Unable to load image

Due to the overturn of Roe v Wade, a 173-year-old abortion ban with no exceptions is suddenly in effect in Wisconsin.

https://old.reddit.com/r/wisconsin/comments/vjpzfk/wisconsins_173yearold_abortion_ban_goes_into?sort=controversial

I know, another Roe post, it's just beating a dead baby at this point. But it's pretty amazing how the pro choice movement carried out literally no long term planning in the last 50 years. Redditors, of course, are Redditing.

Should we start gearing up for the civil war too? How about re-enslaving black people? this country is so fricking stupid

97
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

the first thing reddicels do after losing all-access baby killing is dream about enslaving black people??

:#marseysaluteconfederacy:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

In one of RBGs more chuddish moments she criticized the way Roe was set up saying that it should have been codified through state legislatures. What she didn’t realize is that in this patriarchy none of those provisions would have mattered.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

it's pretty amazing how the pro-choice movement treated precedent the way its supposed to work under common law

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Dude even RBG recognized how shaky this precedent was. She (accurately) diagnosed that all Roe did was give conservatives a target to rail against for 50 years, as well as the inherent risk that it could easily be undone at any moment because it was bench legislation that totally circumvented the legal process.

>“Roe v. Wade, in contrast, invited no dialogue with legislators. Instead, it seemed entirely to remove the ball from the legislators’ court."

>"Doctrinal limbs too swiftly shaped, experience teaches, may prove unstable. The most prominent example in recent decades is Roe v. Wade. A less-encompassing Roe, one that merely struck down the extreme Texas law and went no further on that day … might have served to reduce rather than to fuel controversy"

This whole thing should be a lesson to Dems on why you shouldn't rely on bench legislation like this. If they'd spent the last 50 years passing incremental changes to abortion law through the legislature whenever they had full control (aka "doing it the right way"), Republicans would basically need a supermajority in the legislature to overturn the law.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

the inherent risk that it could easily be undone at any moment because it was bench legislation that totally circumvented the legal process.

Explain to me how you think regular legislation works.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

A judge bangs his gavel and announces a new law, right?


Transform your Marseys! :marseywave:
/e/marseybooba.webp
www.pastebin.com/Jj9URfVi

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Great synopsis. I'm pro choice but for 50yrs dems could have codified that into law, they didn't and this is what happens when you pretend case law never changes

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

And worst, during that 50 years, their rhetoric in philosophy department became more radicalized in an effort to own the chuds by labeling a human fetus as garbage or some vile shits like parasite.

Its funny how had these people just left the Protestant alone, by now, they probably would’ve compromised on abortion at least to some extent but no, it was more important for the libs to circlejerk amongst themselves without doing jack shit

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yeah when I hear terms like that I realize I didn't care for your company that was swept into the Democratic party

My wife's friend is a NICU nurse and they routinely save babies at the 26wk Mark. People who advocate for third trimester abortions as a right make me sick

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If they can save a baby at 26wk what's wrong with just inducing early delivery, saving the baby, and throwing it down the adoption pipeline. For the wammen involved that's functionally the same as an abruption isn't it? Why is this idea never talked about? Except in cases where the fetus is a potato, it would solve everyone's problem with late-term abortions.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

putting the kid in foster care still leaves the mother on the hook for child support

the keystone of feminist philosophy is absolving women of responsibility for their actions so that's a non-starter

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Not a guaranteed chance of survival and the kid is pretty fricked developmentally (physically). Putting them into foster care afterwards further gives them a shitty hand in life.

I doubt someone would want to adopt a super premie either, it's extremely difficult. Then there's the matter of who's paying the bill, a premie can easily rack up $100k medical debt :marseyshrug:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

There are millions of people who want to adopt a baby. Children under 3 who are up for adoption rarely stay in the foster system for long, if at all.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Fun fact: late term abortions are actually longer and more traumatic on your body than a C-section.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

![](/images/16562601975937285.webp)

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Anti abortion people have been working on this for 50 years, you'd think the choicers would have noticed. Precedent has been overturned many times, including famously in Brown v Board.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

First Civil War is fought over slavery, and now the second one would be over abortion? Sign me the heck up.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Frick no, that sounds insufferable. Sincere, christ cucks on one hand, and foids on the other

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

tradwives in need of a husband among very few surviving males though oh mama :#marseygigaretard:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Funnily enough, both are about the definition of a person.


Transform your Marseys! :marseywave:
/e/marseybooba.webp
www.pastebin.com/Jj9URfVi

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I hope the good guys win this time.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

So Conservatives, now that you've gotten what you want, I'll assume you're all set to signup to adopt these babies, right? You're going to be all for orphanages needing to be built with your tax dollars, supporting these babies, increased benefits for an already overburdened Foster system?

It really is like the left and right swapped this policy preference unwittingly.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Why do I have to setup to adopt kids? Can't they just stop banging so nondiscriminantly? Maybe don't frick someone you aren't willing to have a kid with, crazy idea I know

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Having s*x is a human right chud, women literally can't do anything to not get impregnated it's inevitable.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Interestingly, when men don't to be on the hook for child support it turns out that condoms are 100% effective if you really can't keep it in your pants (which is what you should have done). But telling women to keep their pants on is "slut shaming" and all known contraceptive methods are useless.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Perhaps they could get the incels to join their movement with that like of thinking

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

But then they'll r*pe her if she says no!

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

There's a looong wait list to adopt new babies, wannabe parents will take care of any extra adoptable babies really easily. The ones no one wants are feral 11 year old foster kids. Neither side wants to talk about them though

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Big issue with foster kids anywhere is that in the first place the goal isn't to adopt them out anyway. For the foster system, the ideal is to reunite those kids with their parents once said parents are deemed to have resolved whatever issue that got the child taken in the first place. It's only after multiple failures to do so and no progress on that "sphere" that the system starts trying to adopt foster kids out but by then as you said they're often quite old and many probably plan just to finish within the system anyway.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The ones no one wants are feral 11 year old foster kids.

In my country the news also use the term "young males" to describe Blacks & Arabs

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

i literally kept babies until they got adopted, its so great when people respond with shit like this and i can just point to a decade of putting my money (and time) where my mouth is.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Funny enough christ cucks are some of the biggest adopters i knew. Half the families i knew had a crack baby or kid imported from Africa

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This really just shows how stupid it was to rely so heavily on the ruling in the first place.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Presumably excludes r*pe and serious threat to the mother's life as exceptions?

(I hope)

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don't think so. It's a super old law that predates modern abortion techniques and discourse.

Their governor is a Democrat and their legislature is Republican. Maybe they'll come to some compromise to update it (Wisconsin probably doesn't support an absolute ban) but they could just end up sneeding at each other

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:#marseychef:

Snapshots:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

>THIS MANY year-old law

is just

>Current year

with a different salad dressing

The age of a rule is the most pseud-tier argument of whether or not something should be kept around

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.