Roe vs. Wade.....

[iris lilies]

This doesn’t make me happy at all.* In an earlier post I was wrong about Missouri’s trigger law, It was (confusingly) talked about in recent weeks as allowing surgical abortion up to 8 weeks. I even waded through the law to read that.

But apparently (?) a later law takes precedence over that and end result: abortion at any time outlawed except for health of the mother.

Unfortunately I will have to now vote for Democratic statehouse pols in my state, assuming the issue comes up for a vote which it regularly will.
It is an excellent wedge issue and yeah, I am am going to vote for a relaxed abortion restriction.

I suppose this will immediately be one of those dumb constitutional amendment things that they put in front of the voters rather than doing their job and making a reasonable law.

edited to say: the .supreme Court’s decision is not what makes me unhappy, it is my state’s trigger law which went into effect this morning.

[gimmethesimplelife]

I am off today and I slept in late waking about a half hour ago. SO woke me up with the news of the RW reversal. This potentially changes everything for us as gay men. How so, you ask?

A country that can overturn R/W can overturn same sex marriage without thinking twice. I have no trust nor faith in America that G and L marriage is on the chopping block not too far off. I may just end out in Mexico yet, courtesy of the US Supreme Court and how little human rights and human dignity mean in America.

As to American women - bring the marches on. I will proudly join you on this one as I understand this fallen domino makes me vulnerable.

At least a potential silver lining - perhaps this further proof of the truth of America will make it up the social class ladder? Younger people really need to be reevaluating the viability of this citizenship.

Rob

[gimmethesimplelife]

And sadness for LGBTQ people and anyone who uses abortion. Thomas made no bones about the fact that they are coming for us next. And since the radical activists on the supreme court are insistent on going back to the bad old days of the 1950's Brown v. Board of Ed will undoubtedly get cast aside too at some point.

JP1, what did Thomas say? I can Google this but I'm wondering what your take is, as a gay man, on whatever he said.

Rob

[gimmethesimplelife]

JP1, what did Thomas say? I can Google this but I'm wondering what your take is, as a gay man, on whatever he said.

Rob

Came back to add that I did Google and as of yet, no other justices have signed on to Thomas's opinion. Yet. I have no faith whatsoever in the United States though and fully expect same sex marriage to be reversed. Can this be used to get into one of the better countries? I don't know if so, but maybe some few will be able to use this to reestablish in one of the better countries? One can hope.

Rob

[jp1]

Given the Republican party’s current targeting of LGBTQ folks with all the hate they can muster and the fact that more than one senator specifically brought up the grid wold (north ci trip) decision and Loving (interracial marriage) at the most recent Supreme Court confirmation hearing it won’t be surprising at all when those decisions get targeted by this activist court.

[LDAHL]

How does the final opinion compare to the leaked draft?

[catherine]

Trying again:

https://www.axios.com/2022/06/24/cla...contraception#

The following is the body of the article:

In a concurring opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, Justice Clarence Thomas said that the Supreme Court should reconsider opinions protecting same-sex relationships, marriage equality and access to contraceptives.

Driving the news: Roe protected abortion rights in the U.S. under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and Justice Samuel Alito asserted that abortion is not included under that amendment. As a result, Thomas said that the court should reconsider other due process precedents such as Griswold, Lawrence and Obergefell.

What they're saying: Thomas said that "any substantive due process decision is 'demonstrably erroneous,'" quoting a 2020 Supreme Court decision.

• "[W]e have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents," he added.
• "After overruling these demonstrably erroneous decisions, the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions guarantee the myriad rights that our substantive due process cases have generated."
• "[W]e would need to decide important antecedent questions, including whether the Privileges or Immunities Clause protects any rights that are not enumerated in the Constitution and, if so, how to identify those rights.

Don't forget: Thomas is the only justice who has called on the court to reconsider other precedents. It is unclear what immediate effect his concurring opinion will have.

[gimmethesimplelife]

I have places in Mexico that will take me in - but what of those who don't have a place to run to? I've already shot off an email to Vienna and I'm sure I'm welcome there, too - but only for 90 days legally. In Mexico I have both much more time plus marriage to a Mexican national in my favor.

This? Overturning same sex marriage? This would get rid of me. I could.not accept this nor live with it. My basic dignity means much more to me than this strange, alien country (this last burrowed from Astrid and it very much fits).

Rob

[JaneV2.0]

I'm disgusted beyond words that we've come to this. Alito's reference to an 17th-century misogynist* in setting out his opinion is the perfect metaphor.

*https://crooksandliars.com/2022/05/a...-literal-witch

So now that the first domino has fallen, and given the current oppressive climate in this country, I have no doubt that LGBTQ, interracial marriage, and other privacy issues are at stake. Republicans--the party of personal freedom. Ha!

[ApatheticNoMore]

Why are we making this about other issues? This isn't about men. Yea sure maybe eventually. But right now it's about women. Not everything is really about men.