am pretty damn sure that allowing the culling of inconvenient children for the greater good of society is not a road a wise civilization goes down. It’s the kind of philosophy that comes round to bite you in the ass. There’s plenty of awokened people out there who’d see society’s greater good in eliminating evil white Unz-reading conservatives, just to pick a not-at-all-random example.
This text is in footnote 41 on p30 of the document.
“suppress the size of the African American population” is not an accurate description.
“reduce the explosive growth of the African American population” is closer to the facts.
Between the censuses of 1970 and 2020, the black population grew by 82%, while the non-Hispanic white population grew by 15%.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic_demographics_of_the_United_States
Rosie:
Slapping some sense into me because I’m a hysterical, emotional basket case is literally rape, murder, Hitler, and warm chardonnay all wrapped into one.
Aborting an unborn human: No problem!
Bill, NY will pass legislation in a heartbeat to stop a heartbeat. This is the second wokest state in the union.
The serious players both Republican and Democrat well understood that Roe v. Wade could blowup at any time. Any slight bruising to Roe v. Wade could (and did) lead to more serious infections that limited its scope. Supreme court justices who were typically smart would tie themselves into the dumbest of knots trying to justify it. I think Sandra Day O’Connor once spoke an absolutely pathetic gaffe that either had to do with abortion or affirmative action. It was something like the Supreme Court has the right to cave from political pressure, a real doozy. (I can’t find it but if someone could that’ll be super cool!)
The Pill isn’t constitutionally protected, but abortion is. Roe v. Wade had real teeth and made itself felt in US divorce court. It paved the way for the sheer lopsided favoritism divorce court shows to women over men. A women had the power of life and death and the father had absolutely no say. But, would have to bear the price of child support if the woman deemed it acceptable to keep the pregnancy. As Rollo Tomassi has repeatedly stated “all responsibility, and zero authority.” That ain’t political peanuts.
Carol, I like snark. So, thamk you. Sex lives are complicated.
The mask seems to have come off among the Unz commentariat: the preponderance appear fully to support the basic principles of the leftwing revolution and have revealed themselves to be utilitarian sexual degenerates who evidently think that murdering black babies is the reason we can have nice things.
The cluelessness this attitude reveals would be funny if it weren’t so evil.
And how many Black babies have you adopted?
Last I checked there were plenty of Black children available. Why are liberal race deniers and conservative pro-lifers going overseas to adopt children?
The cluelessness this attitude reveals would be funny if it weren’t so evil.
What would you say women are motivated by then?
How so?
There’s been a sweeping number of pro-second amendment victories. I didn’t know George Soros was a big fan of firearms. I guess he really wants to fan the flames in the inner cities.
I think Sandra Day O’Connor once spoke an absolutely pathetic gaffe that either had to do with abortion or affirmative action. It was something like the Supreme Court has the right to cave from political pressure, a real doozy. (I can’t find it but if someone could that’ll be super cool!)
RBG made such a gaffe.
She said they had to serve the politicians at the time because there were so many unwanted pregnancies (from the 60s welfare programs).
So in a single sentence she admitted it wasn’t about the constitution.
WHOOPS
OT 90,000 pages of science-denying Russian disinformation. tldr if the CDC says that sasquatches do not exist, that means that not only do sasquatches exist, but they are becoming as feral as bears or deer.
http://phmpt.org/pfizers-documents/
“It paved the way for the sheer lopsided favoritism divorce court shows to women over men. A women had the power of life and death and the father had absolutely no say. But, would have to bear the price of child support if the woman deemed it acceptable to keep the pregnancy. As Rollo Tomassi has repeatedly stated “all responsibility, and zero authority.” That ain’t political peanuts”
The logical chain here is unclear. It seems to me like the GOP politicians are looking under this political light and that’s where you’ve decided to expect the solution. If the system is just as lopsided against men five years from now will you change your viewpoint?
“Daylong drive” to an abortion State will often be more complicated than that phrase implies: No car, no money in a bank, and an overnight stay is needed. So what’s the procedure? An NGO in the abortion State gives the Red-State person cash to finance the logistics? Uh oh…I can imagine a market being created for fake doctors* notes attesting to a pregnancy where none exists…keep the cash.
*No apostrophe is needed, I would say. It’s a noun adjunct, like “teachers college.” Look, we could debate this, but if the nukes go off, which could happen at any moment, I do not want my last lit cell to be thinking about a point of grammar.
I was most likely recalling that disastrous comment by RBG. Thanks for coming to the rescue John Johnson!
good point…also if you are strongly pro-abortion and live in a blue state like New Jersey why would you get upset because Idaho can now outlaw abortion?
The vast majority of the pro-choice voters live in states which will keep abortion legal. While many seem to believe a reversal of Roe will result in a ban on abortions, this is not close to being true. Very few states will ban abortion. If they actually reverse Roe v Wade the number of abortions in the US will not decline significantly, it would surprise me if the number of abortions declined by more than 10%.
You mean a fetus? So you want millions of women tried for murder?
Women have never been in favor of mass immigration. That would be men’s greed for cheap labor, starting with all those African slaves you brought here.
Prove me wrong or STFU.
As opposed to what?
Is there nothing you can’t blame us for bofag?
I haven’t heard this one yet. Lay it on me. What’s yout theory as to how we’re responsible for this?
Because children belong in factories, mines, chimneys!
I’m pretty firmly in the pro-life camp, but when anyone brings up the yuuge number of abortions that blacks rack up, God help me, I have second thoughts about banning it in any way.
Birth control is cheap and widely available. Unfortunately, large numbers of adult humans have become deranged baby killers.
Men and women who have sex with each other.
I’m not one of the men you’re talking about, but, God help me, that does sound good.
For all that’s good and holy, please can you people stop shooting your mouths off about things you don’t know Jack shit about?
https://www.findlaw.com/family/reproductive-rights/griswold-v-connecticut-and-the-right-to-contraceptives.html
At least, by the grace of God, we won’t have to listen to this crap anymore.
Us? No.
And that’s why not “us.”
I am guessing you don’t have children of your own.
That squirrel just looks scared/surprised. Warren looks hysterical/angry.
I agree with your general sentiment, but…
Why is this shocking? You know this is Unz.com where there are all manners of kooky beliefs and advocations, including outright Nazism and exaltations of Hitler, not to forget our esteemed host believing that Covid was a U.S. bioweapon blowback.
I don’t think highly of Alden’s comments in general, but she is probably right that there are many single men without children on this blog. People, especially young men, who don’t have kids of their own tend to be pretty phlegmatic toward little human lives. Fatherhood (and motherhood) changes people, sometimes a great deal.
I’m sorry to hear that.
Of course. I too have had early miscarriages, and it’s sad, but I would go through that a million times before losing one of my children.
On the theory that a fetus is the moral equivalent of a child, that would make me a bad person would it not?
Roe wasn’t so much cause as just one more symptom.
Daniel K Williams in his 2015 history describes Blackmun’s thought processes as not a devious plot but simply flying by the seat of his robe. He had his result and cobbled together a garden path thereto.
Evidently, everything.
I’m not saying that to be snide. I’m only saying that because, in a manner typical of most modern people, you are making a number of severe and gross category mistakes that are distorting your thinking. I trust that your heart is in the right place, but your framing of the matter is so mistaken that any conclusions drawn from it would fall into the realm of “not even wrong.”
The first thing you need to do is get rid of the idea that “consciousness” has anything to do with what we are talking about here. Your soul is not your consciousness; it is not your thoughts, your inner dialogue, your subjectivity, your feelings and emotions, or your moral sense. Your soul is not your ability to reason or to grasp first principles. Neither is it a spiritual entity that has a different mode of existence than the body, i.e. the soul is not the “immortal” part of your existence in contrast to your “mortal” body.
What the soul is, is in fact much simpler than all these erroneous notions:
The soul is the immaterial form of the material body—that’s it. That’s literally it. All Christian theology and soteriology, all metaphysics, sacred scripture, and all morality touching upon this issue has to be read with this and only this definition in mind, otherwise you will end up in errors and unrealities. The soul is what’s known as the “first act” of a creature, which is to say that the soul is the formal cause by which a creature exists as a thing of a definite nature.
It follows from this (by a careful process of reasoning which I shan’t repeat here but which you can read about in De Anima) that the soul is not material, nor is it an operation within matter. To use a crude analogy, the soul is related to matter as the meaning of a word is related to the sound of the word. Obviously, the meaning of a word is nowhere present in its written or spoken signifier, but no meaning can be expressed without this “matter.” Souls are forms and are, as it were, “natural words” and thus the true atoms of nature. The soul is the essence of the thing and is irreducibly simple. The union of matter and form is called a substance, and the nature of this union is called “hylomorphic dualism” to distinguish it from the erroneous Cartesian dualism.
A plant has a form that has only a power of nutrition and growth, and this we call a vegetative soul. An animal has the power of nutrition and growth but also besides a power of sensation and movement, and this we call a sensitive soul. In man, the soul has powers not only of nutrition and sensation, but also of reason; thus man is known as the rational animal.
The soul of a plant or animal has no operation apart from the bodies of these creatures, but the rational soul of man has an operation that is not dependent on any bodily organ or faculty. Thus, we know that the soul of man is spiritual because it is rational; and even though its only purpose is to inform the body, it does not perish with the body and must be reunited to it at the consumation of the world.
Start with this, and then reread some Aristotle, St. Thomas, and the Canons of the Council of Trent with these definitions in mind.
I mean a viable (look it up in the dictionary) baby, which is a baby–just like the babies that come out of the womb but are still attached to the umbilical chord are babies. I want a fallacy-free conversation about the elective late-term abortions of viable babies who pose no threat the lives of their mothers. I want that practice outlawed, and I want the deliberate murder of those babies to be legally defined as murder. Then, after the laws are on the books, I want the doctors–and the women–charged for the crime. Thank God millions of those murders aren’t occurring. But far too many are.
The New York Times latest op-ed does not name a leaker but quotes some expert as saying for sure it was one of the 5 on the majority to terrorize 1 or 2 of the other majority members they fear is going to defect.
I am thinking no way but I definitely am curious who was the dirty rat.
They claim Thomas, Alito, Gorsich, Kavanaugh, Barrett are the ones on the majority.
Roberts is putting the squeeze on Gorsich and Kavanaugh. And getting nowhere until now and is out for blood at the dirty rat. (According to the utterly not credible New York Times. I am skeptical they even know who the 5 on the majority are.)
If I had kids I would not want them to be run over by an inebriated illegal alien, shot by a jogger who was just getting his life together, locked out of housing by teeming useless eaters, or so much as going to school with kids who in previous years would have been aborted. And the single biggest reason I don’t have kids is my very early life experience with modern medical “science.” This is not anything to do with abortion anyway, this is the Pinkerton man throwing a chair through the company store window when the Molly Maguires had everything lined up legal: this is the Deep State conspiracy against humanity enabling the Democrats to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. Once Mitch McConnell has opened the Kingston valve on what should have been a sweeping Republican victory in both houses, the Democrats will have a clear mandate to enormously strengthen abortion legalization.
Right. But I was talking about the misery I would impose on family and my nation. If I were severely disabled or mentally handicapped, I’d be a burden on them. It might even cost them healthy reproductive opportunities.
What happens after the unwanted baby is born?
I’m not “res”, but I’ll take the error as a compliment.
It’s a word with white roots which I use in the traditional white folks’ manner.
Outside marriage. My working-class grandparents had seven children and 26 grandchildren. We need more such families.
You’re the one who claims a right to snuff them out.
This is your assertion, supported by zero evidence.
It’s your responsibility to support your own assertions, especially when they seem, shall we say, unlikely.
As a courtesy to the reader, I’ve deleted the remainder of your hysterics.
Pocahontas is scary when she’s angry. That poor little squirrel is terrified of her.
WTF are you talking about? You can’t just use insulting words and pretend they’re not insulting. If you say you have a problem with “bastardy,” those of us who are born out of wedlock are going to assume you see our existence as unfortunate. You don’t get to redefine words at whim.
If they turn on you, you’d better. Your own.
My prediction is that white girls will make better decisions, and black girls will make more babies.
Hispanic girls will be somewhere in the middle, as usual.
A dumb argument and essentially an ad hominem. The tens of millions of women who had abortions all had kids of their own, and chose to abort them. So what?
Can a “fetus” even be “murdered,” logically speaking?
What did these women mean by “real man”?
Including Jesus.
Of course, elective abortion isn’t eugenics, but euthanasia.
How exactly did it act as a “psyops against normal civilized life”?
No and I have no idea why you would think I believe this.
Feelings are not actions. Feelings are rather fickle and vary person to person thus are meaningless in the scope of morality. Actions, on the other hand, do matter.
We certainly don’t see our adopted host as unfortunate. We are also glad he wasn’t aborted, which could have happened a little over a decade later, thanks to “prochoice” jurists.
If you are in a hectoring mood, talk to those who bring up “rape or incest”. Valuable people have been conceived via those acts.
It’s funny: As recently as 50-60 years ago, anyone could find that information–in Current Biography profiles, in the Congressional Directory–hell, I’d bet at least a few of the nine, if not more, were listed in the regular White Pages phone book.
She was a paranoid midwit, so we had a lot in common, but I didn’t share her unbridled hatred of the notion of pregnancy and infants.
Cite? I mean, Steve is pretty careful about his statistics, as you can see from his recent rerun of the Did Abortion Cut Crime question.
Perhaps, but the question is not of absolute rates but of relative rates. If everyone declined, but the undesirables are above 2 while the desirables are below 2, that’s a big problem.
Again perhaps, but the original point was that while the aborters may be below average, the lazy impregnatees who don’t even bother to get abortions are even more below average, so the net effect is still dysgenic.
Maybe or maybe not. It is possible that mass abortion having stimulated the “lazy pregnancy” phenomenon, it will persist even after the initial stimulus is removed. OTOH, not removing the stimulus will certainly cause the phenomenon to persist. So yes, retaining mass abortion is indeed a case of “throwing away an imperfect solution in favor of nothing at all.”
No, they didn’t, because that it unknowable. They assumed that writers ignored the quality of the articles and books they cited, and just looked for sources to cite, based on the author’s sex.
True story: he was going to call himself ‘Retarded Design’ until someone explained what it meant.
I think the expansion of the welfare state, starting with LBJs War On Poverty played a bigger role.
Since illegitimacy exploded in every stratum of society and among people who never did and never would have and appeared on the AFDC rolls, this is an implausible thesis. After AFDC was replaced with TANF and the case load cut by 2/3, the ratio of illegitimate births to total births declined not at all. While we’re at it, there were some administrative changes to AFDC distribution here there and the next place that helped expand the rolls, but the program was actually founded in 1935. Daniel Patrick Moynihan identified the point in time when the AFDC census and the unemployment rate were decoupled; it was around 1958.
Note that in that era, you had the explosion in divorce. The ratio of divorces to extant marriages saw some mild flux between 1947 and 1967, but was unchanged, net. Between 1967 and 1979 it trebled. There was more change in the probability of divorce during those 12 years than there had been during the previous 90 years. Only an odd minority of people who were plaintiffs or defendants in divorce cases were candidates for AFDC. (Loosening of formal standards for obtaining a divorce goosed this process some, to be sure).
How people elect to order their domestic life may respond to economic incentives to a degree, but it’s fairly insensitive to those incentives.
Pro-abortion types set the limit on 12 weeks.
You are not informed. “Soul”, according to Aquinas who follows Pseudo-Dionysus & some other authors, consists of vegetative, animal & rational. Rational is further divided into ratio and intellectus. It is intellectus who is divine (being roughly equated with Greek Nous), while “lower” ratio, reason, is ordinary “lower mind” which has nothing divine about it. Intellectus is not, according to Aquinas, embodied in a fetus until quickening.
https://sciendo.com/pdf/10.2478/ejsta-2016-0001
‘Aquinas and Contemplation: A Neglected Topic’
Well, here’s a question.
How many kids do you have?
Well, yeah, but I’d be more charitable.
When everything is on the table, the truth is more likely to be found.
“Because babies with no ability to be self-sufficient are a potential result.”
They don’t have to be.
“There’s plenty of awokened people out there who’d see society’s greater good in eliminating evil white Unz-reading conservatives, just to pick a not-at-all-random example.”
Banning abortion would, eighteen years later, mean there would be many more. There is no God out there assuring your moralistic crusades don’t come back to bite you in the a**. You have to be smart, think for yourself.
Nah, there will always be guys like this in the ‘hood.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermit_Gosnell
“Abortion is fascism, abortion is patriarchial oppression, abortion harms all.”
Everyone pops a big raging blue-veined boner when nattering about fighting off home invaders, but the great majority of home invasion victims are people involved in the drug trade.
Correct and extremely rare for the invader to stick around for a gun battle.
Criminals don’t actually want to get into a gun battle for your HDTV. They also aren’t going to ask what caliber you are using. “22 caliber? That’s it? Yea ok let’s shoot it out”
Yes. Logically and legally.
That’s ridiculous. It’s quite obvious who the 5 are, by process of elimination. It’s not the 3 remaining liberals for sure and it’s probably not Roberts, so that leaves everyone else.
“On the other side we have the unattractive liberal dog moms that will never get pregnant.”
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/may/04/a-moment-that-changed-me-party-host-puppy-mcnulty-king-charles-spaniel
So you’re fine with the fact that I was born, but you think my mother should have been forced, by circumstance, to give me up?
Sigh. I seem to trigger you into uncharacteristic irrationality, Mr. Stix. Go back and read Anon’s post. He basically said women are dull and don’t produce any noteworthy scholarship. Given the extreme nature of this statement, it is quite easy to refute and I did so. Manosphere maggots always make this mistake. Being high on their own supply, they can’t help themselves.
No, Hammerjack, you don’t get to shift the burden of proof, fucktard. Bofag made a positive assertion that mass immigration is women’s fault. The fact that you personally suspect he is right does not relieve him of the burden of proving it.
https://time.com/5491587/koch-brothers-network-immigration-reform/
So you’re fine with the fact that I was born, but you think my mother should have been forced, by circumstance, to give me up?
Don’t bother Rosie. If they really valued the fetus then they would fight to adopt them rather than trying to explain themselves in a forum.
Conservatives and pro-lifers don’t want Black children or the offspring of rape or incest. There has been a surplus of unwanted Black kids for years and pro-lifers don’t line up to adopt them. In fact they and our race denying liberals are willing to pay a massive premium to adopt outside the country. Our moral superiors showing what they really value by offering gobs of money to not adopt unwanted US children.
That is all you need to know.
But they expect all the costs of unwanted children to be handled by the govern… no wait they are against that too.
How does this all make sense? It doesn’t.
Just turn on Fox and then check your fantasy football team. That is their answer. Did you get my message about that trade for Dontel?
Prior to about 1980 in the UK being born out of wedlock was considered shameful. That’s why ‘you bastard’ was an insult.
Soccer fans used to sing to the Clementine tune
When out of wedlock births became common in the 70s and the Thatcher years, that chant died out, as it would have applied to too many of the people singing it.
Like the shame of marriage breakup, also long gone (I was the only child in my primary school class without a father at home), the moral proscription probably kept a lot of people on the straight and narrow path rather than the broad and pleasant one.
Good point, Buffalo, this wasn’t a draft opinion on some commerce-clause issue. Well, I turn to Admiral Nimitz’s famous quote, concluding his review of the tragic Halsey hurricane:
Arguably, Gail Curley, the marshal of The Supreme Court, should have recmmended that the court implement special precautions. If that’s true, and she failed to do so, she should not be the one investigating the leak, because she has a conflict of interest. Alternatively, she did make the recommendation, but an imperious Chief Justice threw her out of his office.
This is a braindead ‘argument’. It would be like responding to someone who had objected to releasing prisoners because of prison overcrowding with “And how many prisons have you built?”
I will also note that when pro-life conservatives do adopt black babies, they are typically excoriated as ‘cucks’ by presumably the very same people in this comment thread who are advocating baby murder.
In fact, it is Enlightenment ideals that have led to the tyranny to which we are now subjected. Modern liberalism is the logical development of elevating freedom to the highest political ideal, which leads directly to the comprehensive system of ideological politically correct totalitarianism we experience today. I don’t have time to go into the details at the moment, but I recommend James Kalb’s The Tyranny of Liberalism.
Could be anybody.
Could be one of the justices, or one of the justices legal clerks, or a clerical worker, a janitor, security guard, or an IT administrator or contractor or printer repair tech. Maybe the draft was sent to the wrong printer on the network by mistake. Maybe a copy of a draft was emailed to the wrong person. Maybe the wife or husband or family of one of the justices leaked it or borrowed the laptop like with Huma Abedin.
Just because the justices are very clever at looking into a crystal ball and divining what Washington or Jefferson would have thought, it doesn’t mean they have much common sense.
What is quite funny is that Politico has a fairly long article today speculating on how the leak will be investigated and by whom, and as to whether any kind of actual crime has been committed.
It is hilarious because Politico actually received the leaked document, and very likely knows who leaked it, or at the very least has information that could help the investigation, but has revealed only that it did not pay for the document. Whew!
I had no idea that both were protected.
I’m not sure what you mean. Since the 1970s divorce and child custody battles have largely favored women over men. Do you mean if it flips 180 degrees in five years and once again favors men?
“The Nice Suburban White Ladies are concentrated in states where abortions will remain largely available for the time being and this may have the effect of demonstrating to them that legal abortion isn’t contingent on Roe being upheld anyways (I bet a lot aren’t aware of this factoid ). ”
To read the WaPo here in the Eastern US, you would think that if Roe is overturned, millions of Nazis are going to come out from under their rocks to take all the vacuum cleaners.
Roe v. Wade left a legal groove within the wood of family law that made it easy for women to maintain control over the child even after birth. Even after the child is born, the kid needs to be nursed and taking the child away is seen as cruel. So unless that women is a drug addict, a felon, and HIV positive family court judges are especially loathed to deprive a woman of her child. That then goes into the issue of child support and how US women are allowed to largely spend that money however they wish. The child is used as a useful human shield in all legal battles between the man and women. Once the sperm leaves your body, men have little to no say over the issue of reproduction. Even if she lied about being on birth control.
“Is legal abortion eugenic or dysgenic?”
I suspect the latter, but then, I suspect emergency rooms disproportionately save the lives of gang-bangers. Meaning that they’re dysgenic, too. We could even selectively shut them down on Saturday night, when the gang-banger ratio is extra high if we want to be sure about that.
But even so, it still seems pretty cold and also short-sighted letting some kid in a car accident die just because some eugenicist hopes that means there will be fewer surgeons around to patch up all those bullet holes in all those thugs.
I’ll wager you can find all of them in Polk directories. Mrs. Kavanaugh is the manager of one of the mini-munis in Montgomery County, Md., so their address would be public information; there’s is a home of about average size in a glam area, so expensive. Samuel Alito and his wife used to have a small condo on Wisconsin Avenue, though it’s apparently been sold in the last year or so. They had a P.O. box in Alexandria, Va at one point. Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her husband lived in a condo on New Hampshire Avenue with about twice the square footage of the Alito’s; it’s sterile modern. Neil Gorsuch and his family live in way too much house in Potomac, Maryland. John Roberts and his wife also live in too much house about three blocks from the Kavanaughs.
Zillow and the other real estate sites made a point of blurring the photographs of the homes of Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch.
Kavanaugh and Barrett are the only justices with minor children.
houston 1992: you are missing the point that the progressive left is a minority and despite an all hands on deck effort by the unified axis of globohomo media, academia, and government to ruin Trump, in the end a progressive billionaire had to pay \$400 million in walk around money to blacks to stuff ballot boxes in order to push Trump out of office. Universal access to abortion is your grandma’s social justice issue. As an issue, it’s not going to shift a majority, today.
Read about Elizabeth Deutsch on @willchamberlain on twitter. Breyer’s law clerk.
I predict that a leftist mob will at some point try to storm the Supreme Court Building, and if able, attack one or more of the justices who voted to strike down Roe.
The media will then dutifully proclaim that this is totally different from the January 6 riot because Reasons.
Because murder is bad.
If sex is not special, your wife cheating on you is no big deal, and rape is no worse than forcing someone to shake your hand. Rude perhaps, but hardly criminal.
Though I suppose a covid hysteric might indeed view forcing someone to shake his hand as tantamount to rape.
He basically said women are dull and don’t produce any noteworthy scholarship.
See the writings of the psychologist Judith Kleinfeld. In comparison to men, women tend to hug the median of the probability distribution. The net effect of that in academe is that they’re teachers who do not publish or they publish but their work doesn’t get cited. See some of the articles and public commentary by gurus at the Institute for Scientific Information, which has been publishing citation indexes for decades. It’s atypical for a research paper to be cited by anyone other than its author.
Of course, some women do influence the work of other authors; it’s just unremarkable that citations to work done by men predominate.
Blacks don’t want whites adopting their offspring. It’s cultural genocide.
Transracial Adoption Statement (c)1972 [PDF]
https://www.nabsw.org/page/PositionStatements
I’ve suggested many times that it would be much more efficient to abort the black mothers rather than the children. Prochoicers inconsistently and hypocritically dismiss this solution as well.
It would be hilarious except if it was Assange and wikileaks instead of Politico an assassin team would terminate him.
Esther Griswold and William J Brennan would disagree (Whizzer White and Potter Stewart “evolved” in opposite directions):
How often do you see so frank an admission in a headline? Would you call this a sack dance?
From Griswold v. Connecticut to Gay Marriage | The New Yorker
One is less likely to get run over in the median.
What do you mean by “abort the black mothers”?
And is it something you advocate be done, or not?
Dog moms and abortions.
White liberals are in a race to off themselves.
Blacks don’t want whites adopting their offspring. It’s cultural genocide.
Well Blacks aren’t in charge of adoption agencies so it really doesn’t matter.
I’ve suggested many times that it would be much more efficient to abort the black mothers rather than the children. Prochoicers inconsistently and hypocritically dismiss this solution as well.
LOL you are upset that pro-choicers don’t support abortion camps for the adults?
Are they going to get a letter in the mail?
Dear Shaniqua,
You have been selected for a 22 year abortion. Please report to your local train station.
– the pro-life movement
The defining trait of the IYI is the selective ignoring of reality, and that seems to be coming from the pro-life side. They have a moral theory that says abortion is immoral and they aren’t interested in the real-life consequences of trying to put that belief into operation. They believe their moral superiority is proved by the fact that they aren’t interested in the possibility of negative outcomes their inferiors insist on discussing. They think of life as being one big children’s movie – there is always an obvious moral path to take and never any consequences from taking it.
I think what’s going on here is that young, single men realize that they have to look out for their own interests – because no one else’s going to. They know they’re going to be at the back of the line for every social program and every private charity. For some this leads to terrible beliefs in kooky zero-sum ideologies. But it also has benefits in immunizing them against ideologies which offer nothing except a sense of virtue. And that’s good because ideologies that don’t offer people anything more than “if you join our virtuous circle we won’t call you names anymore you f***ing MURDERER” usually produce bad outcomes. Whereas ideologies that are oriented around at least theoretical interest-group politics are under pressure to deliver the goods to the relevant interest groups, and thus are limited in how dysfunctional they can get.
No, I’m just utilizing the playground heuristic “When you point a finger at someone, you point three at yourself.”
If you’re going to make a racial case for abortion, pick on someone your own size. Laquisha, not her unborn child.
This guy bedded 20,000 women?
The whole issue just annoys the hell out of me. It is SO EASY to solve.
If she is not on, or have ready, an adequate form of birth control then dudes wear condoms when no pregnancy is intended. To cover the bases further, she should have on hand the Plan B pill to prevent conception, especially if the condom fails.
Fercrissakes, that would eliminate 95%+ of unintended pregnancies.
Humans are morons – that’s the biggest problem.
Art, it doesn’t matter what generally happens and it doesn’t matter what Judith Kleinfeld says. Anon made an asinine, demonstrably false statement, and I proved him wrong.
Admit it, move on, and resolve not to be an asshole like him.
Substantive due process protects a lot of things (or at least it did), to wit:
The right to buy condoms.
The right to have as many children as you want.
The right to visit your children.
The right send your children to a private school.
The right to homeschool your children.
Hunter Wallace is, disappointingly, going on about “slut rights,” as if that were all that was at stake here.
Yeah, I didn’t know that hormonal birth control was also protected. I guess when I always read that birth control was protected under the constitution I thought they just didn’t want to write “abortion.”
That quote does not have application in the circumstance you tried to contort it to fit.
Not even slightly does the guy have all the responsibility during pregnancy and after a baby is born. She has most of it! You must be from another planet.
And after a baby is born and proved to be his, he most certainly does have legal rights equating to some authority.
You know where he could exercise the most mature responsibility? In wearing a condom or pulling out before the big finish. How completely brain dead are men that they cannot accomplish something so simple? That is the biggest issue in unintended pregnancy….irresponsible ejaculation. (I can’t claim that phrase, saw it elsewhere but, it’s a good one and as true as can be.)
He said “how much top-tier legal scholarship have they produced? Not much”
Which is, arguably, a sloppy way of putting it. It’s a blog comment.
You didn’t offer proof, you offered a citation to a study, which may be evidence, but is not proof. Some of the problems with the study have already been pointed out to you.
The word modified by ‘due’ is ‘process’.
The people around you would likely benefit if you were less emotionally neuralgic.
It wasn’t a sloppy way of putting it. It was a damned bald-faced assertion, and an obnoxious one, with no support whatsoever.
You at least attempted to provide some support, but you failed because you didn’t provide any evidence concerning legal scholarship in particular, which was the whole point of the dispute.
You assumed that the state of affairs in the law is the same as in any other area of law. That is objectively, demonstrably false, as is amply demonstrated by the study I posted, however much you want to deny it.
Nonsense. Mr. Stix comment was completely irrelevant to the question at hand. If anything, it was an own goal. He didn’t dispute that women’s articles get cited, but rather that they get cited because they are written by women, which noone was claiming anyway.
Now, FWIW, I don’t really give a shit if the most preeminent legal scholars are men. Men are more ambitious and self-promoting than women, so it would be surprising if they were not, on that basis alone. That they are more capable doesn’t follow at all. And it certainly doesn’t follow that Supreme Court Justices only hire female law clerks because they don’t want to be shown up.
Female law clerks are hired from the same law schools as male ones: the best of the best. You don’t get to go to Yale, Harvard, or Stanford law schools if you’re an intellectual lightweight. I would have thought that would be perfectly obvious to anyone with two brain-cells to rub together.
https://abovethelaw.com/2020/12/supreme-court-clerk-hiring-watch-the-complete-clerk-roster-for-october-term-2020/
The only valid use for even a GPMG like an FN or Stoner is to produce mass casualties. Defending it as a home security option is absurd.
The Constitution clearly provides for private citizens to own these type of weapons, and implicitly *not for the home defense use case.
Taking a child away from its mother is not seen as cruel. It is cruel. How is overturning Roe going to change that?
I find that really hard to believe. My understanding is that child support is allocated so as to minimize disruption for the child. Nonetheless, even if you’re right, overturning Roe isn’t going to help with that, either. It just means that more men will be paying child support than otherwise would.
Is that a thing? If you tell a guy you’re on the pill, but then forgot to take one, is that “lying” or just an accident? Either way, overturning Roe won’t help that, either.
I get the sense that you’re bitter so you want to level the playing field by making everyone equally powerless, except the government which will now have more power to intrude on private matters than before.
Allow me to explain the bizarre and contorted thinking of these people for your enlightenment.
Despite the fact that humans reproduce sexually, requiring both a male and a female, they think pregnancy is solely the woman’s responsibility. Their “normal” is the status quo that prevailed before the Sexual Revolution and paternity testing, where the woman was “ruined” and the man walked away Scot free. Any departure from this natural state of affairs (as they see it) constitutes some sort of bail out and is therefore a moral hazard, be it by way of welfare, child support, or some combination thereof. Of course, that raises the question of whether not requiring men to pay child support would likewise constitute a moral hazard, especially since we all know who cajoles, importunes, and manipulates whom into having sex early in a relationship, but nevermind that.
Note that it doesn’t matter to them that women are the ones who do most of the actual childcare. It is still a bailout with women having “zero responsibility.” Exactly why they think this I haven’t been able to figure out, but I have a couple of theories. One, they think that childcare isn’t work for women because it comes naturally to us and therefore isn’t a burden. (They would never come right out and say this, of course, because they want to maintain their belief that courts unfairly deny men custody of children they are ready and willing to care for full-time.) Second, they think women are deliberately getting pregnant for a meal ticket or to trap them or something. As to this, all I can say is that I have never, ever known a single woman to do this. But who knows? Maybe it happens sometimes.
When I wrote that American men were the worst in the world, you took issue with that. Now you’re handing us evidence.
Men suck at manipulation, white men anyway. We’re not wired for that.
Taking either parent away from the child is cruel.
Evidence of what? Did I say that men who aren’t American do any more childcare than American men?
Lol my achin’ sides. Despite the lack of welfare and ruinous consequences of out-of-wedlock childbirth, all kinds of Victorian fellows sweet-talked their way into young girls’ pants.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/victorians/foundling_01.shtml
Wilt to power.
Rosie – You are a spitfire and I always enjoy reading your comments. They tend to be almost completely on-the-money.
The thing I find so insufferable about men in the 21st century is how much they whine. Somehow, they finally found their feelings but, some can’t calibrate them reasonably so they’ve devolved into utter victimhood. It’s bad enough when women are like that – with men it’s like nails on a chalkboard.
Regarding these issues, it seems many males of a certain age believe that life was near perfect in America in the mid 20th century and they pine for that. But, it’s naive of them because there were plenty of problems then in marriages and families, etc. People just hid all that stuff then.
I was about 15 yrs old when the movie The Stepford Wives came out in 1975 and it was riveting. But, what struck me even more than the film was the reactions I read about it from women in newspapers/magazines or on TV. Women were rattled because they deeply recognized that the movie summed-up what men mostly wanted from a wife – a housekeeper, child bearer and raiser and an always willing sex provider who had few needs in life and even fewer complaints. I was too young to compute all that appropriately but, it stuck with me because the reactions were visceral.
Well, fast-forward a couple decades and I could completely understand what those women were saying and could see the reality of the simplistic description just above. If you haven’t seen the original movie version, I highly recommend it. The later one was fairly dumb.
Anyhow, regarding the abortion issue – let me toss a bomb out. It seems that’s it’s good that paternity DNA tests now exist, right? In order to legally require slackers to contribute economically to the care of a child. Well, as it turns out, it can also put a woman’s life at risk. I was watching Dateline one night and the story was about a young guy who tried to kill TWO women he had impregnated because he didn’t want the financial burden. He actually convinced a (moron) friend each time to do it for him. The first women fought back hard and lived, with a giant knife slash left on her throat which I saw. The second one was a couple years later and his moronic friend succeeded in killing her and the baby, of course.
Well, that story kept me awake that night! Because, of course I thought, ‘No way that’s the only time that’s happened. How many women have been killed by the fool who wouldn’t wear a condom because she didn’t want to abort the pregnancy?’ I did some online research and, naturally, the authorities haven’t considered it very important to keep track such trivialities. But, I did find some info and it was something like approx 1000 pregnant women have been killed in the last 30 years or so by their boyfriend or husband. So, that’s what some men are capable of when they made lazy choices and life got complicated….murder.
Can you just imagine the exponential LIFE risk some women would have in this era if they didn’t have access to terminate an unintended pregnancy?
Will vs Wilt – What’s the difference?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilt_Chamberlain%27s_100-point_game
Look up ad hominem argument, Rosie.
“Mr. Stix comment was completely irrelevant to the question at hand. If anything, it was an own goal. He didn’t dispute that women’s articles get cited, but rather that they get cited because they are written by women, which noone was claiming anyway.”
Stop lying, Rosie. The author of the only study you cited assumed that scholars cited articles based solely on the author’s sex. Don’t put works in my mouth that I never said. If you don’t like the study, why did you cite it? Then find a different study.
Oh. You don’t have any scholarship, so lying is all you’re left with.
Where in the article did you see that assumption, Mr. Stix? I saw nothing whatsoever to that effect in the article, but I was tired when I read it, so maybe I missed it. Enlightenment me.
In an endeavour other than law, note the following:
1. Someone born in 1960 is in the autumn of life, a few years from retirement.
2. In 1982, 39% of the baccalaureate degrees in business went to women; in 1983, 28% of the master’s degrees in business were awarded to women.
3. There are around 3,600 firms listed on stock exchanges in the United States.
4. Of these, 37 were founded by women.
https://thestoryexchange.org/37-public-companies-founded-women/
If you want to form a hypothesis of why this is, you can read Judith Kleinfeld. You can also read Megan McArdle’s brief account of her years working in tech. (McArdle, is 49, so seven years older than an employee of median age in this economy).
And if you don’t agree that women exist to cater to men, you’re a “solipsist.”
And yes, that was a great movie, one of the most, unforgettable I have ever seen.
Children’s lives, too. To avoid the jab, Chris Watts confessed to murdering his two preschool daughters as well as his wife so he could have a “fresh start” with his new galpal.
I couldn’t care less how many public companies were founded by women, nor am I interested in Judith Kleinfeld’s speculation about the reasons.
My spouse and I were faced with this very question.
The truth is…abortion is very very bad for the woman’s womb and the possibility of having future children.
If you want children after the disabled child, then don’t get an abortion.
There are only a handful of U.S. doctors who do good abortions without scarring the uterus and causing future infertility.
Abortions, even for medical reasons, are nasty things to be avoided at all costs.
Even Hilaria Baldwin got stopped/slowed down after her D&C
The abortionists at Planned Parenthood don’t give a rats arse about the woman’s future reproductive health and I personally worked with a white woman [not a good person] who had been left sterile after abortion (IVF can’t help you if the womb is messed up)
A good candidate for leaker could be Clarence Thomas through his wife Ginnie. She is a nutcase, so could be capable of any foolishness.
The Supreme Court erected a fence around itself to protect it from protests. You don’t get a protective fence from Antifah and BLM . The Washingtonians are special.
“White liberals are in a race to off themselves”
Apparently she’d been “extra large” and a drinker since her youth. She lost 7 stone so must have been huge. All in time to be a reasonably fit woman of 50.
Pity. If she’d done it the other way round and had a few babies in youth, she could be an overweight but much-loved mum, rather than a dog mom.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/dec/31/i-spent-years-trying-to-drink-and-eat-myself-numb-the-numbness-almost-killed-me
She’s literally a branchless cosmopolitan.
Well, that’s the ideal 😉
But most of us recognise that you can’t always get what you want, and that women have needs and desires of their own 🙁 which don’t always coincide with ours.
That’s why something called “game” was invented.
Well, Rosie, it’s an actual piece of evidence from another field that’s roughly congruent with the statement which got your nose out of joint. You go from infuriated to indifferent all in one conversation. Rather labile, aren’t you?
Call me whatever you like, AD. I don’t really GAF. I don’t really think women are all that passionate about profits. I do think they’re passionate about justice, though.
I would fight you on that.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S9-C3-2/ALDE_00001089/
Leave it to God.
English pot, meet kettle.
Another remarkable feature of this comment thread demonstrating the obtuseness of the Unz commentariat is the whining about the purported negative political repercussions of this decision while simultaneously advocating that black women murder their children for its eugenic effect: obviously for the right openly to advocate for abortion to cull the black population would have disastrous political effects far outweighing any political blowback from overturning Roe. And the HBD & alternative right folk wonder why more people aren’t attracted to their ideology.
The only thing I’m uncertain about is whether the grousing about political consequences is deliberately intended as a cover, or whether their murderous animus toward blacks and other undesirables has so enstupidated them that they literally do not notice the contradiction.
The same sort of attitude was present in the early 20th century racialist thinkers such as Madison Grant: his famous The Passing of the Great Race laments that our civilization
hashad a moral code that blocks the serious consideration of infanticide as a solution for reversing dysgenic trends. It’s no wonder that decent people eventually came to reject the racialist ideology of that time period.No. Women who aren’t American just complain about it less. Since this cannot be the fault of American women, it must be the fault of American men. Follow the agency.
Sociopaths all. Not the general run of male Anglo-Saxon, who is a doofus. Just ask any frog!
How do you know that?
Either way, you can characterize self-assertion as complaint all you want. It doesn’t change the substance of the argument nor does it affect the merits.
That looks like it might mean “lippy”. (Above the equator, you dirty-minded cads). But the etymology is elsewhere:
Portuguese has a devilishly fun word for ” screwed up”, coitado. This looks suspiciously related to coito, “coitus”. But it is not:
‘A etimologia de coitado’
Cuidado: coitado não tem nada a ver com coito
This comment is ipso facto qed evidence that twitter is brain death for brain dead individuals. Eschew twitter. Gesundheit.
I’ve lived abroad. The difference is eye-opening.
Robert Weissberg, who has essays posted here, tells of how his male students would return from Europe saying, “The girls over there are so different from ours, so special, but I can’t put my finger on why…”
“They’re not angry.”
“That’s it!”
You and I share the same “Who are you to talk?!” instinct, but I’m wired to use it in both directions. If my Unz.com comments seem easy on Somalis and harsh on Southerners, it is only due to countering the trends here. My conversations with Minneapolitans in meatspace run the opposite way.
I spend a lot of energy here defending women. They were more likely than men to oppose FDR, the buildup of the welfare state (both here and in the UK), entry into foreign war, and even women’s suffrage itself. How can one not respect, even celebrate all this?
Jennifer Roback Morse toured the country giving talks opposing “marriage equality”. She felt like her audience was a “ladies’ club”.
I just got George Foreman’s cookbook from a Little Free Library, and it’s full of nutritional advice. That sounds nuts, but it’s co-authored by a dietician, so it’s surprisingly sound, if a little dated. It’s from the mid-’90s, and the new conventional wisdom is easier on fats and harder on carbs.
It even has a food pyramid. So XX Century!
I do think they’re passionate about justice, though.
As compared to whom?
IOW, you respect women who disrespect other women. With friends like you …
How very interesting. Well, let me know when you have something more than vague impressions and anecdotes from college boys about their flings abroad.
What does it matter?
I would have guessed you’d offer a more direct response about all the pregnant women that have been killed by their impregnators (or their help) who didn’t want to assume responsibility for their selfish carelessness.
Hey Reg, why don’t you ask your buddy to ask his students why European men won’t marry agreeable European women until they’re over 30. See if they have any theories.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Archive:Marriage_and_birth_statistics_-_new_ways_of_living_together_in_the_EU
Oh good grief, JM. The leak was so obviously from a Leftist to roll the ball towards support for Dems in Nov 22 or to, indeed, pressure the court not to drop R v W.
PRO TIP – when a sudden, unusual and dramatic event like this occurs and is instantly followed by large, organized protests with decent signage already made and people at the ready, that is the big clue that the event was part of large, organized scheme.
It has happened so much in America the last couple decades I can’t believe there are still those who haven’t computed it and recognize the pattern and set-up.
I would fight you on that.
I would win.
“Despite the lack of welfare and ruinous consequences of out-of-wedlock childbirth, all kinds of Victorian fellows sweet-talked their way into young girls’ pants.”
Not just Victorian fellows – it must have been happening for millennia. You could perhaps see why some cultures kept their women indoors at home until marriage. An unmarried Victorian girl with a baby was said to be “ruined”.
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44332/the-ruined-maid
But to be fair, some young men will say absolutely anything to a girl to get her pants off.
That comment coming from your chosen handle is just perfect, especially because it is a nearly complete non sequitur.
“ Call me whatever you like, AD. I don’t really GAF”
And she’s got 50 comments in this thread to prove it!
Non sequitur. What do our feelings have to do with what is objectively the case?
You could set up similar fallacious comparisons for all sorts of categories of human beings.
Interesting how pro-aborts selectively resort to medical language over normal, everyday colloquial language when the issue of abortion comes up. Normal people refer to fetuses in the womb as ‘babies’.
Is that all?
You made an implicitly comparative statement. Now it does not matter. If it does not matter, why make the statement?
No, I didn’t.
They are passionate enough about it that they are overtaking men (who are much more likely to choose an MBA program) in law school.
Whether they are more passionate about it than men, less so, or equally so matters not in the least. Are you just going to keep asking me stupid and irrelevant questions until I say something you can pounce on? This conversation is stale.
I can only repeat what I said above, while correcting one typo (“it”->is).
No, they didn’t, because that is unknowable. They assumed that writers ignored the quality of the articles and books they cited, and just looked for sources to cite, based on the author’s sex.
First off, pull out game is highly risky. A single drop of plasma has millions of sperm cells so never rely on that as the main defense against pregnancy.
Second, nearly all the big athletics organizations provide mandated special classes for male players regarding sex.
https://nypost.com/2016/10/12/sources-back-derrick-rose-nba-teaches-condom-disposal/
Yeah, flushing down a condom is bad for plumbing, especially cast iron plumbing. But might be worth the risk compared to the potential of 18 years of child support. If you had a girl sign a contract both consenting to sex and that she WAS on birth control (real romantic right?) would that even work under Roe v. Wade?
Those classes are needed because people like Brittany Renner hang around the dark clubs of big cities. Just watch this video at the 1:20 mark for three minutes.
It is, but in some cases it may be necessary for the protection of the child. But mothers could in practice (and do) easily deprive the child from the father which too is cruel. The law is in her orbit. The destruction of Roe v. Wade may lead to a truly more equitable legal balance between mother and father. If abortion law restarts on the state level there’s room for political maneuvering and compromise.
Unfortunately, there’s been plenty of examples of women misusing child support for non child rearing purposes. Especially seen in a certain racial demographic.
It happened to a male Mormon high school friend. Girl claimed to be on birth control but she lied. They’re married now and live in his parents basement with two kids. I’m not sure if they’re happily married. He has a future, but I’d wager it would have been brighter had that unfortunate incident not occurred. My own Episcopal church is on the other hand very pro-contraceptives and pro-abortion. Though not entirely for the reasons of women’s rights if you catch my drif “Tyrone! Leave this neighborhood at once! This ain’t your zipcode shoo shoo!”
For which read a Conservative.
This is the first time I’ve heard that Ida Tarbell disrespected other women. Or Annie Nathan Meyer, founder of Banard College.
Or that Mormon men respected them more than anyone else did. Utah Territory held the first election in America, probably the world, under universal adult female suffrage.
The only suffragists I find worthy of respect are Jeannette Rankin and Sylvia Pankhurst, who tried, sadly to no avail, to keep their countries out of Continental wars.
This is how women voters decided the 2020 election
Women crucial to Biden’s win, even as gender gap held steady
Their agreeable women seem to agree with them.
Jonathan probably thinks Ecuador’s elections are cleaner than America’s. If so…
he’s right about something!
At least Ecuador does not have all these problems over determining who is allowed to vote, because it is mandatory for everybody to vote, and people who don’t vote can be fined for not voting.
Unfortunately this never occurred to Jefferson and Madison.
Everybody has a unique ID number on the ID card which is used for voter ID, so there is no need to register to vote. However if you do not update your address when you move, then you have to travel back to your hometown to vote, just like Joseph and Mary.
The introduction of mandatory voting in the US would solve a lot of problems.
No, I am a conservative, Ginny Thomas is a nutcase.
It is pure fantasy and only deeply moronic people would even bother to give 2 minutes thought to it.
Too many men have had ridiculously indulgent Mothers that gave them false expectations of women’s lives, interests and needs. Not to mention what they could reasonably expect from a marriage relationship. Those Mothers are dumb as are fathers that led their sons to believe it realistic that he can be “king of the castle”.
What happens because of that nonsense? It creates automatic problems for those sons in relationships in adulthood. They don’t understand why the GF or wife isn’t complying with his wishes like Mommy did and she may not want to do all the dull, domestic stuff Mommy did and wants him to share the burden. Reality check! Almost every woman I know has dealt with alot of that garbage; it’s killed some relationships.
I would guess you were at a fairly advanced age before realizing your second sentence. (The patronizing comment itself indicates some age.) Plenty of men never get it and remain bitter that they aren’t being acknowledged and treated the way they “should be”. Poor old relics, I just shake my head. They could be having alot more great sex if they just improved their lousy attitude.
ROFL! You can’t be serious; you seem smarter than that.
You front an MSNBC article and about “exit polls”? Both of those are vastly bogus and if printed on paper nor worth using to pick up my dogs droppings.
Reg, don’t embarrass yourself like that again. Just saying.
P.S. Dominion fake-elected the eggplant in the WH. You know that.
You have difficulty maintaining a linear dialogue and staying on point.
It wastes too much time having to bring someone back around to the points being made.
Take your Adderall, it’ll likely help.
A firearms license should be all that is necessary to cast a vote.
There are no “mid-terms”, except with Senate vacancies like Georgia’s in 2020. What you are talking about are end-of-term elections.
The Constitutional illiteracy in this phrase is disturbing and ubiquitous.
It appears, from the pricing, that there’s a significant adoption market for black babies.
The issue with black children in the foster home system probably has to do with them not being adopted at birth. Some might have been in abusive situations. The principal problem is the fact that many behavioral issues that might already be baked in for an adoption candidate of 5 or 6 are less of a problem for a child adopted at birth. If 50% of how someone turns out is nurture, you’re already behind the eight all when you adopt a child of 5 or 6. With black kids, you want to start as early as possible.
I do not suppose to know His mind. But perhaps it was a test. Could more advanced races resist the temptation to bring them to their lands as slaves so as to not have to do the labour themselves? They did. And so Europe and North America’s future is Brazil. And our ability to develop enough technology to leave this Earth and escape certain doom rests on the shoulders of a certain white South African who knows all too well how destructive the negro race is.
How many cats does she have?
“it is pure fantasy” – as are all ideal worlds.
“Too many men have had ridiculously indulgent Mothers that gave them false expectations of women’s lives, interests and needs.” – blaming women again. I can’t speak for all mothers, but my wonderful mum gave me (perhaps because my father was a bit of a cad) very poor advice (basically “be a nice guy, be open with her”) on “what women want” in my teenage years. Tried that with my first deep relationship, it ended disastrously, but at least I learned by experience in my 20s.
“They could be having a lot more great sex if they just improved their lousy attitude.”
I agree 100%, but I think we may have different ideas about what “improving their attitude” involves (hint – doing more dishes is not the answer).
The vast majority of abortions occur in the blue states , so banning abortion in a few red states will have no discernible effect in the number of abortions in the US.
Almost half the abortions done in America occur in just 5 states NY, NJ, PA, Illinois and California.
So even if they outlaw abortion in a few red state and all the women in these states choose to have their babies to avoid going to another state for an abortion, it will have no measurable effect on black births in America.
No, I didn’t.
And then proceeds to make an explicitly comparative statement.
They are passionate enough about it that they are overtaking men (who are much more likely to choose an MBA program) in law school.
Buy my bridge.
At this point, they probably are.
The introduction of mandatory voting in the US would solve a lot of problems.
It would solve no problems. Limiting the issuance of postal ballots to those suffering an abiding impediment to voting in person would ameliorate a problem. (About 10% of the electorate have such an impediment). Moving the polling times to the week-end would ameliorate a problem. Expanding the number of precincts to 1 per 1,000 residents would ameliorate a problem. Having all the postal ballots in the mail to voters seven weeks before the election would ameliorate a problem; verification of returned ballots as they return would ameliorate a problem; invalidation of ballots returning after the polling day would ameliorate a problem; tabulating all validated returned ballots on the day of in-person balloting would ameliorate a problem. Checking voter registration cards against a menu of statewide databases and tossing the anomalous registrants into an inactive file (while informing them by post they are currently ineligible) would ameliorate a problem.
Note, just the act of filling out a brief form, mailing it in, and then appearing at the polls once in a quadrennium is sufficient to screen out 30% of the adult citizens in a typical community. A huge bloc of the adult citizen population is completely disengaged from public affairs. There’s no point in compelling them to vote.
Declaring a public holiday on general election day seems like a no-brainer. (In Ecuador they also have a ban on alcohol sales on election Day!)
The Supreme Court really ought to discover a few hitherto unknown laws to improve federal elections. States should be confined to making choices like the color of the ballot paper and the location of the polling stations.
Was reading an interesting blog yesterday that pointed out that even after the new law the number of abortions in Texas had not really gone down.
It appeared that the number has gone down, but the number of abortions in States neighboring Texas had skyrocketed. In addition to that there was an increase of people ordering abortion pills by mail from outside the United States, and an increase of people crossing the border into Mexico to obtain same or to obtain abortions.
I guess this is okay but what Texas really doesn’t want is an epidemic of backstreet surgical abortions under the auspices of organized crime, which is a likely outcome of making illegal a service for which there is a demand.
I had also read that Louisiana was planning to enact a law, if Roe versus Wade is rescinded, that would classify abortion as a homicide.
However I find it hard to think that states like California would agree to extradite allegedly homicidal abortion clients to Louisiana, and would probably tell the atavistic swamp creatures to eff off. If it goes to the Supreme Court we could see Dred Scott II, and we all know how that went!
States should be confined to making choices like the color of the ballot paper and the location of the polling stations.
Why? It’s the state governments attempting to improve ballot security while federal lawfare artists are working to sabotage them.
We already have a wretched excess of public holidays. If you cut the number down to four you’d have all the holidays people actually celebrate spontaneously in their own homes. One or two others have been celebrated by private civic associations in my lifetime, but not much anymore. Another actually popular event is Halloween, which does not incorporate school closures or time off work. The other ‘holidays’ were turned into three-day weekends fifty years ago and have lost any significance they ever had except as a hook for ad campaigns. The MLK holiday is an artifact of federal legislation that RR signed into law to finesse a PR problem. It would be ignored except that public sector workers get the day off and its the sort of thing schoolteachers and school administrators push.
Ca. 1855, Tuesday was commonly a market day in small towns and rural villages. No more. After the 1st world war, Saturday ceased to be a regular work day for most people. The election day should have been moved to Saturday around that time.
It is true that most office workers and school teachers in the US don’t have to work on Saturdays, but most businesses are open on Saturdays and in many industries such as hotels, restaurants, retail, supermarkets, sports of all kinds, prisons, hospitals, home health, nursing homes, law enforcement, airports, airlines, taxis, gas stations, utilities, people have to work.
It is not always easy to work 12 hours and then go to vote on an empty stomach.
You’re a silly person.
I see I was right. You’re belaboring this conversation specifically to play “gotcha.”
The truth is that I suspect men are just as passionate about justice as women, but business draws men in a way that it does not draw women. Hence, the predictable outcome: more men with MBAs and more women with JDs.
It’ll work out fine. You run the corps; we’ll run the courts. But don’t worry, you’ll still have plenty of eyes and ears on the inside.
No, it’s not that. It’s just that they’re not interested in marrying someone 5-10 years older than them.
I suspect I’m more pro-life than you, but laws like these are indeed ridiculous.
I suspect at least a few of Steve’s readers remember the late John J. Reilly, who ran “The Long View” blog before dying of a brain disease. He was a pro-life attorney, witer and critic.
He was very much pro-life but he favored taking a “soft power” approach to abortion. He once stated that “abortion should not be criminalized, it should be ended”. He believed abortion should be less a criminal matter and more a civil matter of medical ethics. A doctor who performed an abortion (or performed an abortion outside certain exceptions) would have their license revoked, or find themselves unable to apply for malpractice insurance etc.
He believed locking up doctors and abortion recipients only made martyrs for the pro-choice cause. He believed we should simply foster a regulatory and licensing climate where few or no doctors would be willing to perform an abortion.
Haven’t you already made a fool of yourself by shooting your mouth off about things you know nothing about? A noncustodial father’s right to visitation is nearly absolute. A woman cannot deprive a father of it unless he is not only unfit but dangerous.
Or it may lead to you having fewer rights than you already have. Indeed, for all your bitching, I have never heard one single constructive demand ever from you manosphere people, all I ever hear are vague allegations about “muh biased courts.” The fact that men have worse outcomes in family court does not prove disparate treatment. Women have worse outcomes in certain careers. That isn’t proof of disparate treatment, either.
Your male sense of entitlement is showing again. You think women should spend every last dime they have on the kids so you can pay less child support and buy a bigger house with your new wife or a new three-wheeler or whatever. Well tough shit it doesn’t work that way.
Money is fungible. Unless Mom is depriving the child of something that factored into the child support award, like private school tuition, karate dues, or whatever, she can spend her money how she wishes.
How do you know she lied? Were you there?
Of course, even if she did, he could have avoided this by following his Church’s teachings and not having sex with a woman he didn’t want to marry and have kids with. You’re just a true believin’ sexual revolutionary, aren’t you?
About 12% of the adult population regularly works Saturday. If you had a holiday, you’d still have to staff the hospitals and the police force, and the emergency services. You can have the polls open for four hours Friday evening and then 11 hours on Saturday, with ample time for tabulations.
I see I was right. You’re belaboring this conversation specifically to play “gotcha.”
No, I’m pointing out you’re playing stupid games and making unsupported assertions. Which you should stop doing.
If you’re going to make a racial case for abortion, pick on someone your own size. Laquisha, not her unborn child.
No real solutions or answers which is typical for the anti-abortion side. Unrealistic rhetoric about aborting adults.
Conservatives want to ban abortion for being immoral, ban government assistance to women and children, then wait for Randian Magical Unicorns to somehow fix everything.
When conservatives admit they don’t have a plan they yield to the left. They admit they have no answers or plans to pay for all the unwanted children. The position amounts to:
I have no idea so I’ll go stick my head in the ground.
The left doesn’t even have to argue their position. The classic conservative immediately yields the debate.
Conservatism is completely worthless. They can’t explain what exactly they are conserving and the entire ideology is wrapped in race denial. Somehow the Randian Magical Unicorns haven’t fixed Haiti even though in theory it should be a capitalist utopia.
This is a braindead ‘argument’. It would be like responding to someone who had objected to releasing prisoners because of prison overcrowding with “And how many prisons have you built?”
It’s not realistic for a single person to build a prison.
It is entirely realistic for conservative couples to adopt Black children….. and they don’t.
Conservatives tell us that adoption is the answer and then have their own children. They tell us that the state also isn’t responsible for unwanted children so that leaves….. ?????
Conservatives are complete hypocrites because they act as if they are protectors of the Black fetus and yet they have no interest in it once it is a child. In fact they have generally been against public health care for the mother while she is pregnant. So poor women are supposed to pull up their boot straps and become their own obgyn.
I will also note that when pro-life conservatives do adopt black babies, they are typically excoriated as ‘cucks’ by presumably the very same people in this comment thread who are advocating baby murder.
It is extremely rare for conservatives or liberals to adopt Black children. There is currently a surplus of them.
The conservatives I have seen adopt Black children are typically very wealthy and can afford a fully time nanny to watch all the children. The pick up the one Black child to show they are still Christian and not just another upper class family with a mcmansion.
I have never heard one single constructive demand ever from you manosphere people, all I ever hear are vague allegations about “muh biased courts.”
1. End no fault divorce.
2. Make it a rebuttable presumption that the custody of children is awarded the defendant in divorce suits.
3. Calculate child-support obligations on the basis of actual income, not ‘imputed’ income.
4. Enforce visitation agreements with the same range of brutality that child-support obligations are enforced.
5. Make it a rebuttable presumption that plaintiffs do not receive alimony.
==
1. End homosexual pseudogamy.
2. Limit permission to adopt to (1) conventional married couples of (2) youths under the age of 10.
==
Make abortion illegal almost without exception.
==
1. End the applicability of employment discrimination law to any private party other than a natural monopoly.
2. Require recruitment and promotion in public employment and in natural monopolies be regulated by impersonal examinations, with no institutional biases in favor of any ascribed group.
3. Allow activities in work places which map to harassment and extortion in criminal law to be defined as tortious. Be as precise as possible about circumstances in which the corporation is liable in addition to particular persons.
4. End anti-discrimination law applicable to rental housing.
5. Limit the applicability of anti-discrimination law in service provision to public utilities and to the provision of shipping, transportations, food, fuel and lodgings in small towns and in the countryside.
==
1. Regulate admission to public institutions of higher education by examination results. Period. Require that private institutions as well as public issue audited statements on the demographics of their students, faculty, administration and staff (stock and flow).
2. Limit degree programs in the arts and sciences (and concentration programs within degree programs) to those subjects delineated in a glossary enacted by the state legislature. Not in the glossary: any victimology programs. This would apply to pubic and private institutions.
3. Replace the baccalaureate degree with specialized courses of study, typically under 60 credits.
4. Limit occupational schools it be permissible to erect subsidiary to institutions of higher education to those specified in a glossary enacted by the state legislature. Not in the glossary: schools of social work. In the glossary, but defined in a detailed fashion so as to be radically different from the current order: teachers’ colleges. Assigned by law to hands-on diploma programs run by the state museum, state library, or a licensee: programs in library administration, archives, and curatorial work.
5. As a consequence, recruit child-protective services and the like from the ranks of police officers / sheriff’s deputies, nurses, and junior grade psychologists and then assign them to a series of modes cross-training programs.
==
1. Limit the discretion judges have in criminal cases to whether or not to accept a plea agreement. Otherwise, the sentencing formula is specified in the statute. Sentences contingent on factual determinations would require sentencing hearings in which the final ruling on the facts would be made by a panel consisting of a judge and two assessors. The assessors would be drawn from a roll of professionals whose expertise was apposite to the case: pharmacy technicians, occupational therapists, physicians, surgeons, &.c
2. Incorporate into the penal code formulae to apply the standard sentences to defendants between the ages of 9 and 25.
3. Have the state penal system be strongly age-graded.
4. Have factual determinations in all criminal cases be made by municipal courts and superior penal courts. Limit family courts to (a) custody decisions regarding defendants under age 9, who have not been punished and (b) custody decisions and reporting for defendants between ages 9 and 18, which apply coincident with and after their punishment is applied.
5. Assign the function of local policing to county government or multi-county consortia. Increase the staffing of local police by about 60%, and deploy them optimally.
==
1. Have the sheriff’s department set up day detention centers for incorrigible youth under the age of 14. The centers would have their own motor pool and fixed costs would be incorporated into county budgets. Public schools would pay a capitation to handle the variable costs of students so remanded. In all-charter voucher-funded systems, reporting to the day detention center would be required for youths under 14, with the variable costs financed by the voucher. Youths over 14 deemed unsuitable for schooling due to behavioral issues would be left to the labor market and the penal system.
2. Eliminate general interest public schools in core cities in favor of voucher-funded all-charter systems.
3. Allow suburban systems to replace public schools with all-charter voucher-funded system by exercising an option in a referendum.
4. Provide opt-outs for those parents wishing to use conventional private schools or to homeschool, in which their school taxes would be partially refunded by the use of formulae.
5. For youths subject to joint-custody agreements, assign discretion over primary schooling to mothers, secondary schooling to fathers.
6. Institute state regents examinations for quality control. Each youngster in the state would be registered for a particular examination series. Their registration would be a function of their performance on examinations to date, but would have some elements of parental choice. The curriculum of local schools would be influenced (not commanded) by the content of examinations. The basic education series (reading, writing, arithmetic, elementary algebra, and the fundamentals of American history, geography, and civics) would be given at four paces for all suitable students. Students not English-proficient, students deemed incorrigible, and students with low absorptive capacity would be given special diagnostic examinations. Secondary examinations would consist of academic subjects (arranged in a fast pace and a slow pace option) and vocational subjects (given at a single pace). For students who do not finish their basic education by age 14, there would be special remedial courses with associated examinations. There would be no state-wide curricular mandates, but some sorts of instruction would be deemed to violate the modesty of students, and be deemed tortious or criminal.
==
1. On a household’s general income tax liability thus: (a) have a broad and constitutionally fixed definition of taxable income, simple as you can make it; (b) have a precise definition of the households membership, with the signatories of the return counting as 1 each; juvenile dependents counting as somewhere between 0 and 1 each depending on custody and support obligations (encoded in family court determinations); incompetent adult dependents calculated similarly; and young adult dependents (18-21) counting as between 0 and 0.6 depending on the weighted average of how they counted between ages 15 and 18; (c) apply a flat percentage to taxable income, then subtract the household’s payroll and specialty income tax payments (assessed by the authority levying the general income tax, not some subsidiary authority), then subtract a dollar value credit for each member of the household. If the result is a positive number, that’s your liability. If it’s a negative number, the absolute value thereof may be what you’re due as a rebate. (d) compare the absolute value to the caps applicable to your household. If the absolute value is less than that cap, the absolute value is your rebate. If not, the cap value is your rebate; (e) if no signatory to the return qualifies as elderly or disabled, the cap is a function of your earned income; if all signatories are elderly or disabled, the cap is a function of personal income per capita in your state or territory; if one is elderly / disabled and the other is not, the cap is the average of these two values.
2. Limit open-ended cash doles to the elderly and the disabled; term limited cash doles would be in the form of unemployment compensation, workman’s compensation, and survivor’s benefits, and would have a term adapted to program.
3. Limit issuance of publicly-financed insurance, vouchers, subsidies, and direct provision to certain problem markets: medical care, l/t care, schooling, legal services, and shipping and transportation.
4. As a consequence, eliminate the following programs: TANF, SNAP and other nutritional subsidies; public housing, housing vouchers, &c.; and subsidies to utility bills. The latter are all frequently replenished goods and services and their consumption is sensitive to considerations of amenity.
==
Pass a bill of attainder to exile Rosie.
Was reading an interesting blog yesterday that pointed out that even after the new law the number of abortions in Texas had not really gone down.
Patient aren’t you?
I think Judge Barrett and her husband have a handsome income, but I’ve not seen any evidence that they are wealthy. I can think of two families I’ve known off the top of my head who adopted inter-racially. In the one family, their income came from a small printing company they’d founded. In the other, I think the husband was a hospital administrator with a sketchy work history; the mother worked for United Way.
Whether you or I trust the data isn’t the point. Rosie demanded it, so I supplied it.
Foreign interference in US elections, not from Moscow or Peking, but from Chinatown, Toronto. They probably keep chopsticks in the breakroom for all the stir-fry they order in.
Well, there you go. Something a person can actually respond to.
Fine. Don’t be surprised if men have even worse outcomes in court than they already do. We all know who’s misconduct causes divorce (you know, the people who commit all the crimes — men).
No. Since we’ve abolished NFD, the person found to be at fault in the destruction of the family can be the one to suffer separation from the children.
No. You don’t get to sabotage your own income to spite your ex-wife and children.
They already do. A woman who fails to comply with a visitation order can be held in contempt and put in jail. Continued noncompliance can result in loss of custody.
No. You have no legitimate interest that would justify this draconian measure.
No. You have no legitimate interest that would justify this draconian measure.
Art Deco, for one,welcomes his new Asian overlords.
No. That would create an unnecessary risk of abuse against relatively powerless victims. There is no evidence of any need for such measures. If you want men accused of sexual harassment to get special protection from workplace abuse, that protection should be applied universally with an abolition of the employment-at-will doctrine.
Ok.
I’m done for now. I may continue this post, at whim.
You should really stop projecting and take your own advice.
Start shit with me -> Get humiliated.
Don’t feel bad. You’re in good company.
In which case, you would have set a terrible precedent that makes a mockery of the rule of law, all without one single baby being brought back to life.
We all know who’s misconduct causes divorce (you know, the people who commit all the crimes — men).
Misconduct is not typically a motor of divorce actions, Rosie. You can consult the sociological literature on the point if you care to.
vThey already do. A woman who fails to comply with a visitation order can be held in contempt and put in jail. Continued noncompliance can result in loss of custody.
In your imagination only.
No. You have no legitimate interest that would justify this draconian measure.
The legitimate interest is in not allowing perverted gynecologists to dismember human beings. This isn’t that difficult.
No. You have no legitimate interest that would justify this draconian measure.
Rosie fancies freedom of contract is ‘draconian’.
Art Deco, for one,welcomes his new Asian overlords.
Ethnic Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, VietNamese, and Thai collectively account for about 2.5% of the population. They’re not known to have a peculiar affinity for public employment. Looking forward to you making the case for eliminating occupational licensing examinations for physicians and architects because it will lead to too many slants working in those trades.
No. That would create an unnecessary risk of abuse against relatively powerless victims. There is no evidence of any need for such measures. If you want men accused of sexual harassment to get special protection from workplace abuse, that protection should be applied universally with an abolition of the employment-at-will doctrine.
Your reading comprehension is quite poor.
I’m done for now. I may continue this post, at whim.
I’m waiting with bated breath.
Start shit with me -> Get humiliated.
I’m waiting.
You know, Reg, it’s one thing to try to pass off anecdotes and conjecture as real evidence, it’s quite another to tell outright lies. I didn’t demand any such data from you.
Indeed, I have never disputed that women are more likely than men to vote for Democrats, whereas you lot just keep voting for the GOP, over and over again, with no reasonable hope of them actually doing anything for you. Maybe if you had played a little hard to get, like White women, the Republicans might have felt obligated to, you know, do something for White people.
Look. I’m sorry but that is not what they assumed. The wording of the abstract could be interpreted that way, but that is not in fact what the study assumed. When they said they were going to “analyze the impact of gender on citation to articles,” they meant that they were going to examine the data to determine whether, all other things being equal, an article written by a woman was less likely to be cited.
Interestingly, they determined that it was not. Effectively, they concluded the very opposite of what you are saying they assumed: that is, that gender doesn’t seem to be a barrier to getting cited for women legal scholars. Rather, if anything, it is the opposite.
This is a concession by the authors that women legal scholars get treated equitably and are not in fact discriminated against. I would think that, as a man, you would have found that statement vindication. However, since you refuse to reconsider your initial hasty remarks, based on admittedly confusing language in the abstract, you are unable to see what the study authors are trying to say. Shame.
There is no sociological literature to that effect. People file for NFD because it’s easier and cheaper.
You expect us all to believe that 35 year old women file for divorce from perfectly good husbands because they think they can do better than the guy that married them when they were 27. That’s retarded.
If and when we get rid of no-fault divorce, you are in for a nasty surprise when the ugly truth comes out.
You have no idea what you’re talking about. The law presumes that contact with both parents is in the child’s best interests. Therefore, if a parent tries to obstruct visitation, the court may decide that the more cooperative parent should be awarded custody. You can educate yourself all about it here.
https://cordellcordell.com/2022/enforcing-family-court-orders-with-contempt-actions/#:~:text=Consequences%20of%20contempt,-Contempt%20can%20include&text=These%20include%20fines%2C%20compensatory%20visitation,make%20up%20for%20the%20violation.
Question-begging.
Yes, it often is, to wit:
When it is used to justify paying children, or adults for that matter, starvation wages.
When it is used to justify sexual quid pro quo.
When it is used to arbitrarily interfere with women’s right to earn a living.
I could go on but you get the idea.
Apparently, that’s enough.
https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2019/03/stuyvesant-admissions-controversy-fact-or-fiction/585460/
all other things being equal, an article written by a woman was less likely to be cited.
How do they operationalize controls?
You’re pathetic.
There is no sociological literature to that effect.
Ye Gods, there are sociologista who make their career publishing on family relations, including compiling surveys and personal interviews. Norval Glenn was one, Judith Wallerstein another, Andrew Cherlin another, and Bradford Wilcox another. Journal of Marriage and Family is entirely devoted to such studies. It’s amusing to speculate whether or not statements like this from you are outbursts, exercises in gamesmanship, or just manifestations of articulate stupidity.
You expect us all to believe that 35 year old women file for divorce from perfectly good husbands because they think they can do better than the guy that married them when they were 27. That’s retarded.
Its happened 3x in my family in the last 12 years. And, of course, I’ve read the literature and you haven’t.
Question-begging.
The term ‘begs the question’ does not mean what you fancy it means.
When it is used to justify paying children, or adults for that matter, starvation wages.
Neither the children nor the adults are compelled to take the offer. Employers are seldom price-makers in the labor market. When an employer and an employee find each other, a job is created. For it to be a voluntary transaction, it has to improve the welfare of both parties. The parties have different objects, of course. The employer is not the patron of the employee. He is so only when you have in-house apprenticeships and terms of indenture. Johnny Tremaine was set eight generations back.
When it is used to justify sexual quid pro quo.
That’s not draconian, either. It’s corrupt, which is different.
When it is used to arbitrarily interfere with women’s right to earn a living.
No one’s interfering with your right to earn a living. They’re telling you they’re not going to hire you. You not being hired by me is not properly a cause of action. It’s only in the post-war period anyone thought to make it so.
Apparently, that’s enough.
Enough for what?
You either use examinations or it collapses into patronage.
I would more or less agree with Reilly. Abortion is undesirable, but driving it underground is worse.
The ideal thing would be that so many alternatives would be available that surgical abortion would be a rarity.
I do not like the case of it being either a question of “pro-life” or “pro-choice” as both slogans seem misleading and lacking in nuance.
I was reading on another blog where a commenter who said he was an MD said he was opposed to abortion because he believed in the sanctity of human life, but I commented that the whole question of sanctity was a religious one, and the US is supposed to be a secular Republic.
From outlawing abortion on the grounds that human life is sanctified is only a step away from outlawing male masturbation for the same reason. On the other hand, human beings are just glorified apes.
It is not so long ago, certainly in my lifetime, that the Pope maintained that sex should only be used for reproductive purposes, and that contraception was a sin. Certainly not so long ago that condoms were illegal in Ireland.
In any case about 1/3 of pregnancies abort spontaneously, often before the putative mother is aware that she is pregnant, so the theological implications of that are too hard for me to get my head around.
On the other hand, it seems to me that the issue of a woman having a right to choose what to do with her own body is also a false dichotomy, because being pregnant is an anomalous exception to normal medical conditions, and a fetus is not a body part.
Giving birth and having children goes to the core of what it is to be a human being and the purpose of life, so seems odd to have rules about it made by judges whose law school education may not have prepared them for this.
Nonsense. And I’m not interested in bringing dead babies back to life. Making baby murder illegal and punishing baby murderers for murdering babies would diminish the use of elective late-term baby murder as a form of birth control. Your average airhead woman who gets an elective late term abortion is inspired by social narratives that the baby in her stomach is actually just “a clump of cells” and lowest-common-denominator moral relativism espoused by an army of Michelle Wolfe types.
A clear message–that baby murder is murder, that doctors who murder babies will be treated as baby- murderers, and that there will be consequences for mothers who murder their own babies–would significantly shrink the number of babies that get murdered.
“A lot of people think that even if you’re allowed to get abortions, it should only be for a very few, specific reasons. Well, I think you should be able to get an abortion for any reason you want. If it’s a big deal for you, it’s a big deal. If it’s not, it’s not. Both are correct. My abortion, not a big deal for me. I left work, I got an abortion, I drank half a LaCroix, and then I went back to work. Not a big deal, and I also think a pretty good advertisement for LaCroix.” –M. Wolfe, comedian/philosopher.
LOL, says the guy capable of typing a mere four words. Which articulate nothing except your mental density and inability to comprehend. I have no doubt you don’t get much great sex.
I would more or less agree with Reilly. Abortion is undesirable, but driving it underground is worse.
What’s wrong with driving it underground?
Why not? Women deserve blame for such things and given I have three brothers I have witnessed what I described first-hand for a very long time. (I also had a father that was rather a “king of the castle” type….which might translate to: bully.)
I also have female friends whom I have often watched indulge their sons in compliant, servant-like ways. Bad precedent and only winds up causing him problems later, as I described.
No, speaking of lousy attitudes, I was more referring to the dismissive absurdity of Mike’s comment to my post. Women deal with that type of dreck ALL their lives from both men and women.
Dishes? I can do dishes, so can you. I can also chop wood but, I would prefer that you do that. So, how about you chop plenty of wood, open a bottle of wine, then we can build a crackling fire and I figure nice things can happen from there. See, YetAnon, that’s what a willing and helpful attitude can produce – good times!
The abortion issue is so absurdly over-wrought while most people have barely a shred of comprehensive, factual info about it and can’t seem to consider it except in the most myopic, hysterical, black and white ways possible. They’ve been trained by politicians, the media and churches (in some cases) to “think” about it so narrowly and emotionally and they have blindly complied. Frankly, your comment is squarely in that category.
That tells everything. That you simply decide that women are airheads and that it’s easy to make that decision. Unreal. That you speak about late-term abortions which barely exist. Please provide both stats and the circumstances about those and then we can have an informed discussion.
That you don’t speak about the airheaded male who could have simply worn a condom or pulled out thereby preventing the whole problem. Talk about brainless, that would be he.
Anyhow, you can put me, my Mother and siblings in your ‘murders’ category because we pulled the life support on my Dad causing him to die many months, maybe a year or more before he would have. We killed him. I expect we’ll be doing the same to my very elderly Mother in the next year or two – not give her life support that could save her when she falls ill and is hospitalized.
People do similar all over America everyday – they make the specific decisions that result in someone’s death – an actual living person, not a potential one. You must be utterly horrified to be surrounded by so many murderers! I won’t even go into Fed Gov routinely sending thousands of Americans off to die in wars of choice, based on lies, and for profit. Have you protested those ugly murders?
Btw, Michelle Wolfe is an idiot. You just embarrassed and discredited yourself by using her as a source for anything.
Sorry to ask a question you can’t answer.
Nonsense! The beauty of the iSteve community is the chance to learn new things and clash ideas in an oratory arena. I remember taking various political science courses from a wonderful professor in college. He was a practicing lawyer with good legal experience in the corporate world. The class would study various legal cases determined by the US Supreme Court. But he never touched on Roe v. Wade. I distinctly remember it being brought up in some discussion once. He offered to discuss Roe v. Wade only during his office hours in his office. (I dearly wish I took him up on that offer.) Now, think about that. This single legal case concerned a tenured professor so much that he’d only discuss it in private. (Plausible deniability, hearsay all that jazz.) No other legal case has that kind of political power in our contemporary era. I don’t think even the pro-slavery decisions or even Plessy v. Ferguson had that kind of cultural/societal/political “oomph” in their respective eras. You can’t have a clear and open discussion of Roe v. Wade without the chance of someone going bonkers. No small wonder this court draft that overturns Roe v. Wade is the first “leak” in the US Supreme Court’s history. So yes, thanks Rosie for enlightening me for free and not asking 40K in tuition.
I thought that was the beauty of desperate impact. It doesn’t matter if the test is intentionally racist or not. If blacks score lower on it compared to whites it is therefore a racist test. I guess divorce court is sexist.
She later told him she lied (years later.) She liked him that much. Then he told me and I tried not to laugh.
Isn’t that the mirror image of the “that loose skank with the short skirt was asking for trouble” statement that got feminists so riled up?
Unsafe abortion is a leading – but preventable – cause of maternal deaths and morbidities. It can lead to physical and mental health complications and social and financial burdens for women, communities and health systems.
Leads to women getting septicaemia and then not seeking medical help until it is too late, so they die, perhaps leaving other children as orphans.
Is she a raging pro-abortionist?
If she shares any ideological underpinnings with her husband why would she leak to Politico?
Wow, what a showcase of trite, hysterical anti-life blather. Thank you, I couldn’t have written a parody funnier than your comment.
“That you simply decide that women are airheads and that it’s easy to make that decision.”
I was referring to women who are airheads. Like you.
“you speak about late-term abortions”
Yes, that’s exactly what I’m talking about. (This was the most focused part of your comment. You deserve a pat on the head.)
“which barely exist.”
That’s a highly subjective statement, but, great, then let’s get rid of elective late term abortion murders, since they hardly exist anyway! Thank you. I’m so glad we could agree on something!
“Btw, Michelle Wolfe is an idiot. You just embarrassed and discredited yourself by using her as a source for anything.”
Your emotionalist rantings will always come back to haunt you. On April 28, 2018, Wolf was the featured entertainer at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Because of all the political comedians in America, she best reflected the values of the powerful mainstream media. The New Yorker called it “the most consequential monologue so far of the Donald Trump era.”
From that most consequential monologue: “[Pence] thinks abortion is murder. Which, first of all, don’t knock it ‘til you try it—and when you do try it, really knock it. You know, you’ve really got to get that baby out of there.
***
Murder notes:
“It should be noted that varying definitions of medical necessity for abortion have ricocheted along a continuum with consideration of a “broad range of physical, emotional, psychological, demographic, and familial factors relevant to a woman’s well-being” at one extreme and “conditions which place a woman in danger of death” at the other. However, while the occasional politician or news reporter will still indicate that late-term abortions are most often performed in the case of “severe fetal anomalies” or to “save the woman’s life,” the trajectory of the peer-reviewed research literature has been obvious for decades: most late-term abortions are elective, done on healthy women with healthy fetuses, and for the same reasons given by women experiencing first trimester abortions. The Guttmacher Institute has provided a number of reports over 2 decades which have identified the reasons why women choose abortion, and they have consistently reported that childbearing would interfere with their education, work, and ability to care for existing dependents; would be a financial burden; and would disrupt partner relationships.”
“A more recent Guttmacher study focused on abortion after 20 weeks of gestation and similarly concluded that women seeking late-term abortions were not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment.”
Late-Term Abortion and Medical Necessity: A Failure of Science – James Studnicki, 2019
Yr Welcome. 😉
(Sigh) Fine, let me break it down.
The pregnant woman has full authority over the life and death of the child. She doesn’t need written permission from the biological father to continue or terminate the pregnancy. Isn’t that the basis of Roe v. Wade? “My body, my choice” equates to her choice, not anyone else’s. That power is an example of ultimate authority. (Buck v. Bell might still be on the books, but when was the last time the state ordered someone sterilized?)
But will that authority be continuously overruled by the woman? Unless the woman has tried to sell the child for drugs or some other ghastly endeavor most family courts strongly favor the woman. That isn’t contested fact.
https://nypost.com/2019/04/08/mom-who-sold-kids-to-settle-drug-debt-gets-6-years-behind-bars/
Oh dear Real World how I love it when people prove my point. Our beloved Rosie made a similar argument. Both carried the same moral principle that as if women simply didn’t wear mini skirts they wouldn’t get raped. It takes two to tango (unless it is rape) and both parties should share equal responsibility and blame from the potential fallout of sexual intercourse. But our current system of laws and culture provide the equivalent of tactical nukes to sociopathic gold-diggers like Brittany Renner and Amber Heard.
Rumors abounded that PJ Washington (Renner’s ex-boyfriend) had to pay a whopping \$200,000 in child support. While an extreme example, it does demonstrate the real favoritism of women over men in society.
https://www.jordanthrilla.com/post/does-pj-washington-have-to-pay-brittany-renner-200k-a-month-in-child-support-checks/
I have to say I absolutely love the iSteve/Unz community! Every single commentator is a gem to be cherished. You really can’t find this sharp humor and wit anywhere else! 🤣🤣🤣
Unsafe abortion is a leading – but preventable – cause of maternal deaths and morbidities.
Actually, sepsis from abortions was claiming about 40 lives per year in this country prior to 1973. Dr. Bernard Nathanson was promoting the idea at the time that 10,000 lives a year were lost due to illegal abortions. He later admitted he’d invented the figure out of whole cloth.