Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 1001 posts

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#571

Post by ehsankia »

noslenwerdna wrote: post #447
nus07 wrote: post #391

I fail to see what moderates can do in a two party system where gerrymandering is so heavily done that often Democrats have to win 3-1 to control any majority. At this point I see it as a fight between rich landowners+business owners+religion vs all the rest of the people . For a country where political lobbying and donations to effect legal decisions is common , I do not expect judgements to ever be fair. The battle…

Where is gerrymandering so bad that Democrats have to win 3-1? This doesn't represent the experience of the median voter.

Forget 3-1, what about 65-1?

Legislation needs to pass both Senate and the House, and in the senate, someone from a state like Wyoming has 65x more voting power than someone living in California.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#573

Post by fuzzer37 »

umvi wrote: post #470
lawn wrote: post #52

There's this belief that society always moves in a "forward/upward" directory, where we become more advanced, more enlightened and more moral. But this is not the case and sometimes we regress.

This assumes there is a universally agreed upon definition of "upward" and "forward". Religious people would argue things like abortion rights and pride celebrations are the opposite of upward and forward progress since they enable and encourage what they believe to be sin.

No post body was provided.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#574

Post by CuriouslyC »

umvi wrote: post #470
lawn wrote: post #52

There's this belief that society always moves in a "forward/upward" directory, where we become more advanced, more enlightened and more moral. But this is not the case and sometimes we regress.

This assumes there is a universally agreed upon definition of "upward" and "forward". Religious people would argue things like abortion rights and pride celebrations are the opposite of upward and forward progress since they enable and encourage what they believe to be sin.

These are the same people who think the world is 6000 years old, the first man was made out of mud and the first woman was made from the rib of the first man. They're clearly insane so their view of forward should be thrown in the garbage.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#575

Post by refurb »

kdtsh wrote: post #426
screye wrote: post #330

I'll be the begrudging devils advocate for a decision that is sure to have devastating consequences for poor women in red states. It is good for unelected bodies like the Supreme Court to allow such dividing issues be figured out democratically. The US house has bled power to the other 3 institutions and of them, the judiciary is the least democratic. Ofc, my support for this change assumes that this Supreme Court wi…

> I'll be the begrudging devils advocate There are plenty of devils out there, they can advocate for themselves. This ruling can be as technically correct as anyone likes, but it is disastrous in every conceivable way. All this ultimately demonstrates is how feeble rights - real, natural rights - are under the American conception of federal constitutional rights. Edit: there are a lot of people who are clearly very c…

No post body was provided.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#576

Post by dpbriggs »

kdtsh wrote: post #426
screye wrote: post #330

I'll be the begrudging devils advocate for a decision that is sure to have devastating consequences for poor women in red states. It is good for unelected bodies like the Supreme Court to allow such dividing issues be figured out democratically. The US house has bled power to the other 3 institutions and of them, the judiciary is the least democratic. Ofc, my support for this change assumes that this Supreme Court wi…

> I'll be the begrudging devils advocate There are plenty of devils out there, they can advocate for themselves. This ruling can be as technically correct as anyone likes, but it is disastrous in every conceivable way. All this ultimately demonstrates is how feeble rights - real, natural rights - are under the American conception of federal constitutional rights. Edit: there are a lot of people who are clearly very c…

That edit is a nice but ultimately impotent statement.

What matters is the mechanics of how we're in this situation. They're complicated and thankfully this decision doesn't mean an outright ban for all Americans. Providing access for the rest is what should be discussed, over shaking fists and platitudes.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#577

Post by xdennis »

nabla9 wrote: post #265
lesstyzing wrote: post #154

Looking at this ruling and the one a few days ago on arms - could someone explain to me why they're wrong legally? FYI I'm not American and personally am in favour of legalised abortion + severe gun restrictions. My understanding is these rulings are both based on the constitution. The one on guns seems really straightforward: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of th…

There is a legal principle that once the court bedsides something and it becomes established law, you don't overturn the previous decision lightly. Roe & Wade is based on the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Roe vs Wade did not happen in vacuum, it's part of a larger understanding of the Constitution that recognizes a right to privacy and recognizes that there are unwritten…

This is just scaremongering for funding. Nobody is trying to ban interracial marriage.

Roe v Wade was controversial since it was decided. It was never settled precedent. People have tried to overturn it from the start.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#578

Post by afavour »

screye wrote: post #330

I'll be the begrudging devils advocate for a decision that is sure to have devastating consequences for poor women in red states. It is good for unelected bodies like the Supreme Court to allow such dividing issues be figured out democratically. The US house has bled power to the other 3 institutions and of them, the judiciary is the least democratic. Ofc, my support for this change assumes that this Supreme Court wi…

> If the voting majority truly cares about access to abortion then we will hopefully see enough democratic traction to give them the mandate needed.

I’m sorry but this feels entirely divorced from reality. The nature of the senate, the continued erosion of voting rights… we’re not going to see democratic traction in a system that actively opposes it.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#579

Post by codeguro »

kdtsh wrote: post #426
screye wrote: post #330

I'll be the begrudging devils advocate for a decision that is sure to have devastating consequences for poor women in red states. It is good for unelected bodies like the Supreme Court to allow such dividing issues be figured out democratically. The US house has bled power to the other 3 institutions and of them, the judiciary is the least democratic. Ofc, my support for this change assumes that this Supreme Court wi…

> I'll be the begrudging devils advocate There are plenty of devils out there, they can advocate for themselves. This ruling can be as technically correct as anyone likes, but it is disastrous in every conceivable way. All this ultimately demonstrates is how feeble rights - real, natural rights - are under the American conception of federal constitutional rights. Edit: there are a lot of people who are clearly very c…

No post body was provided.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#580

Post by cryptonector »

bambax wrote: post #155

The fact that the same institution (SCOTUS), reading the same text (US Constitution) could conclude that abortion is a right, then isn't, tells us much of what we need to know about said institution, text... and certainly "historicism" as well. It's all arbitrary; clever and well-read people spending a lot of time justifying and rationalizing their predjudice.

Yeah, it's a bunch of humans with opinions.
Post reply on HN