Outcomes of Overturning Roe Vs. Wade

[temporal1]

Perhaps this thread could stay focused on Roe Vs. Wade?

Coincidentally, a NYT report on this very topic.

NYT / NEWSLETTER / The Morning / “The New Abortion Landscape”
Women in states with abortion bans are turning to telemedicine.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/02/brie ... pills.html

Just two years ago, about 250,000 people had abortions in the U.S. states where the procedure is now banned or severely restricted, or probably soon will be. Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on June 24, allowing those prohibitions to take effect, where have women in these states turned?

They’re increasingly using telemedicine to get abortion pills. Because of access to the pills, a gray zone for providing abortions has emerged in the months since the court’s decision. The method is safe and effective, though in states with bans, the delivery mechanism is not legal.

Only one telemedicine service, Aid Access, openly provides pills in states with abortion bans. In the months preceding a leaked draft of the Supreme Court’s decision, Aid Access received an average of about 83 requests a day from people seeking abortion pills in 30 states, new research found. In 27 of those states, abortion is now banned, likely to be banned or allowed only during the first six weeks of pregnancy. For comparison’s sake, the study also included three states where the procedure is still widely available. .. ..

“The misoprostol pill is used to terminate early pregnancies.” Credit...George Frey/Reuters

THIS ARTICLE STRIKES ME AS ODD, wasn’t the public “schooled” that these pills did NOT cause abortion -
they “merely” PREVENTED pregnancy?! .. Now, this NYT article is openly+proudly labeling them ABORTION PILLS.

“SAY ANYTHING,” don’t fuss over details. Details are fluid, according to LIB whims.

The report has a graph of abortion pill sales.
Sales do not equal abortions.
Sales could include purchases for “just in case,” also, they could be sold for illegal resale purposes, etc.
How many of these awful horrible poisons are ingested - with no proof of pregnancy, at all?!!

The descriptions of what females go through after ingesting this poison created to kill human life, is horrifying.
This includes pregnant children and teens. Children and teens are NOT women, even if pregnant.

i would not want to go through such an experience as an adult woman, much less a child or teen - often alone on a toilet.
To endure that misery, then to live after, knowing a life had been ended. Whether by my decision, or by force of others.
Coercion is a known factor.

How have women+children become so low-value as to deserve this?

.. where have women in these states turned? ..

.. no mention of PREVENTION of pregnancy, choosing BEFORE conception. males+females have good options for effective PREVENTION. 250,000 better choices?!

[Josh]

Non-profits can make enormous profits. Non-profit status is a tax status not a prohibition on earning profits. Which are simply net revenues on the balance sheet. They just do what most corporations do and plough their profits into re-investing in the institution and lavish salaries for those at the top. What they don't do is pay dividends to stockholders or plough profits into things like stock buybacks. Which most corporations don't do either.

In fact, there is very little difference between the behavior of a for-profit company that reinvests all of its profits back into growth. And a non-profit like a hospital chain or university that does the same thing. That is how we get monster corporations like Amazon that declare zero profits because they reinvest all their net revenue into growth. And monster non-profit hospital chains like Ascension Health that realize massive profits and do the same exact thing.

Ken, do you actually sit on the board or have responsibility for filings for a nonprofit? What you described is simply not how nonprofits function at all. It is entirely inaccurate to claim that nonprofits and for-profit corporations are the same thing.

A better way to speak is that a nonprofit can be a tool used by its donors and administrators to engage in political and social control, which DOES seem to be a rather big problem with nonprofit hospitals, as we saw during COVID. And nonprofits also can become rather aggressive about soliciting donations from anyone and everyone - we saw this with the intense lobbying from the medical nonprofit community for bigger payments during COVID. (The U.S. government distributes massive amounts of money to nonprofits.)

My earlier statement stands: hospitals (whether for-profit or nonprofit) got to charge 3X as much for any Medicaid/Medicare receipts if the patient was positive for COVID. This has nothing to do with extra costs to be on a ventilator and had 100% to do with a cash grab. Cash grabs can happen for reasons other than for-profit motive.

[mike]

Perhaps this thread could stay focused on Roe Vs. Wade?

No

[temporal1]

2022 Votes:

GenZ voted for abortion rights. That is what turned it.

It is possible, post Dobbs, abortion as an isolated issue will favor the pro choice side. It wouldn't surprise me to see democrats putting abortion rights on ballot measures as single issue up or down votes because they sense the average voter is not ready for a post abortion country.

When law outpaces the national conscience, it can curtail unwanted behavior by making it more difficult, but it also can cause backlash like prohibition. I'm not convinced the prolife movement is succeeding at moving the national conscience along side law.

The USSC is to rule on Constitutional law, not public opinion. Then, they are to let the cards fall as they will.

The pro life side is not organized and funded in any way comparable to the activists+profiteers affected in the for-profit abortion industry, these will not just roll over and accept rulings, accept financial losses, etc. My state (and others) were investing in expanded abortion laws and clinics years before the overturn. They’re thrilled their investments are paying off. Open+prideful.

There is no apples to apples comparison. Truth versus lies doesn’t work that way.

Using the RvW ruling to throw elections is “no problem” to those with no conscience. Lies and scare tactics.
Those with conscience will be disappointed, but, nothing new. Nothing changed. The gravity of sin made even harder to ignore.

Rallying young people, esp women+children, to shill for death of innocents is about as ugly as it gets.
God have mercy.

[Sliceitup]

I saw comments today where conservatives were mad at the Supreme Court because the Dobbs ruling ruined this election for Republicans. Is this a widespread sentiment?

[temporal1]

I saw comments today where conservatives were mad at the Supreme Court because the Dobbs ruling ruined this election for Republicans. Is this a widespread sentiment?

Dems grabbed the opportunity, didn’t they?
It’s not as tho they weren’t prepared, they are politically organized and ready for battle, 24/7. They’ve been preparing for this for years, while most of us were more than surprised at the overturn. Just what they do in gov schools, alone, is .. OTT.

They’ve been candid, they haven’t lied about their preparations. Many live in denial.

i’m not sure about the answer to your question; to repeat my understanding, the USSC is to rule on the Constitution,
not to be involved with speculating on or ruling on “what MAY result.” The electorate, and electoral college, determine outcomes. Many WANT to politicize USSC. Judges must attempt to rise above.

What is (example, Rand Paul) versus powerful blocs/cults/lobbies?? Those of faith know there is more than surface appearances.
Sometimes, “winning” is losing. Measured in misery and suffering.

Truth is Truth, it doesn’t alter due to earthly politics.

2016 / "Inconvenient" "Persons" [Rand Paul's Petition for the Unborn]
http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=36

[Sliceitup]

I saw comments today where conservatives were mad at the Supreme Court because the Dobbs ruling ruined this election for Republicans. Is this a widespread sentiment?

Dems grabbed the opportunity, didn’t they?
It’s not as tho they weren’t prepared, they are politically organized and ready for battle, 24/7. They’ve been preparing for this for years, while most of us were more than surprised at the overturn. Just what they do in gov schools, alone, is .. OTT.

They’ve been candid, they haven’t lied about their preparations. Many live in denial.

i’m not sure about the answer to your question; to repeat my understanding, the USSC is to rule on the Constitution,
not to be involved with speculating on or ruling on “what MAY result.” The electorate, and electoral college, determine outcomes. Many WANT to politicize USSC. Judges must attempt to rise above.

What is (example, Rand Paul) versus powerful blocs/cults/lobbies?? Those of faith know there is more than surface appearances.
Sometimes, “winning” is losing. Measured in misery and suffering.

Truth is Truth, it doesn’t alter due to earthly politics.

2016 / "Inconvenient" "Persons" [Rand Paul's Petition for the Unborn]
http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=36

To say “we” were surprised by the overturn is a bit of a stretch if you mean people who are pro-life. This has been the entire reason why many people held their nose and voted for Trump. It was all about the Supreme Court seats. Democrats didn’t think it would ever happen which is why they always struggled to get out the vote by talking about the Supreme Court.

[Josh]

I saw comments today where conservatives were mad at the Supreme Court because the Dobbs ruling ruined this election for Republicans. Is this a widespread sentiment?

Perhaps there are some people who think killing babies is OK if it helps you win an election. I am not one of those people.

In Ohio we have a strong anti abortion law (currently blocked by a liberal judge, who claims Ohio’s constitution allows a right to abortion), and the entire state voted Republican outside of a few safe D districts and a new district in a big city. Big cities tend to be full of both liberals, crime, and massive vote fraud.

Likewise Texas is at the forefront of strong abortion laws and the Democrats lost for governor there. It was Beto’s third attempt at running for a major office in a row.

[ohio jones]

To say “we” were surprised by the overturn is a bit of a stretch if you mean people who are pro-life. This has been the entire reason why many people held their nose and voted for Trump. It was all about the Supreme Court seats. Democrats didn’t think it would ever happen which is why they always struggled to get out the vote by talking about the Supreme Court.

Republicans are struggling to find a new carrot.

[RZehr]

I saw comments today where conservatives were mad at the Supreme Court because the Dobbs ruling ruined this election for Republicans. Is this a widespread sentiment?

Because I’m quite unimpressed with the follow through of Republican politicians, I’m happy to get a genuine, sturdy Supreme Court ruling, rather than a wimpy Republican majority. I would prefer both; but if I had to pick between the SC we have, or a Republican House and Senate, I’ll take the bird in hand any day.

For myself, I don’t think it was the ruling alone that made the election day difference. But even if it did, I’ll still take it.

I think it was Trump/Maga that lost the Republican “red wave”. And if it wasn’t for Trump, we’d not have the SC that we have. So as far as I’m concerned, Trump gets credit for the SC and the blame for the election loss. But to me, his SC legacy out weighs the mid term loss.