Roe vs Wade

Grasshopper

Grasshopper

Senior Jockey
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
16,050
So a half-dozen Christian fundamentalists have been able to withdraw birth-control rights from around 160m American women.

What a fu*cking shi*tshow of a country the US has become.
 
It could have been a Utopia. It has a fantastic amount of space and natural resources, and I think most of the people there are decent but **** it's has been ruined by triabalism and greed and religious nonsense. It's Gomorrah instead.
 
Interesting ( but not surprising) that the ones who voted to keep it had been appointed by Clinton and Obama. The rest were appointed by Bush and Trump*.People forget ( in fact I think a lot of Americans don’t even know it) but child marriage is allowed in some states. What a strange country America is. Heaven help them ( and us) if they get another Republican president next time.
*and we all know Trumps attitude towards women
 
The rednecks think its great news,don't have to worry about their sisters getting rid..
 
Agree with the sentimemt on this thread.

For a country that prides itself on "alledged' liberty this issue is a disgrace.

The same right wingers that promote this policy then use the same liberty argument, to promote the gun lobby and Americans owning guns.

Hence it's pretty clear to see that liberty in the minds of many Americans, is something you pick and choose and impose upon those you don't agree with, which obviously is not something that can be called or defined as liberty..

We in this country and even elsewhere in Europe don't live in such a socially, politically, and I would even venture to say racially divisive and barbaric country, (yet anyway).

Although I acknowledge we are far from perfect either and have been getting as divided and somewhat deluded as the Americans the past god knows how many years on many different issues.

I reckon the nuclear threat now posed from Vladimir Putin to Europe and beyond might make a lot of the far right reconsider just how good Adolf was for Europe, (instead of slavering at his political and racial agenda).
 
Last edited:
The general problem with the US is that too many of them are living in the past and that attitude reflect a lot of their laws and the way they look at issues/subjects. It's an absolute tragedy.
 
Absolutely fukcing ridiculous decision. Listening to some of these dribbling fukcwits is cringing.
 
Abortion hasn't been banned. A dubious legal decision (a fairly general consensus) has been reversed. It's up to the individual states what they want to do.
 
A woman's right to have an abortion is no longer protected at the Federal level, which effectively equates to a ban in the Cracker states - most of whom have had trigger-bills on their Statutes, just waiting for Roe to be over-turned..

This ruling will heap misery on huge amounts of poorly-educated, low-income women living in the Cracker states, as they won't have the means to travel to have an unwanted pregnancy terminated in a State that hasn't chosen to turn the clock back 200 years.
 
Grasshopper said:
A woman's right to have an abortion is no longer protected at the Federal level, which effectively equates to a ban in the Cracker states - most of whom have had trigger-bills on their Statutes, just waiting for Roe to be over-turned..

This ruling will heap misery on huge amounts of poorly-educated, low-income women living in the Cracker states, as they won't have the means to travel to have an unwanted pregnancy terminated in a State that hasn't chosen to turn the clock back 200 years.
Click to expand...

Without going into all the emotion of it, isn't the problem here that the initial decision was not tight enough. Therefore a conservative supreme court was automatically going to overturn it.
 
As I understand it, the decision was never codified, which left it open to reversal by a future SCOTUS. I also understand that Obama had intended to codify it, but never got round to it - presumably because he didn't think there was any risk.
 
It's a hugely divisive - polarising, even - subject.

The worry with USA is that it's seen as a redneck issue.

In most places worldwide it's a women's rights issue.

The Catholic Church sees is as a baby's right-to-life issue. (I've no idea how other major world faith groups see it.)

There will never be any agreement on it.
 
I don't particularly care that there will never be agreement on it, DO.

I am quite happy for Catholic women around the globe, or Evangelical Christian women in the US (or any other women for that matter) to choose not to have an abortion, if it is a matter-of-faith to them.

What is not acceptable to me, and what shouldn't be acceptable to anyone else living in a functioning democracy, is for that matter-of-faith to be imposed on any other woman i.e. that they have their choice removed.
 
Unfortunately, grassy, it’s not the only thing forced down our throats that is unacceptable. Very often the fanatical few get their way against the moderate majority.
 
Grasshopper said:
What is not acceptable to me, and what shouldn't be acceptable to anyone else living in a functioning democracy, is for that matter-of-faith to be imposed on any other woman i.e. that they have their choice removed.
Click to expand...

Is it any fairer than pro-life doctors being disciplined (I have no evidence for this, only hearsay from family who are doctors, despite this from the BMA* bma-view-on-the-law-and-ethics-of-abortion-sept-2020.pdf) for refusing to carry out abortions? Or pro-life students being refused entry to university faculties of Medicine because of their beliefs (I personally know someone who was refused entry to Glasgow University and who was told by the Faculty that this was the reason, despite her being the highest qualified applicant)?

*The stories related to me were some time (10 years?) before 2020.
 
Last edited:
Should a Doctor be permitted to choose which operations to conduct, based on his/her faith? That act would deny the right of abortion to someone else, would it not?

The same applies to anyone wishing to start a career in Medicine/Surgery. On what basis could they refuse to perform an abortion, without infringing on the rights of the pregnant woman to have her abortion? If it's an obligation on Doctors to perform these operations, then that is perhaps a consideration of an intake interview.

Any individual wishing to go into Medicine, but who is unprepared to meet that obligation, should perhaps consider a different career?
 
Desert Orchid said:
Is it any fairer than pro-life doctors being disciplined (I have no evidence for this, only hearsay from family who are doctors, despite this from the BMA* bma-view-on-the-law-and-ethics-of-abortion-sept-2020.pdf) for refusing to carry out abortions? Or pro-life students being refused entry to university faculties of Medicine because of their beliefs (I personally know someone who was refused entry to Glasgow University and who was told by the Faculty that this was the reason, despite her being the highest qualified applicant)?

*The stories related to me were some time (10 years?) before 2020.
Click to expand...

If the person was the most qualified but refused to carry out legal procedures that are part of their role, its pretty obvious why they might not be seen as the best person for the job. There are 11 more states now where he/she would be a fantastic doctors.

Maybe its the same in Scotland but the consequences of faith-driven medical decision-making is still very raw in Ireland.
 
Last edited:
Grasshopper said:
Should a Doctor be permitted to choose which operations to conduct, based on his/her faith? That act would deny the right of abortion to someone else, would it not?

The same applies to anyone wishing to start a career in Medicine/Surgery. On what basis could they refuse to perform an abortion, without infringing on the rights of the pregnant woman to have her abortion? If it's an obligation on Doctors to perform these operations, then that is perhaps a consideration of an intake interview.

Any individual wishing to go into Medicine, but who is unprepared to meet that obligation, should perhaps consider a different career?
Click to expand...

The BMA item I linked would suggest it has now accepted conscientious objectors.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top