Roe Vs Wade Overturned

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-22-2024, 05:24 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Understanding you are agnostic, I wil say I believe God “talks” to plenty of people, and I don’t think God’s message ever changes. Men change it to benefit themselves. Like creating a narcissistic psychopath who will torture you forever if you don’t get it right and continuously let God know how awesome God is. That’ll keep people in line, and create never ending power for the select few.

There's a lot of great things in all religions, coupled with a lot of dark and sinister crap.  They all get used as the word of God at one time or another by "true believers".  Personally I think what we don't know about this existence absolutely dwarfs what we do know.  If full knowledge of the universe, and beyond, was a medical PHD then the human race is in first grade.  Consequently, I can allow for a lot that cannot be proven, or even comprehended, at this time.  But I must respectfully withhold judgment on the existence of the divinity until some more tangible proof is available.

[GMDino]

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/tommy-tubervile-alabama-supreme-court-embryos-children-ivf_n_65d78e1fe4b0cc1f2f7b1a81

Quote:Tommy Tuberville On Alabama Supreme Court Deeming Embryos Children: Great! Wait, Bad!
In the span of three minutes, the GOP senator said he was “all for it,” didn’t agree with it, supports IVF and just needs to read the bill. (There is no bill.)
[/url]


[url=https://www.huffpost.com/author/jennifer-bendery]
By Jennifer Bendery
Feb 22, 2024, 02:56 PM EST



NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. — Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) said Thursday that he is “all for” the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision that frozen embryos are children.

He also said he opposes the effects of the ruling. And that he supports fertility treatments like IVF that are now being denied to women across his state as a result of the court’s ruling. And that he wants to read the legislation more closely before saying more — except there is no legislation.

The Alabama senator delivered this spectacular series of responses in the span of three minutes when asked for his reaction to the court’s unprecedented decision on Tuesday.

The ruling is already having a chilling effect on families and fertility clinics in the state, who are now at risk of being held liable for wrongful death if they destroy unused embryos. At least two Alabama health clinics have halted IVF treatments, a devastating development for families in the state trying to have children who cannot do so without fertility assistance.

Tuberville initially didn’t hesitate to praise the court’s ruling when asked about it by reporters attending the Conservative Political Action Conference.

“I was all for it,” the Republican senator said cheerfully. “You know, you just gotta look at everything going on in the country. It’s just an attack on families, an attack on kids. You know, anything we can do for the future of our young people because they’re our No. 1 commodity.”

His remarks made no sense, as families are now being denied the ability to try to have children through IVF. “We need to have more kids,” he continued. “We need to have an opportunity to do that. I thought this was the right thing to do.”

When it was pointed out that Alabama health clinics are halting IVF treatments as a result of the court decision, Tuberville started talking about abortion.

“Well, that’s for another conversation,” he said. “I think the big thing is, right now, you protect, you go back to the situation and try to work it out to where it’s best for everybody. I mean, that’s what the whole abortion issue is about.”

Except the court’s decision wasn’t about abortion. And the concern now is that families in Alabama might not have access to IVF anymore.

“I know, I know,” Tuberville said about that. “I agree, people need to have access. We need more kids. We need people to have the opportunity to have kids.”






Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) has no idea what is going on.
ALEX WONG VIA GETTY IMAGES

HuffPost asked what he would say to women in Alabama who will no longer have access to IVF treatments as a result of this ruling. Tuberville said it was “unfortunate” and “hard.”

“Really hard. Because again, you want people to have that opportunity,” he said. “We need more kids. I’d have to look at the entire bill, how it’s written. I have not seen it.”

Except there is no bill. This was an Alabama Supreme Court decision, not a bill passed by the state legislature.

“Well, I know that,” Tuberville snapped. “But I haven’t looked at it. This is a state issue.”

Huh?

When another reporter asked if he thought the court’s decision would alienate swing voters in the November general election, the senator shrugged.

“I don’t know, it might, some,” he said, downplaying its significance. “You don’t hear a lot of folks talk about it. That’s not a big conversation.”

Tuberville then backtracked and agreed that there is a conversation about this happening right now, and that fertility treatments are not a partisan issue.

“We don’t need that,” he said of the court’s decision halting IVF treatments. “We need people to have an opportunity to have kids.”

Another reporter asked Tuberville if he disagrees, then, with the court’s decision to treat embryos as children. This time, he simply feigned ignorance on it.

“I’d have to look at what they’re agreeing to or not agreeing to,” he replied, before walking away. “I haven’t seen that.”

[Belsnickel]

(02-22-2024, 09:49 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/tommy-tubervile-alabama-supreme-court-embryos-children-ivf_n_65d78e1fe4b0cc1f2f7b1a81

I wish I could say I expected more.

[GMDino]

(02-22-2024, 10:06 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I wish I could say I expected more.

From him or the people who voted him in? 

[*Nately120*]

(02-23-2024, 10:28 AM)GMDino Wrote: From him or the people who voted him in? 

It's a bit amazing how if you want to apply for any job this side of flipping burgers you have to show that you got a degree or a certification or have X amount of years of experience, yet you can say that you have no experience nor interest in learning how to do the job for which you are applying in politics and it be seen as a benefit.

They should let me have Tubberville's vacant coaching job.

So, coach Nately120 your team has 0 points after the first half.
ME -Well, if you count the real points we're winning.

What does your team need to do to overcome their cover 2 defense that's been so effective so far?
ME - Um, uh...we need our linebackers to get more penetration.

Cover 2 is defense.
ME - Yeah, so?

So, your defense isn't on the field at the same time as their defense.
ME - That's a hard question right there.

What do you have to say to Alabama fans who are forced to suffer through your poor choices and lack of insight?
ME - Uh...that's a question for another time.  Thank you and god bless.  Where is my paycheck?

[basballguy]

(02-22-2024, 09:49 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/tommy-tubervile-alabama-supreme-court-embryos-children-ivf_n_65d78e1fe4b0cc1f2f7b1a81

Most republicans don’t even agree with this.

[NATI BENGALS]

(02-23-2024, 03:14 PM)Nately120 Wrote: It's a bit amazing how if you want to apply for any job this side of flipping burgers you have to show that you got a degree or a certification or have X amount of years of experience, yet you can say that you have no experience nor interest in learning how to do the job for which you are applying in politics and it be seen as a benefit.

They should let me have Tubberville's vacant coaching job.

So, coach Nately120 your team has 0 points after the first half.
ME -Well, if you count the real points we're winning.

What does your team need to do to overcome their cover 2 defense that's been so effective so far?
ME - Um, uh...we need our linebackers to get more penetration.

Cover 2 is defense.
ME - Yeah, so?

So, your defense isn't on the field at the same time as their defense.
ME - That's a hard question right there.

What do you have to say to Alabama fans who are forced to suffer through your poor choices and lack of insight?
ME - Uh...that's a question for another time.  Thank you and god bless.  Where is my paycheck?

Lucky for you myself and many others realize the truth. We see the evil media unfairly targeting you asking you loaded one sided questions with their witch hunt interview. The real fans know there is only one man that can do this job. Shit….. idgaf how “unqualified” you are or the “major character red flags”. Hell I’d probably march down to the front office, break in, beat up cops, and try to hang the workers if they ever fired you.

[*Nately120*]

(02-24-2024, 12:51 AM)basballguy Wrote: Most republicans don’t even agree with this.

Well you can't just let the majority of people automatically get their way. 

[GMDino]

(02-24-2024, 06:03 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Well you can't just let the majority of people automatically get their way. 

Aw cripes...now you've opened it up to the "slavery was legal once!!!1!!111!!  Does that make it right??!?!!!11?!" crowd.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-24-2024, 10:30 AM)GMDino Wrote: Aw cripes...now you've opened it up to the "slavery was legal once!!!1!!111!!  Does that make it right??!?!!!11?!" crowd.

Oh, we don't have to go back nearly that far.  How about what the majority of the public would have allowed post 9/11?

[*Nately120*]

(02-24-2024, 12:18 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Oh, we don't have to go back nearly that far.  How about what the majority of the public would have allowed post 9/11?

Dubya and Obama agreeing the Patriot Act was super awesome is some of that unity I've been told this country needs back.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-24-2024, 01:10 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Dubya and Obama agreeing the Patriot Act was super awesome is some of that unity I've been told this country needs back.

Indeed.  At that time the public would have allowed far greater abuses than that in the name of national security.  A strong Constitution prevents such reactionary policies, and full credit to the Framers for realizing that.  Not trying to change the subject, at all, but I consistently cite this when people use Australia and New Zealand as examples of "quick and decisive action" after their mass shootings.  Making snap decisions in the heat of the moment rarely ends well, and allows for potentially horrific abuses.  Hence a pure democratic system would be an awful way to govern.  Social media should provide all the evidence you'd need of that.

[GMDino]

I've said it before but I really wish Duckworth would run for President.

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/02/gop-senator-blocks-ivf-protection-bill-because-it-could-lead-to-human-animal-hybrids/

Quote:GOP senator blocks IVF protection bill because it could lead to human-animal hybrids
The bill seeks to protect IVF, but Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith also claimed it would somehow allow minors to become surrogates without parental consent.
By Molly Sprayregen Thursday, February 29, 2024


Sen. Cindy Hyde Smith (R-MS)Photo: U.S. Senate
A Senate Republican blocked a bill intended to enshrine federal IVF protections into law in the wake of the Alabama Supreme Court ruling that declared frozen embryos have the same legal rights as children in the state.

Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) proposed the bill and attempted to rush it through the chamber with a unanimous consent vote, a procedure that can get a bill approved faster but can fail if even one senator objects.


Hyde-Smith called the bill a “vast overreach that is full of poison pills that go way too far.” She claimed the bill – meant to protect access to IVF and other fertility technology – “would legalize human cloning. It would legalize commercial surrogacy, including for young girls without parental involvement. It would legalize gene-edited designer babies and lift the federal ban on the creation of three-parent embryos.”


In her speech in the Senate, Hyde-Smith claimed she fully supports access to IVF and also believes human life should be protected. “These are not mutually exclusive,” she said.

She then claimed that the Alabama ruling did not ban IVF. While she is technically correct, even the Alabama justices themselves acknowledged that their decision would effectively end the practice of IVF in the state since it declared doctors who mishandle embryos could be charged with murder. Several clinics have already stopped offering IVF services to avoid this risk.

Hyde-Smith has also claimed the bill would allow the creation of human-animal hybrids – called chimeras (which is not the first time the GOP has instigated chimera-fueled panic). Duckworth emphasized, “It does nothing of the sort.”

“All the bill says, is if you want to seek reproductive technology you can, if you want to provide it you can, and if you want to cover it as an insurance company you can,” she said during her speech on the Senate floor.

The bill, called the “Access to Family Building Act”, states that individuals have the right to access “assisted reproductive technology, and all medical care surrounding such technology.” It also says these individuals “retain all rights regarding the use or disposition of reproductive genetic materials.” It also provides protections for health care and insurance providers.

Duckworth opened her speech in support of the bill by talking about her deep love for being a mom to her two children, something that was only possible for her due to IVF. She called her challenges with infertility “one of the most heartbreaking struggles of my life.”

“The very people who claim to be defending family values are the ones trying to enact dystopian policies that would prevent Americans from starting their own families,” she said.

Duckworth called out Republicans for trying to give frozen embryos “more rights than the women who would carry them,” referring to the overturning of Roe v. Wade that stripped Americans of their constitutional right to abortion.

She blasted Donald Trump for bragging that he is the one who got Roe v. Wade overturned and then claiming he was against Alabama’s decision and had nothing to do with it. “We now the truth. IVF is at risk because of him. He is to blame. Him and every other GOP official who kisses his ring.”

Indeed, Republicans have been scrambling to show support for IVF in the wake of the Alabama ruling. Despite pushing for decisions like that of the Alabama Supreme Court, the Republican party is now reportedly worried it will lose favor with the hordes of voters who support expanded IVF access, including many who identify as anti-abortion.

But many of these Republicans have found themselves victims of their own hypocrisy, as 125 Republicans – some of whom have released statements supporting IVF –  are co-sponsoring a bill declaring that human life begins at conception, without an exception for IVF embryos.

Many federal GOP legislators are trying to cover their tracks by claiming they support IVF but that it’s a state issue that they shouldn’t get involved in.

Democrats are trying to ensure Americans know that the Republican agenda against reproductive rights directly led to this moment.

“In this nightmarish moment, it’s nowhere near enough to send out a vaguely worded tweet claiming you care about women’s rights, despite your voting record to the contrary,” Duckworth said in her speech, warning that they’re not going to stop in Alabama.

“Mark my words,” she said, “if we do not act now, it will only get worse.”

Duckworth is hoping for a roll call vote that would force every GOP senator to go on record with their position on the bill, but she doesn’t anticipate it happening anytime soon due to the Senate’s jam-packed calendar.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(02-23-2024, 10:28 AM)GMDino Wrote: From him or the people who voted him in? 

[*pally*]

Florida's Supreme Court okayed the legislature's 6-week abortion ban with few exceptions. But at the same approved the addition of a Constitutional amendment on reproductive rights including abortion.

Plus there is a marijuana legalization initiative already approved for the November ballot.

This is not good news for the Republicans...they have lost every election when abortion has been on the ballot. It may not put Florida into the Democratic column at the Presidential level but it takes aim at disliked Sen Rick Scott's re-election hopes. Plus it means that Republicans will have to spend money, that they don't have, in a state they thought was safe

[GMDino]

(04-02-2024, 08:37 AM)pally Wrote: Florida's Supreme Court okayed the legislature's 6-week abortion ban with few exceptions.  But at the same approved the addition of a Constitutional amendment on reproductive rights including abortion.

Plus there is a marijuana legalization initiative already approved for the November ballot.

This is not good news for the Republicans...they have lost every election when abortion has been on the ballot.  It may not put Florida into the Democratic column at the Presidential level but it takes aim at disliked Sen Rick Scott's re-election hopes.  Plus it means that Republicans will have to spend money, that they don't have,  in a state they thought was safe

That's main take away I had too.  The amendment may even fail in Florida.  Lot's religious people there from the old people who moved there to the Latinos that live there.

But it is an issue the gop can't afford to not protect.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(04-02-2024, 08:37 AM)pally Wrote: Florida's Supreme Court okayed the legislature's 6-week abortion ban with few exceptions.  But at the same approved the addition of a Constitutional amendment on reproductive rights including abortion.

Plus there is a marijuana legalization initiative already approved for the November ballot.

This is not good news for the Republicans...they have lost every election when abortion has been on the ballot.  It may not put Florida into the Democratic column at the Presidential level but it takes aim at disliked Sen Rick Scott's re-election hopes.  Plus it means that Republicans will have to spend money, that they don't have,  in a state they thought was safe

I can see your logic, but abortion was literally on the ballot in those states.  Is there a ballot measure or the like in the next election in Florida of that type?  If you mean Florida has a chance of flipping blue for POTUS I think you're exceedingly optimistic.  Trump will win Florida comfortably, probably in the realm of five to six points.  You are correct about one thing, these types of abortion restrictions are a millstone around the GOP's neck.  That being the case it would appear that their desire to restrict abortion comes from an actual ideological place, seeing as it hurts them in elections.

[GMDino]

(04-02-2024, 11:09 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I can see your logic, but abortion was literally on the ballot in those states.  Is there a ballot measure or the like in the next election in Florida of that type?  If you mean Florida has a chance of flipping blue for POTUS I think you're exceedingly optimistic.  Trump will win Florida comfortably, probably in the realm of five to six points.  You are correct about one thing, these types of abortion restrictions are a millstone around the GOP's neck.  That being the case it would appear that their desire to restrict abortion comes from an actual ideological place, seeing as it hurts them in elections.

https://health.wusf.usf.edu/health-news-florida/2024-04-02/florida-justices-ok-abortion-amendment-trigger-six-week-ban

Quote:Voters will get to decide the future of abortion through a constitutional amendment that will be on the ballot in November. In the meantime, a six-week abortion limit is now scheduled to take effect in 30 days. The moves are part of two separate rulings from the Florida Supreme Court.


The Florida Supreme Court has issued two rulings that stand to significantly impact abortion access in Florida. Voters will get to decide the future of abortion through a constitutional amendment that will be on the ballot in November. In a separate decision, the court upheld Florida's current 15-week abortion ban, triggering a six-week ban to take effect in 30 days.

Lauren Brenzel is the campaign director for Floridians Protecting Freedom, the group leading the push for the amendment.Brenzel is happy to see the proposal heading for the ballot, but they worry the six-week limitations on abortion will create a “public health emergency.”

“There is nowhere in our southern region to intake Florida’s patients,” Brenzel says. “Women will be forced to travel thousands of miles away from their support systems and their own providers.”

Lawmakers approved the six-week ban last year but stipulated it would not go into effect until the court issued a ruling on Florida's current 15-week abortion limit. In an opinion Mondayjustices upheld the current rules and found that a privacy amendment in the state constitution does not protect access to abortion—reversing a ruling the court had issued back in 1989.

As the new restrictions go into effect, Brenzel says abortion access advocates will be working to ensure people can get the care they need.

"There is a network of folks who are interested in helping people obtain care," Brenzel says.

The proposed amendment could reverse the six-week ban. If the amendment language passes in November, Brenzel says it will go effect in January of next year. To pass, it needs approval from at least 60% of the voters who turn out at the polls. More than a million people signed petitions to get the proposed amendment on the ballot, but Brenzel says the next step will require even broader support.

“We need to make sure that we reach out to voters all across this very large state who come from a variety of different backgrounds and a variety of different standpoints on the uniqueness of pregnancy," Brenzel says.

Florida’s Republican House Speaker Paul Renner spoke to journalists immediately after the court issued its rulings. Renner calls the amendment “extreme” and says he plans to fight it—starting by targeting people “in the middle.”

“Those that are pro-choice, or consider themselves that," Renner says. "When you dig into this amendment, they would find it to be far, far more extreme than anything else in the country or even around the world.”

The proposed amendment says, in part, “No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.” It includes one exception, for parental notification when minors seek an abortion—a stipulation which is already in the state constitution.

The proposal has already been given a ballot number. It will appear as Amendment Four in November. Abortion access advocates are planning to kick off their “Yes on 4” campaign next weekend in Orlando.

Copyright 2024 WFSU. To see more, visit WFSU.

[*pally*]

(04-02-2024, 11:09 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I can see your logic, but abortion was literally on the ballot in those states.  Is there a ballot measure or the like in the next election in Florida of that type?  If you mean Florida has a chance of flipping blue for POTUS I think you're exceedingly optimistic.  Trump will win Florida comfortably, probably in the realm of five to six points.  You are correct about one thing, these types of abortion restrictions are a millstone around the GOP's neck.  That being the case it would appear that their desire to restrict abortion comes from an actual ideological place, seeing as it hurts them in elections.

I specifically said I doubt it would place Florida in the Biden camp.  However, I do think increased turnout can change the election for the Senate seat held by Rick Scott  and other down-ballot races.  Florida has to protect the Scott seat for Republicans to gain control of the Senate.  Scott won by only 10,000 votes in 2018 and is unpopular among his constituents.

Republicans will have to spend money to defend that seat.  Money they really don't have and need elsewhere.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(04-02-2024, 12:19 PM)pally Wrote: I specifically said I doubt it would place Florida in the Biden camp.  However, I do think increased turnout can change the election for the Senate seat held by Rick Scott  and other down-ballot races.  Florida has to protect the Scott seat for Republicans to gain control of the Senate.  Scott won by only 10,000 votes in 2018 and is unpopular among his constituents.

Republicans will have to spend money to defend that seat.  Money they really don't have and need elsewhere.

Anyone voting for Trump, which you acknowledged will be more people than vote for Biden, is going to also vote for Scott.  I don't see abortion peeling away any of those voters.  I say that while completely agreeing with you that the issue is an albatross for the GOP.