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

751–760 of 1001 posts

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#751

Post by president »

49531 wrote: post #677
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…

> My personal opinion is that polarization has pushed both sides to be completely antagonistic towards each other. This opinion is about as uninformed as it can be. Currently the US is run by "moderate" Democrats, and extremist Republicans; the Right cries wolf every time the moderates do anything, and the moderates capitulate. If we look at American politics through your lens it makes zero sense. We no longer live i…

Both sides believe they are the moderates and the other are the radicals. Until you zoom out and stop playing tribal politics, you will realize both sides are batshit insane and nothing really matters except being civil to one another and trying to connect with others in ways other than politics.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#752

Post by lovich »

teakettle42 wrote: post #562
ausbah wrote: post #441

saying "SCOTUS didn't ban abortion" is at best useless semantic formality and at worst plain incorrect a number of state have laws that the automatically make abortion illegal as soon as Roe was overturned, those are now enacted. furthermore, the case behind this ruling was dealing with a state law the effectively outlawed abortions, despite previous precedent ruling against it. this rule is simply enabling such beha…

It’s neither a semantic formality nor incorrect. The Supreme Court returned the question to the legislative branch. That’s it. I happen to think abortion should be legal. I also think it’s pretty clear that, when one side believes abortion to be a totally unrestricted right despite never appearing in the constitution, while simultaneously arguing for severely restricting and even eliminating a specifically enumerated…

> …when one side believes abortion to be a totally unrestricted right despite never appearing in the constitution…

Bud there’s a whole amendment about how if it’s not mentioned in the constitution it’s assumed you have the right.

> This will force people to talk to each other. To convince each other. To work together. That’s ultimately a healthier outcome, even if things are a little worse while we figure things out.

What part of this ruling makes that outcome happen?

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#753

Post by sterlind »

cmollis wrote: post #525

When I was a child in the Catholic Church (70s and 80s) there was NEVER any political discussion that entered into the service (“..render unto caesar what is caesar’s..” or ‘separation of church and state’. Or, more probable, perhaps it was felt that it simply was not the forum for present-day politics. I don’t know). Since lapsed, A few years ago I was encouraged by a priest, as he enjoyed his fourth old fashioned,…

this was masterminded in large part by Leonard Leo of the Federalist Society. he's Catholic, and the upper echelons of the organization are virtually all Catholic, and has enjoyed tremendous influence - even providing Bush and Trump with shortlists of Justices to pick from.

unsurprisingly, the majority of Justices are now Catholic - Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor (liberal, not a FedSoc pick), Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#754

Post by light_hue_1 »

fulvioterzapi wrote: post #686
cmollis wrote: post #525

When I was a child in the Catholic Church (70s and 80s) there was NEVER any political discussion that entered into the service (“..render unto caesar what is caesar’s..” or ‘separation of church and state’. Or, more probable, perhaps it was felt that it simply was not the forum for present-day politics. I don’t know). Since lapsed, A few years ago I was encouraged by a priest, as he enjoyed his fourth old fashioned,…

> What I witnessed was no less than a 45 minute diatribe on the dangers of abortion, casting various aspersions (ad hominem) on any political leader not on board with new political agenda of the Catholic Church. A typical Catholic Mass lasts less than one hour. Most of the Mass follows a fixed, prescribed set of prayers and readings, that have nothing to do with politics. In the middle there's a sermon, that usually…

> New? Like it or not, the position of the Catholic Church on abortion has been extraordinarily consistent through the centuries.

That's not even remotely true!

For the vast majority of the history of the Catholic Church early term abortion was acceptable. It was only the 1588 that it was outlawed, and that didn't last long, only a few years. Another ban was instituted in 1869.

At the timescale of the Catholic Church, the current extremist position on abortions is extremely recent. Far less established as precedent than say Roe was.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#755

Post by spacemadness »

d23 wrote: post #111
qalmakka wrote: post #64

This is the final chapter of a decade-long saga which basically boils down to the Republicans obtaining votes from Evangelicals and other Christian denominations in order to give them what they wanted. In exchange for that, they would use their power to cut taxes, regulations and let the riches become richer and richer at the expense of everyone else. I hope that whomever supported this ruling is happy right now, and…

Christianity’s true face has been shown. I’ve rarely seen it to have anything to do with the teachings of Christ.

This isn’t really Christianity collectively. Lots of what’s happening in America is due to an American heretical brand of Christianity with its own motives outside the teachings of Christ.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#756

Post by runarberg »

bko wrote: post #647
cmollis wrote: post #525

When I was a child in the Catholic Church (70s and 80s) there was NEVER any political discussion that entered into the service (“..render unto caesar what is caesar’s..” or ‘separation of church and state’. Or, more probable, perhaps it was felt that it simply was not the forum for present-day politics. I don’t know). Since lapsed, A few years ago I was encouraged by a priest, as he enjoyed his fourth old fashioned,…

The framing of this debate is often religious, but it doesn't have to be. The fact is that at some point between inception and time of delivery, the fetus becomes a person and has some rights. Most people agree that it's probably not inception and it's probably not the moment before birth. So the question is when does this happen? In that way, the pro-life crowd has at least a closer framing of the issue. The pro-cho…

> The fact is that at some point between inception and time of delivery

I don’t think this is that complicated of an issue. The moment when the parent decides they want to keep the baby, is the moment when the fetus becomes a person. That precise time is when the fetus has someone that loves and cares for it, holds attachment towards it, etc.

However if the parent carrying the child is not allowed to make that decision form them self, then this becomes unnecessarily complicated.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#757

Post by i5Aj7PXGjUPy »

mattnewton wrote: post #457
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…

Where you see delegating to the states, I see a minority (less than 30% of Americans agree with this) enforcing social views on the majority- and it will not stop here. Other things the Supreme Court has blocked state law using the same logic as roe v Wade (due process of the 14th amendment[0]) on are blocking contraception bans (grisewald), overturning anti-sodomy laws (lawrence), and giving equal protection to gay…

> Where you see delegating to the states, I see a minority (less than 30% of Americans agree with this)

Provide the source and the question that was asked on it. The majority of Americans think it should be up to the states, whether the state is for or against

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#758

Post by ncr100 »

vitruvian_man wrote: post #341
InTheArena wrote: post #188

Separate abortion from Roe v. Wade. The big challenge has been that Roe v. Wade was horribly decided. Even RBG thought so. Roe v wade gave the Supreme Court the right to make law without reference to any text in the constitution. Casey tried to change the justification but it still was a disaster. Sadly it is far from the only time the Supreme Court has made things up out of whole cloth that has had massive societal…

While I'm a strong supporter of abortion rights, I agree with this logic. If anything, this will force conservatives to solidify and clarify their views on abortion which will allow voters to decide where they land on the spectrum of abortion rights. Whereas before, conservatives just deferred to "abortion bad. look at supreme court decision". Also, is it not the case that most Americans support some abortion rights?…

The law is (was) not perfect.

The distribution of Americans who support the right to abortion is also not even.

In States where the distribution of "anti" outweighs "pro" all citizens will lose the right. So human rights are lessened in the United States.

It is a tragic day.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#759

Post by imchillyb »

> The issue reverts to the states, many of which have taken steps to curtail or ban abortions.

Sounds like people need to get off their asses and vote now. Voting is more important now that it's ever been before. It's up to individual states how they want to treat abortion and related services.

This ruling isn't an end to anything, unless the populace doesn't care enough to grass-roots the effort to change their state's laws.

Now, go vote. Voting is the only say we have in this tumultuous country.

Re: Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade

#760

Post by sirbutters »

iancmceachern wrote: post #545

I'm curious to ask some pro xhoice folks, respectfully, how they reconsile the fact that they believe abortion is murder, and also at the same time are seemingly pro military, war, and pro militarization of thr police. I'm genuinely curious how those two world views can coexist in the same mind. So a soldier who kills in the name of their country, even in a conflict that we can all agree was at best morally debatable…

Because they are hypocrites (it's a fact, not a judgement). And it's interesting because hypocrites is one of the things that Jesus specifically calls out in the Gospel and seem to have much disdain for them. As a Catholic, I practice my faith with as much common sense as I can, to not judge, and forgive, as Jesus wanted us to.

As such, I am against the death penalty, against "preemptive" wars (of course defending your territory being invaded is justified), against 2nd amendment, and support women's right for abortion. To me, this is common sense that aligns with Jesus' message.

I cannot picture the loving Christ looking at a 13 year old child pregnant because of rape/incest and go "this new life is a miracle and it was my will". I reject this notion of "every conception was God's will and is sacred".

Post reply on HN