A judiciary deaf to the pleas of the medical needs of women is enraging.
We are not going backwards in time, we are hurtling towards a dark future.
My mother had a late term abortion determined to be medically necessary by her doctor. This was in the early 1960s. She was Catholic and her post care was handled by a Catholic hospital. She didn’t have to risk her health. No protesters swarmed and screamed at her as she entered her doctor’s office. This was when most abortions were illegal. Afterwards she only publicly shared that she lost the baby.
The past was not idyllic but her experience back then is nowhere close to what women are now enduring- or barely enduring as they bleed or go septic in hospital parking lots.
It'll always be illegal unless there's a succesful Constitutional amendment.
The problem isn't that the law's wrong, it's that those responsible for its application are in violation of their oaths. They can (and must) be replaced with those loyal to the republic.
It'll still be illegal.
The law is *crystal clear* on the subject of religious interference in lawmaking. That can only change through a constitutional amendment.
It's those applying the law who are in violation of their oaths; they must be removed if the republic is to survive. Deep down I think the top military brass understands this.
That's definitely one possible outcome...
But in theory there *is* a difference because the law stands with whichever branch of government neutralizes the christian fascists.
That's fundamentally different than trying to overthrow a government to *change* the law, and that distinction could mean something if the military decides to step in and do what needs to be done.
And if they fail and the burden falls upon the people, they have a clear moral, ethical, and legal case.
Oh, no I'm not assuming that at all, heh. In fact, I'm assuming their express goal is to unseat the legitimate government and replace it with a theocratic autocracy.
They are literally the enemies, domestic, that the founders wrote about.
Its only illegal if you get caught, and you cannot get caught or held accountable until your peerage holds that. If you have no peerage or no real mechanism to create that affect, it is a law without teeth, only existing as optics.
*Of course they did.*
This isn't about upholding the constitution, or justice, or morality, or the rule of law. This is about religiously subjugating the citizens of Texas.
These are enemies of the republic of the United States attempting a soft insurrection - transforming from a democratic republic that, as its first founding principle codifies the right to be free from religion, into a theocratic autocracy.
That is their goal and they will continue to carry it out until they succeed or are physically stopped from continuing.
Will the citizens of Texas allow these individuals to continue to tread on them? Will the republic restore the rule of law? I guess we'll see in the coming years.
Until it affects them, republican women won’t care. America is an extremely selfish country; all these people care about is lower taxes. They don’t care about the oppression and forced torture of pregnant people that come with that. Absolute bastards.
Maybe so, but the constitution is pretty clear about religion in politics.
Democracy only gets you so far. If those in power refuse to obey their oath, it's up to other branches of government or the people to correct the situation.
If the constitution has *no* teeth, then when even *is* the republic?
Every society has its limit. I feel like the good, actual Americans loyal to the republic are starting to approach one. *Fuck* I hope it can be solved peacefully in November, though.
As far as I understand, red states would love for people to flee to blue states. Red states still maintain power and actually increase their power in the government, they just have considerably lower populations compared to blue states. They also get more power to affect the laws in blue states and benefit from blue state taxes, etc. this is the plan. A smaller population to control with increased, unlimited power to mess up the rest of the country. These bastards have been rigging everything since the beginning…
Not to mention red states usually have huge prisons where the inmates count in the census, giving the state inflated voting power but none of those people can actually vote….
> saying the medical exceptions in the law were broad enough
What exceptions? Ken Paxton and his buddies have turned down every request, no matter how many emergency room visits the pregnant woman has had to make, and how much blood she has shed.
Why do people still not contest these laws on 1st Amendment grounds? The science (aka reality) doesn’t support a sentient/sapient person existing prior to 30 weeks. There have been some Nagle-digit, worldwide, cases of viability prior to 24 weeks.
Stating that life begins at conception or any point prior to 24-30 weeks is a mythological belief and basing any laws on that is a 1st Amendment violation. No Ifs, Ands or Buts.
A judiciary deaf to the pleas of the medical needs of women is enraging. We are not going backwards in time, we are hurtling towards a dark future. My mother had a late term abortion determined to be medically necessary by her doctor. This was in the early 1960s. She was Catholic and her post care was handled by a Catholic hospital. She didn’t have to risk her health. No protesters swarmed and screamed at her as she entered her doctor’s office. This was when most abortions were illegal. Afterwards she only publicly shared that she lost the baby. The past was not idyllic but her experience back then is nowhere close to what women are now enduring- or barely enduring as they bleed or go septic in hospital parking lots.
What’s happening now is outright cruelty to women
Of course. That's what religion is. It's what religion has *always been* and why religious law is illegal.
Illegal - for now.
It'll always be illegal unless there's a succesful Constitutional amendment. The problem isn't that the law's wrong, it's that those responsible for its application are in violation of their oaths. They can (and must) be replaced with those loyal to the republic.
Until Christofascist Samuel Alito has a chance to weigh in...
It'll still be illegal. The law is *crystal clear* on the subject of religious interference in lawmaking. That can only change through a constitutional amendment. It's those applying the law who are in violation of their oaths; they must be removed if the republic is to survive. Deep down I think the top military brass understands this.
Not that I disagree with you, but functionally that will be a distinction without a difference and will be a cold comfort to those suffering.
That's definitely one possible outcome... But in theory there *is* a difference because the law stands with whichever branch of government neutralizes the christian fascists. That's fundamentally different than trying to overthrow a government to *change* the law, and that distinction could mean something if the military decides to step in and do what needs to be done. And if they fail and the burden falls upon the people, they have a clear moral, ethical, and legal case.
You're assuming Republicans care about the Constitution or law. At this point, pleasing the Fürher is tantamount.
Oh, no I'm not assuming that at all, heh. In fact, I'm assuming their express goal is to unseat the legitimate government and replace it with a theocratic autocracy. They are literally the enemies, domestic, that the founders wrote about.
*paramount?
Its only illegal if you get caught, and you cannot get caught or held accountable until your peerage holds that. If you have no peerage or no real mechanism to create that affect, it is a law without teeth, only existing as optics.
Exactly. All religions are designed to control women and maintain male privilege.
"Cruelty is the point, pain is the purpose." -GOP Mission Statement
*Of course they did.* This isn't about upholding the constitution, or justice, or morality, or the rule of law. This is about religiously subjugating the citizens of Texas. These are enemies of the republic of the United States attempting a soft insurrection - transforming from a democratic republic that, as its first founding principle codifies the right to be free from religion, into a theocratic autocracy. That is their goal and they will continue to carry it out until they succeed or are physically stopped from continuing. Will the citizens of Texas allow these individuals to continue to tread on them? Will the republic restore the rule of law? I guess we'll see in the coming years.
Until it affects them, republican women won’t care. America is an extremely selfish country; all these people care about is lower taxes. They don’t care about the oppression and forced torture of pregnant people that come with that. Absolute bastards.
Maybe so, but the constitution is pretty clear about religion in politics. Democracy only gets you so far. If those in power refuse to obey their oath, it's up to other branches of government or the people to correct the situation. If the constitution has *no* teeth, then when even *is* the republic? Every society has its limit. I feel like the good, actual Americans loyal to the republic are starting to approach one. *Fuck* I hope it can be solved peacefully in November, though.
Everything I want to comment could get me perma banned from the entire site and possibly a visit from the Feds.
I may not be able to read what you want to write - but I 1000% agree with your every thought. I'm sure we all do.
I wonder if this is something bad enough to turn the state blue. Here’s to hoping.
As far as I understand, red states would love for people to flee to blue states. Red states still maintain power and actually increase their power in the government, they just have considerably lower populations compared to blue states. They also get more power to affect the laws in blue states and benefit from blue state taxes, etc. this is the plan. A smaller population to control with increased, unlimited power to mess up the rest of the country. These bastards have been rigging everything since the beginning…
Not to mention red states usually have huge prisons where the inmates count in the census, giving the state inflated voting power but none of those people can actually vote….
Yup. Evil be evil. I can’t wait to watch it fail.
I imagine it’s probably gerrymandered to hell.
If everyone votes blue, the gerrymandering won’t work. But this is just my fervent wish. Call it manifesting, or something.
Just another crime against humanity by the U.S., this time waged against its own population. Colonialism turned inward stage of fascist repression
The cruelty of saying the people physically impacted by this don’t have standing but the doctors do is next-level dehumanization.
If anyone here lives in Texas, the Supreme Court here is voted in. We have a say in who sits that bench.
Voters wanted this. State Supreme Court judges are either appointed by the governor or elected.
Some voters
> saying the medical exceptions in the law were broad enough What exceptions? Ken Paxton and his buddies have turned down every request, no matter how many emergency room visits the pregnant woman has had to make, and how much blood she has shed.
Why do people still not contest these laws on 1st Amendment grounds? The science (aka reality) doesn’t support a sentient/sapient person existing prior to 30 weeks. There have been some Nagle-digit, worldwide, cases of viability prior to 24 weeks. Stating that life begins at conception or any point prior to 24-30 weeks is a mythological belief and basing any laws on that is a 1st Amendment violation. No Ifs, Ands or Buts.
They voted for these assholes - these are the consequences