RBG’s dead and Mitch is gonna do it

[gorfias]

Clearly the USA existed for a long time with women unable to own property in their own name, under the Constitution. If women could effectively be chattel of their husbands constitutionally, they can surely be forced to reveal any and all of their private medical issues to their husbands constitutionally.

Physical punishments could be imposed as long as they were not unusual or considered excessive to a given crime. Even a death penalty can be imposed upon your body.

I earn a living with my body. The court can, to this day, require me to give the money that comes from my body to an ex wife. I can be expected to do a primary function of a husband (support my wife) even though we are no longer married. Not sure where lil devils x gets the following ideas...

Of course it would be unconstitutional to require married women to inform their husbands of ANYTHING done to their own body, just like husbands are not required to inform their wives of anything done to their body. A man isn't even legally required to inform his wife when he has a vasectomy either. Sure telling your spouse about any surgery or procedures is good for a healthy marriage, but there is no legal mandate to do so nor should there ever be unless you have a contagious disease and they are in a position to where they can be infected. The man isn't going to be infected by a woman having an abortion. It's her body, not his. Her body doesn't " belong to him" simply because they are married. If he thinks her body belongs to him, then he really shouldn't be married in the first place as that mindset is blatant abuse/control issues that he should seek help to resolve before being in any relationship. Her body = her body. His body= his body. That is all there is to it. If she wants to have her breasts removed, she can do that too without him being informed as well. Legally, she doesn't even have to have him listed as her next of kin in the hospital, and can deny allowing him to visit her there, but he can as well. It works both ways.

If he had another life growing inside his body, that would still be his decision as to whom he wishes to discuss it with unless that is somehow contagious, not hers. The same circumstance applies regardless of sex. So when technology reaches the point we can make men pregnant the same will apply to men.

I have no idea why you would think this is even negotiable. That is pretty creepy for you to think that this would be a thing at all.

I have no idea why you think this is creepy. The government can force you to social distance and wear a mask. It can force me to pay alimony, money I earned with my body, to someone I was arguably never even partnered with in any significant manner ie https://toronto.citynews.ca/2020/09...ut-couple-still-spouses-appeal-court-rules-2/
In France, a woman can lie to a man, tell him he is the father of her child and he is legally barred from unilaterally having the DNA tested for verification.

There is a process for making it unconstitutional to insist a wife tell her husband of her pregnancy and intention to abort. But as Agema notes above, do you really think that is already in the US Constitution?

If you agree, there is no way this is already in the US Constitution, it appears you prefer to let elite

 

[gorfias]

Sorry for the double post.. unable to save my post... so... If you @lil devils x agree, there is no way this is already in the US Constitution, it appears you prefer to let elite USSC justices act as a super legislature making laws you like rather than go to the hard work of convincing people to your point of view. Well, that can go South fast.

 

[lil devils x]

Physical punishments could be imposed as long as they were not unusual or considered excessive to a given crime. Even a death penalty can be imposed upon your body.

I earn a living with my body. The court can, to this day, require me to give the money that comes from my body to an ex wife. I can be expected to do a primary function of a husband (support my wife) even though we are no longer married. Not sure where lil devils x gets the following ideas...



I have no idea why you think this is creepy. The government can force you to social distance and wear a mask. It can force me to pay alimony, money I earned with my body, to someone I was arguably never even partnered with in any significant manner ie https://toronto.citynews.ca/2020/09...ut-couple-still-spouses-appeal-court-rules-2/
In France, a woman can lie to a man, tell him he is the father of her child and he is legally barred from unilaterally having the DNA tested for verification.

There is a process for making it unconstitutional to insist a wife tell her husband of her pregnancy and intention to abort. But as Agema notes above, do you really think that is already in the US Constitution?

If you agree, there is no way this is already in the US Constitution, it appears you prefer to let elite

Are you required by law to inform anyone of any medical procedure you have? Nope? Well that goes both ways. Stop trying to compare this to incomparable situations. It is creepy because it is a control issue to think you should have control over your spouse. If that were the case, I can't see why anyone would ever be willing to marry someone like that at all. I don't feel that way about the man I love, if he wanted to tell me something he would, I do not need a law to force him to, as that would just be pretty gross to try to take control over them like that in the first place.

 

[gorfias]

Are you required by law to inform anyone of any medical procedure you have? Nope? Well that goes both ways. Stop trying to compare this to incomparable situations. It is creepy because it is a control issue to think you should have control over your spouse. If that were the case, I can't see why anyone would ever be willing to marry someone like that at all. I don't feel that way about the man I love, if he wanted to tell me something he would, I do not need a law to force him to, as that would just be pretty gross to try to take control over them like that in the first place.

Is there any surgery a man can have which will cause a wife to lose her baby? I don't think so. Pregnancy is a "sui generis" (unique) matter.
You have what appear to be very comfortable assumptions. You want a thing, so, of course that's the only reasonable way to look at it.
I believe, increasingly, the statement, "it's my body" is going to mean less and less. No one cares, it is not an argument, and it doesn't matter. It's my body that can be used by government in any number of ways, including getting me killed in wars that have nothing to do with us.
I think you are going to need some new arguments if you are going to convince people of the correctness of your position.

 

[Houseman]

I believe, increasingly, the statement, "it's my body" is going to mean less and less. No one cares, it is not an argument, and it doesn't matter.

I was quite pleased with my argument against "it's my body", but lil hasn't responded to it. Pity.

 

[lil devils x]

Is there any surgery a man can have which will cause a wife to lose her baby? I don't think so. Pregnancy is a "sui generis" (unique) matter.
You have what appear to be very comfortable assumptions. You want a thing, so, of course that's the only reasonable way to look at it.
I believe, increasingly, the statement, "it's my body" is going to mean less and less. No one cares, it is not an argument, and it doesn't matter. It's my body that can be used by government in any number of ways, including getting me killed in wars that have nothing to do with us.
I think you are going to need some new arguments if you are going to convince people of the correctness of your position.

I want a thing? I just want people to have control over what happens to their own bodies. That isn't too much to ask. People should have say over what happens to their own bodies and not have people telling them what they can and cannot do with their own bodies.
"It's my body" should never mean " less". I also disagree with your body being used in wars against your will as well. In fact, going back though my own culture's history, Many Hopi sat in jail due to refusing to fight for that very reason. They didn't draft dodge" they showed up and told the US government they would not fight as they were not capable of taking a life, and willingly went to jail instead. The draft is repulsive and grotesque and universally condemned. I disagree with the draft as much as I disagree with someone telling a woman she can or cannot have an abortion. Both will result in forcing people to take their own lives or other desperate measures to escape, and have no place in a free society. Telling people what they can do with their own bodies against their will and telling people they must go to war against their will are both horrifyingly wrong.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

legally barred from unilaterally having the DNA tested for verification.

The hell?

 

[Revnak]

If it isn't a realistic concern, why involve the courts? They are already trying to put women in prison for 20 years for miscarriage's, and you think I shouldn't be concerned about the courts. Exception circumstance is exceptional, that is why it should be left up to the patient and her physician, and let the courts deal with actual crimes here. Even without them being illegal, you still have very few physicians even willing to carry them out, and will ONLY do so in " exceptional cases" so that is what is actually considered here in the first place. Like we can trust Trump religious zealot packed courts to treat women fairly. Who's going to overturn the 20 yr sentence then?

We have plenty of medical guidelines in place that are not "enforced by the courts" there is no reason why this one should be. The courts do not tell people when they can and cannot have heart surgery or a vasectomy or any other procedure, so why should they do so here? The last thing we need is police busting down doors to arrest women for miscarriages and we in no way can trust the courts not to use the police to force their own religious beliefs upon other people .

Devils, my stance is the Roe v Wade stance. The original ruling was based on viability. I’m just gonna drop arguing with you on this because I feel like you’re projecting arguments onto me that I’m not making.

 

[lil devils x]

Devils, my stance is the Roe v Wade stance. The original ruling was based on viability. I’m just gonna drop arguing with you on this because I feel like you’re projecting arguments onto me that I’m not making.

I am saying that the current stance ALREADY is resulting in women being convicted with 20 yrs in prison for miscarriage like the articles linked earlier so they should just leave it at " a woman's body is her choice" to keep that from happening at all. The current stance is allowing the police to bust in and arrest women for having miscarriages and not even allowing them to have options at all in some circumstances that are only even considered if the circumstances are extreme in the first place. It is already rare without it being enshrined in law, so why make it so they can keep prosecuting women as they do now? Changing the law to just remain between a woman and her physician and guaranteeing her the right to bodily autonomy means she cannot be prosecuted for a miscarriage. Doctors already do not just take later than 22 weeks to begin with lightly to begin with, so those rare, extreme circumstances are all that would be happening regardless of law. We STILL have medical guidelines that physicians follow. That is why Physicians don't just do whatever surgery they can without laws for all of them being in place, because the laws are not necessary for us to have guidelines that use reasonable judgement. We don't just go do quadruple bypasses on people because they thought they might want one simply because the laws don't say we can't either.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Is there any surgery a man can have which will cause a wife to lose her baby? I don't think so. Pregnancy is a "sui generis" (unique) matter.

As the lessee [a father] does have certain rights. [On Ferenginar] pregnancy is considered a rental.

 

[Exley97]

This is just a reminder that all high-minded sermonizing from the GOP about the sanctity of the judicial nominee proccess is, and pretty much always has been, complete and utter bullshit.

Republican senators vow to block any Clinton supreme court nominee forever

Ted Cruz and John McCain voice support for indefinitely blocking Clinton from filling vacancy left by Antonin Scalia and leaving ninth seat vacant

www.theguardian.com

If Clinton wins, more in GOP say no to full Supreme Court

Some Republican lawmakers suggest they would be fine with just eight for four years more rather than have Hillary Clinton fill the vacancy.

www.pbs.org

 

[Agema]

They separated and killed the weaker conjoined twin to save the stronger one against the wishes of the parents and regardless of the wishes of the children, through a court order.

I am truly amazed that the courts and doctors managed to divine the wishes of 3-month-old children.

 

[Revnak]

Worthless. These fucking worthless worms. These motherfuckers. These morons. They are seeing this coming right in front of them and they are choosing to ask “their enemies” to politely not destroy democracy.

This is why I said voting will not save us. This is why harm reduction is insufficient. This is why we are utterly fucked. The democrats have zero interest in saving our democracy. They are careerist septuagenarians dreaming they are in another age who think their strong moral stances will win them the day. We’re in a satire of a Sorkin drama. Fuck everything.

 

[lil devils x]

Worthless. These fucking worthless worms. These motherfuckers. These morons. They are seeing this coming right in front of them and they are choosing to ask “their enemies” to politely not destroy democracy.

This is why I said voting will not save us. This is why harm reduction is insufficient. This is why we are utterly fucked. The democrats have zero interest in saving our democracy. They are careerist septuagenarians dreaming they are in another age who think their strong moral stances will win them the day. We’re in a satire of a Sorkin drama. Fuck everything.

Actually.. If she fails to recuse herself, they will have grounds to impeach a supreme court justice if they can get a majority. Which is actually better in the long run.. especially if they make DC and Puerto Rico a state. They may not be able to block her regardless, but they are laying to groundwork to get rid of her if she lies. A supreme court justice cannot lie to the US senate, as that would be disqualify her. They need to get her to recuse herself from roe vs wade as well.

Of course they could just be BSing GOP at this point and tossing ideas to get them to relax on urgency while still trying to delay. There is no telling at this point.

 

[Revnak]

Actually.. If she fails to recuse herself, they will have grounds to impeach a supreme court justice if they can get a majority. Which is actually better in the long run.. especially if they make DC and Puerto Rico a state. They may not be able to block her regardless, but they are laying to groundwork to get rid of her if she lies. A supreme court justice cannot lie to the US senate, as that would be disqualify her.

WHICH THEY NEED A TWO THIRDS MAJORITY TO WIN GODDAMNIT THAT WILL NOT WORK AND TRUMP WILL BE THE ONE TO REPLACE HER IN THAT CASE ANYWAY

 

[lil devils x]

WHICH THEY NEED A TWO THIRDS MAJORITY TO WIN GODDAMNIT THAT WILL NOT WORK AND TRUMP WILL BE THE ONE TO REPLACE HER IN THAT CASE ANYWAY

If Biden doesn't win we are screwed for the rest of our lifetimes regardless. This election is the only chance we get to change that.
We can still get a majority in congress.

psst. CALM down with the Fire.

 

[Revnak]

Democrats: *do something that only works if Republicans are nothing like they have proven themselves to be for a fucking decade*
Libs: “How is this brilliant actually”

 

[lil devils x]

Democrats: *do something that only works if Republicans are nothing like they have proven themselves to be for a fucking decade*
Libs: “How is this brilliant actually”

They already know what the GOP is going to do. This could just be a delay tactic regardless, She and the GOP will never agree to it anyhow. The thing is though they can stall and delay, but if Trump wins this election we are so screwed regardless. None of their delays will matter.

 

[Revnak]

If Biden doesn't win we are screwed for the rest of our lifetimes regardless.

Biden won’t win if Trump gets away with ending the count on election night. It’s mathematically impossible for him to do so under those conditions. Pennsylvania won’t even start counting mail-ins for a day or two and the polling difference on mail-in vs in person is has Democrats voting by mail at almost double the rate. This is why a giving conservatives a majority without Thomas, who likely won’t cash in all his chips on Trump, will be a disaster. It is conceding everything.

 

[Revnak]

They already know what the GOP is going to do. This could just be a delay tactic regardless, She and the GOP will never agree to it anyhow.

Then pull actual delay tactics! Walkout! Pelosi can do a federal shutdown! They can call for mass protests around the senate building and lead them themselves! There are so many better tactics than “pinky promise you’ll recuse yourself” when she can literally just lie then not recuse herself!