The conservative movement is like the dog that finally caught the truck it was chasing and it still has no idea what to do now that it “won.”
Agreed, but I just hope they don’t just start casually blowing up hospitals now.
One can say the Ohio vote was about abortion rights, but it was really about democracy, plain and simple.
Can you explain that chart, because I just don’t get it…
Basically: abortion is popular everywhere, even in the “reddest” areas. In almost every single county where Trump won, the margin of support for abortion is greater than the margin by which Trump won.
explain to me how those are different things? Is the events in my uterus up for debate?
I’m a white man married to a black woman, and we honestly think they’re going to come after Loving at some point…
Interesting that she tries to claim success in the Cold War as a conservative thing. I guess it’s true that they all think Reagan did that because he made that speech about the wall. Gorbachev ended the Cold War by seeing what it was doing to his country and starting reforms internally. Reagan happened to be standing there when it happened.
No they’re not. They should always be between you and your doctor. And while I’m not sure what generic exactly meant, I have much the same belief that this fight was much bigger than just about abortion. The extant issue was about the right for the people to decide to enshire reproductive rights in the Ohio Constitution, but it was also a stand-in to see if the people would stand for their rights to self-determination to be stripped from them.
I grew up in Ohio (left it the moment I could, though) and it was always proudly taught in our Ohio History class (yes, we had to take one in 8th grade) that the people had the right to deicde what was in the Constitution for themselves how they wanted to be goverened. Now these jags who have gotten themselves in charge of my beloved home state, didn’t like the way the tide was turning against them, because if women (and men) would stand up for women’s rights, that could easily be a threat to their entire theory of governance (think, what about a proposition to turn redistricting over to a non-partisan comission instead of the gerrymandered Ohio Legislature?), and that had to be stopped. So, with the immediate threat being to their forced birther ways, they decided that enough was enough, and they had to strip the people of the power that they had, but do it in a way that still looked like they were for that right, but wanted to make it impossible to exercise that right.
Everyone was talking about the raising of the threshold from 50% to 60% but the real poison pill was requiring to get enough signatures from all 88 counties instead of 44. I said this over at Slate where I spend most my time (don’t judge) but if you give me an issue (regardless of if it’s a liberal one or a conservative one) I can tell you the three counties you need to focus on either side to spike that requirement to get 88 counties. THIS was the real mechanism by which Prop 1 was going to destroy the right to amend the Constitution.
Loving was the one decision Thomas notably left out of his list of things to be undone. Wonder why that was?
Yes, that’s what they no doubt think. Just as Clarence Thomas no doubt thinks they won’t be coming after his interracial marriage either.
I hope things won’t get so far as to them finding out that the patriarchy / white supremachy applies to them, too.
they are the anti-democratic party (small d). They want minority rule, meaning they shape society exactly as they want and disenfranchise anyone who disagrees. And that’s also why they don’t want women to have bodily autonomy, because they believe that women having the option to not be a baby factory gives us more options in life. Women having the right to make choices for themselves IS at the heart of our right as citizens. If we can’t make that most critical choice, then we are not full citizens.
The Respect fot Marriage Act* codified the Loving & Obergefell decisions into law. But someone (& someone’s money) could still try and get that in front of the SCOTUS.
*(According to that Wiki article, a Gallup poll from 2021 said that acceptance of interracial marriage in the U.S. is 94%, and that it’s pretty much the same regardless of the U.S. region, including the South [I’ve anecdotally heard that being ascribed, in part, to more & more couples meeting in the U.S. military, then when they’re done they move back to one of their hometowns, where the bigoted uncles etc. just have to accept it or go pound sand]. Part of me thinks 94% seems high, while the other part is glad to see that it is that high. [& that’s without getting into how polls are conducted these days, when fewer people would answer a call from an unknown number] )
There is no reason not to think they’ll not come for basically any and all rights decided by the Warren court, including Loving. The Thomas’ are insulated enough to withstand something like that, while it will give the far right what they want, which is to strip all of us who aren’t straight, white cisgendered men of our basic rights.
You’re right, of course - someone may try even if that 94% figure is correct (I didn’t mean to come off as overly optimistic).
And this is what I think they will do.This will be the vehicle to get Loving back before the Court.
My wife is a BigLaw lawyer (so smarter about these things than I am), and her belief is that they’re going to go for this via “religious freedom,” in that “it violates mah religious freedom to issue a marriage license to those people” a la Kim Davis and teh gheys. And given how the Court views religious freedom, and how they shoehorn everything into it, I think she’s probably right.
Well, for certain religions, anyway. I suspect a Muslim offended by bacon would find little regard for their rights to not be offended.
The are seeking a Christofascist ethnic state, and nothing short of that will satisfy them.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.