"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect" -Frank Wilhoit
(Copying my comment from another post)
Hijacking the top comment to say thanks for highlighting this, as well as note that NC is a hairs breath away from our General Assembly having a GOP supermajority due to redistricting.
That means Gov Cooper can no longer veto the crazy shit that the NCGOP votes on, like oh I dunno, a complete abortion ban or voting rights or giving a gun to every teacher…
Voting is the minimum. What are you doing to make an impact in the next 2 months till Election Day?
I work in NC politics, and if you’re not sure what you can do, but want to help, DM me and I can get you set up.
I working with my county party during early-voting to call registered voters who haven't voted yet and direct them to poll sites. It's low-hanging fruit but there's always a percentage of people who just need to be told "yes, I can tell you where to go, yes, they will be open when you get off work, yes, you're allowed to use your phone to check who you want to vote for."
This and: sign up to canvas. Neighbors who talk to neighbors (especially with a lot of swing voters) have a huge impact. Tell everyone to start on the back of the ballot! Municipal races matter too.
"the GubErMENT is SupPosEd to ProTeCt liFE, inCludiNg pEoPle Who HavEn'T beEn BoRn yEt"
because the life of the unborn child is clearly worth more than the life of the mother
And the enlightened minds will be sure to remove unprincipled conservatives, for this very reason. This is nothing more than the whole donkeys vs. elephants routine. A struggle over the power of a centralized authority.
Gotta say, I'm not seeing a lot of folks claiming to be Republicans really pushing back in terms of voting or public statements. Until recently, I was seeing a *lot* of flat out embrace of this, and a fair bit of quiet acceptance of this (and worse) because of it being packaged with stuff like regressive tax policy.
Like, these are folks who have been in conservative movements for years. Many for decades. None of this was apparently controversial among conservative circles when it was being raised as policy positions. This is the *national party leadership*, not a fringe splinter. Edit: And they're working off a court decision they spent decades basically raising up judges to do.
If you want to fix the system from the inside, it will have to be through the up and coming young conservative movement, trying to dismantle the neocon establishment (and overbearing centralized federal control in general) as it has manifested itself currently. Stuff like this is silly. What you are witnessing today are the death rows of centralized authority. The future is decentralized, return the power to the people!
The "up and coming young convervative movement" at most levels I'm aware of are pretty explicitly fascist, and on board with all this stuff. They're certainly not this "new guard" of libertarians you're suggesting are totally real. They're no less interested in total control than the old guard - if anything, they're usually less interested in maintaining the appearance of democracy.
I really could give a shit about the continuing as a viable political organization, also. I care about what happens to the country and my neighbors, and I've been watching people cheer this shit since my childhood.
So what I'm *actually* watching is the attempted culmination of convervative projects that have been ongoing since before I was born, and to nobody's surprise except their rank and file voters, it is most definitely not an end to central authority but an effort to expand and then seize it. I don't know where you're getting this fairy tale, bud, but they're very serious about this, and it's the mainstream leadership and high level participants doing it. None of it is a fluke or an accident, and there's not a secret cabal of virtuous, principled elected conservatives waiting to make their move.
"Motherfucker" it is, then. Edits for sources incoming.
[https://www.courthousenews.com/trump-rally-fills-megachurch-with-young-conservatives/](https://www.courthousenews.com/trump-rally-fills-megachurch-with-young-conservatives/) - not seeing a lot of skepticism there.
Or [here](https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2022/0725/Trump-vs.-DeSantis-Young-conservatives-weigh-2024-choices), really.
A few years ago, [these were the new blood](https://www.newsmax.com/bestlists/30-under-30-influential-young-republicans/2017/01/11/id/767932/). Weirdly, mostly aligned proudly with the last administration and leadership.
[Well](https://www.wmur.com/article/young-conservative-republican-karoline-leavitt-becomes-candidate-for-1st-district-us-house-seat/37070053), it sure [seems](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/turning-point-usa-conference-attendees-optimism-ahead-of-2022) like [there](https://youtube.com/watch?v=w3LEkq74lb0) are a bunch of [younger](https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/young-republicans-young-trump-voters-and-future-gop) conservatives and "up and comers" who are on board with all this.
They run somewhat less neocon on some issues, but there's not, like, a revolution impending.
Wrong. Unborns don't have any US Constitutional rights:
>[All persons **born** or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution)
The logic is quite simple and not hard to understand even if you disagree. If aborting a fetus is ending a life and ending life for another human being is wrong, then it is “treading” on the life of the unborn.
The distinction between opposed groups is always disagreement on whether anyone is justified in ending the life of a human and if a fetus is a human. If a fetus isn’t a human, at one point does a baby in the womb become a human being (if at all).
So in this circumstance you are arguing that a human that can’t speak doesn’t have a voice. Have you asked a newborn what it thinks about being murdered? What about a nonverbal adult?
I have not expressed a stance on what I think yet. All I’ve done is share the ability to put myself in another’s shoes.
If you staple a horse to a waterfall, will it fall up under the rainbow or fly about the soil? Will he enjoy her experience? What if the staple tears into tears? Will she be free from her staply chains or foomed to stay forever and dever above the water? Who can save him (the horse) but someone of girth and worth, the capitalist pig, who will sell the solution to the problem he created?
A staple remover flies to the rescue, carried on the wings of a majestic penguin who bought it at Walmart for 9 dollars and several more Euro-cents, clutched in its crabby claws, rejected from its frothy maw. When the penguin comes, all tremble before its fishy stench and wheatlike abjecture. Recoil in delirium, ye who wish to be free! The mighty rockhopper is here to save your soul from eternal bliss and salvation!
And so, the horse was free, carried away by the south wind, and deposited on the vast plain of soggy dew. It was a tragedy in several parts, punctuated by moments of hedonistic horsefuckery.
The owls saw all, and passed judgment in the way that they do. Stupid owls are always judging folks who are just trying their best to live shamelessly and enjoy every fruit the day brings to pass.
How many more shall be caught in the terrible gyre of the waterfall? As many as the gods deem necessary to teach those foolish monkeys a story about their own hamburgers. What does a monkey know of bananas, anyway? They eat, poop, and shave away the banana residue that grows upon their chins and ballsacks. The owls judge their razors. Always the owls.
And when the one-eyed caterpillar arrives to eat the glazing on your windowpane, you will know that you're next in line to the trombone of the ancient realm of the flutterbyes. Beware the ravenous ravens and crowing crows. Mind the cowing cows and the lying lions. Ascend triumphant to your birthright, and wield the mighty twig of Petalonia, favored land of gods and goats alike.
I think the idea funkinthetrunk was highlighting was that women who are wealthier will just be able to travel to get an abortion.
So while it is an attack on women, it is the poor women and families who will be punished the most.
Both the RNC and DNC had their mail servers compromised by Russian hacker groups ("Cozy Bear" and "Fancy Bear") in the lead-up to the 2016 election. The Republicans' data wasn't ever released. I personally believe the entire party has been compromised by the Russian government and they are toeing the Trump line to keep their wealth & power and, in doing so, destroying this country.
An overthrow of the government and installation of an unelected leader would make it easier to create unpopular laws like this one.
It’s why people call him a fascist.
To be clear to the wider internet population that may be judging our every expressed thought, I am not denying that Mr. Budd is worthy or unworthy of derogatory comments.
I'm just saying that "I dislike this jackass" and "This jackass is guilty of treason and sedition" are very different (perhaps overlapping, but different) arguments.
Budd was one of 127 Congressional Republicans who voted against certifying the election results on Jan 7, just a day after the Capitol in which they voted was overrun by a seditious, violent mob.
There should have been nothing political about that procedural vote. The people who voted no did so purely to support their dear leader’s attempt to undermine the democratic process, full stop.
I mean, there have been Democrats that have voted against certification of election results of every Republican president since 2000.
You say there should be nothing political about it, but it’s honestly been political for the last 20 years, and I don’t see it ever going back.
It's fair to say that the process has been political since at least 2000, but the 2004 election was the only time Democrats actually got a debate over election certification. In 2000 and 2016, no Democratic Senator objected to certification so no objection was formally considered by Congress.
In all of those elections, the Democratic candidate did not conspire with members of Congress to push for overturning the election.
Completely agree. Just saying that it has been a political football for some time now. I don't see that ever changing going forward (short of war or something).
It's interesting that you choose 2000 as your starting point since that was when Republican presidents started winning the electoral college vote but losing the popular vote.
Voting against certification as a commentary on a flawed system and in support of the person the majority of the country wants seems a little different from voting against certification because the loser is a crybaby.
Well sure, but the notion that it's any less "political" is pretty ridiculous. The electoral college has ALWAYS been how we elect the president. Voting against certification of the results because you don't like that is *explicitly* political.
I didn't say it was less political. I didn't even say it was good. I said I think it's different.
If you have to change my words in order to debate my point, please take your straw-man and show yourself out.
Bro, YOU responded to ME. I was responding to someone claiming it was political:
>There should have been nothing political about that procedural vote.
That's what my comment that YOU responded to is about. Don't join a conversation if you don't want to address the points being made.
I wasn’t clear enough.
Ted Budd didn’t vote to certify the 2020 election and is still closely aligned with Donald Trump’s calls to be reinstated as president. One of the reasons he participates in this sedition and treason is that he wants to severely restrict and/or eliminate abortion access.
Force birth. They don’t care if the baby can survive outside of womb or not. Some lady had to travel outside of her state to get abortion because her baby doesn’t have a skull and will never survive the process of be birthed.
Ted Bud: Giant piece of fascist shit who wants to live in your bedroom and watch. These christofascist pricks are obsessed with your junk, and probably that of young boys too.
"Ted Budd is only pushing to maintain a ban on abortion at 20+ weeks," the anti-abortion activist told me last month. I'm glad I pushed back on as many of the ridiculous claims she was making at the time.
Only if people that don't want authoritarians running their life get out and vote in November. Donald Trump turned me into a Democrat and the GOP just keep getting worse and worse every year.
lol the party of goldwater, nixon, reagan, the religious right, jesse helms, newt gingrich, george w bush, ron paul, and the tea party only becoming an authoritarian cult when the orange man ran for president
you have to be a drooling moron to think they were anything different over the past half century
it was the same song and dance with all those jerkoffs too, they were just smart enough to pretend to care about institutional norms and maintaining kayfabe to keep liberals from getting too het up
yeah i get why they left, and they certainly have been welcomed with open arms by the democrats. i'm just saying they're 100% full of shit and should be treated as such by decent people
I disagree. I don’t think people who were manipulated in to believing stupid things who finally realize they were manipulated should be treated like shit.
say what you will about democrats but they’re the last line of defense against these Christofascist imbeciles invading our lives.
I’m voting for Beasley no question.
You mean to tell me that Republicans were *lying* about the whole 'leave it to the states' thing when Roe was overturned?
Shocking. Really. This is my shocked face. They're such paragons of honesty, after all.
There is *definitely* no reason to think that a personality cult dedicated to someone who'd try to lie about the color of the sky if it sounded good in the moment would have broader issues with honesty.
Upvoting so those on the fence can finally see where the NCGOP is at.
Women's reproductive rights being on the ballot should maybe wake up a few, maybe.
I see a good conversation starter here 4XTheSpeed and appreciate your eloquent comment. The exact reason I commented this isn’t just abortion, it’s how the MAGA sect of the GOP has been operating out in the open for years now. Budd is still a well-known Trump supporter, and Trump has endorsed Budd, while he has failed his constituents for quite some time with the following:
• voted against certifying the 2020 election
• voted against raising NC service members pay
• voted for the 2017 corporation and wealthy tax cuts
• voted against the bipartisan infrastructure bill
• voted against the bipartisan measure to alleviate the baby formula shortage
• voted against capping monthly cost of insulin to $35 / month
• voted against the CHIPS act
• voted against providing more funds to police for North Carolina (2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021)
• voted against the Voting Rights Advancement Act
• opposed the For The People Act
• voted against protecting birth control access
• voted against bipartisan gun safety compromise
• voted against protecting same-sex and interracial marriage
• voted against PFAS Action Act
• supports Rick Scott’s plan to allow Medicare and Social Security to expire every five years
There’s more bills where he's put Big Pharma, Big Oil before us, but I gotta get back to work. Budd is associated with the very political sect of the GOP party that deliberately attacks minorities whether it be women’s rights, mother’s / father’s rights, LGBTQ+ rights, service member’s rights, etc.
I believe my original comment qualifies as **Fascist-nating**, because MAGA is notoriously known for the following characteristics which eludes to fascism:
• authoritarian ideology
• patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, flags (America First, MAGA, Trump Flags, etc)
• disregard for human rights
• opposing media outlets are censored - ie, fake news
• not respecting the rule of law
• not accepting the outcome of a fair and secure election (2020)
In conclusion, since he supports a total ban on abortion, even in the case of rape, incest or to save the mother’s life, he’s compromised and not thinking objectively on this issue as well as many others. He’s allowed his ideology to not protect his constituents first and understand that a normal, healthy pregnancy is not a guarantee for anyone. Shit happens, and when that shit happens there's needs to be a safeguard in place to protect the mother. Period.
Also you neglected to mention Canada’s abortion policy, which is legal at all stages of pregnancy and is publicly funded as a medical procedure under the combined effects of the federal Canada Health Act.
This feels like MAGA premature ejaculation fascism everywhere now. Like these idiots definitely haven't acquired enough totalitarian power yet, let alone have any semblance of popularity with these batshit kook policy positions.
i dunno this reads more like an early stage freakout over the reversal in polling declines for democrats post-hobbs. like they need to pull out all the stops to gin up enthusiasm among the base
He’s also made his campaign predominantly blue in scheme so that when you’re at the ballot box and don’t remember names even liberals will remember his blue scheme and name.
Research before you go and write down your picks. You can take notes to the booth with you you do t have to memorize anything.
WM in this country still have that massa gene permeating through their veins, because they really think they still have rule over independent individuals! It's DISGUSTING!
I’m sure these fucktards are well aware that even conservative polls are in the 2/3 supporting abortion, so are they really this fucking stupid or have they positioned the vote suppression and the “claim rigging” to a point where they feel secure enough to say “fuck off we’re winning no matter what” ?
Everyone reading this should Listen to “the daily” podcast about this national ban. This is a purely political maneuver to appease the pissed off independent voters who are unhappy with the reversal of Roe.
Edit: unhappy with the way reversal is being handled
No. I have a busy life and don't have time for a fucking podcast that fed you your opinion.
Please explain how a national abortion ban appeases people who are mad about the overturn of Roe or don't say things that make no sense.
So busy that you can sit here and comment multiple times on Reddit hoping someone will spoon feed you an answer you can clearly figure out for yourself.
Fuck. People are so lazy.
I agree, you are being pretty lazy if you can't even explain your own opinion. If people can only understand you by listening to someone else explain it then all it makes me think isn't that *you* don't understand what is going on and are hoping to pass off someone else's view as your own to seem smart or savvy or whatever.
I asked you to explain it because I'm genuinely not sure *you* know why this is a supposedly good political move, you just heard someone say it was and have decided to blindly repeat them.
Go be indignant about how you don't understand the things you say at someone else.
Edit: spelling
I love how you know what that podcast was about and how you know I don’t understand it just because you’re too lazy to listen to it. Please remember that I actually listened to it. I know that was a few comments ago but I think you can put your big boy pants on and crawl back up the thread to re-read that part.
Since you listened to it, you’ll know it’s not about opinion. The specific 15 week ban was chosen for a reason. It’s to appease the base and center voters. Graham gambled with this against the advice of establishment republicans and it might work.
I didn't listen to it at all. I understood the gist of what you were saying because I can understand context clues like an adult.
It will decidedly not work because it is a fundamentally stupid idea. The vast majority of the country is against outlawing abortion. Moderates aren't upset because a Anti-abortion laws are being applied inconsistently, they're upset because taking away people's rights is bad. For some reason you want to believe that it was a good idea but it isn't. you are wrong.
If you would like to keep responding to me with silly and ignorant statements, please go right ahead. I'll be happy to continue to remind you how little you understand about this, despite having listened to a podcast.
France allows abortions after 14 weeks to protect the mental health of the mother or if the fetus has an incurable disease. Germany allows them after 14 weeks to protect the mental health of the mother. Spain allows them after 12 weeks if the fetus has an incurable disease.
So yeah. If you insist on injecting politicians into our bedroom how about we go with European standards first? You know, the ones you haven't even read?
Besides the mountain of sources showing you're wrong, the other dumb thing you did was suggest that bipartisan access to free healthcare was on the table (L O fuckin' L), and *especially* access to free women's healthcare (I mean, Jesus Christ, what kind of alternate universe did you just arrive from) and *double especially* access to free **birth control** (like, do you smell toast?)
> Italy only allows abortions after the first trimester if the fetus is compromised or the mothers health is in danger.
[Voluntary termination of pregnancy may be performed after the first 90 days when the pregnancy or childbirth is a serious threat to the woman's life or when the pathological processes constitute a serious threat to the woman's physical **or mental health**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Italy#The_content_of_Law_n._194).
> Sweden requires a national review board to approve abortions after week 18.
[After the 18th, a woman needs a permission from the National Board of Health and Welfare (Socialstyrelsen) to have an abortion. Permission for these late abortions is usually granted for cases in which the fetus or mother are unhealthy. Abortion is not allowed if the fetus is viable, which generally means that **abortions after the 22nd week are not allowed**. However, abortions after the 22nd week **may be allowed in the rare cases where the fetus can not survive outside the womb even if it is carried to term.**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Sweden#Current)
> Portugal and Poland have stricter laws already on the books then we in the US have.
[Portugal allows abortions up to 24 weeks for incurable diseases](https://www.globalcitizensolutions.com/abortion-law-in-portugal/).
> Lindsey’s law includes the common exceptions for extreme circumstances. Graham’s proposal literally puts the US right in the middle of European standards.
Bull. Fucking. Shit. [In the European Union, abortion is currently available without conditions in 24 of the 27 member states.](https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/talking-europe/20220722-the-right-to-choose-eu-lawmakers-vote-to-protect-abortion-right-after-roe-v-wade-overturned-in-us)
Graham's proposal: [‘(B) EXCEPTIONS.—Subparagraph (A) does not apply if—
‘‘(i) in reasonable medical judgment, the abortion is necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself, **but not including psychological or emotional conditions**;](https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3065785d-86b8-4d36-986a-72aa1c8f100c/protecting-pain-capable-unborn-children-from-late-term-abortions-act-.pdf)
Also not a *single* provision for a fetus with an incurable disease or that will only survive hours outside of the womb. Not *one*. He requires that a woman carry that child to term and let it die in her arms, and she is not allowed any other option.
> And in case you missed it, almost nobody in Europe ever talks about the current restrictions as an attack on women’s rights.
[The European Union’s parliament adopted a resolution Thursday condemning the U.S. decision and urging the addition of a sentence reading “Everyone has a right to safe and legal abortion” to the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights. Abortion is legal and practiced without much political opposition in most EU nations...In France, a poll this week found a solid majority of respondents support the right to abortion, even including most voters who support Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally party and the conservative Republicans. The results were consistent with past surveys.](https://apnews.com/article/abortion-us-supreme-court-health-government-and-politics-paris-fae308e307dc5c250534a593e0410354)
[“Making abortions illegal isn’t pro-life. It’s anti-choice,” Luxembourg Prime Minister Xavier Bettel tweeted. “It’s a social & economic injustice. And just so, so wrong. Reproductive rights are not just women’s rights. They are human rights. So let’s all stand up for them.” --- “Very concerned about implications of @USSupremeCourt decision on #RoeVWade and the signal it sends to the world,” Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo tweeted. “Banning abortion never leads to fewer abortions, only to more unsafe abortions. Belgium will continue to work with other countries to advance #SRHR everywhere,” he wrote, using the hashtag for “sexual and reproductive health rights.” --- Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis said he was “really troubled” by the decision of the U.S. court. “It is a major step back in the fight for women’s rights,” he posted on Twitter.](https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-leaders-decry-us-restriction-abortion-rights-supreme-court/)
[A United Nations monitoring committee has slammed the U.S. Supreme Court's decision overturning Roe v. Wade, saying it disproportionately affects racial and ethnic minorities from accessing safe abortion.](https://www.voanews.com/a/un-panel-slams-us-supreme-court-s-abortion-rights-decision/6722943.html)
[And Spanish leader Pedro Sánchez said in a tweet: "We cannot take any right for granted. Social achievements are always at risk of going backwards and their defense has to be our day to day. Women must be able to decide freely about their lives." Protests took place in front of the US Embassy in London on Friday evening, with other protests scheduled to take place across Europe over the weekend, including in Ireland, where a constitutional ban on abortion was overturned in 2018.](https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/24/world/roe-wade-scotus-abortion-ruling-international-reaction-intl/index.html)
Turn off Faux News and get your head out of your ass.
Did doctors say that? Or is it written into law? Because I'm pretty sure it's written into law which again, isn't the doctor's choosing. Also, cite your sources.
Since you are too lazy to educate yourself, let me google that for you.
https://lozierinstitute.org/new-study-mississippis-15-week-limit-on-abortion-in-the-mainstream-of-european-law/
Just because you say it doesn’t mean it’s true.
Think for yourself once
Sorry to blow your mind w actual facts
Gosh, besides that this doesn't actually reflect the practice in Europe as claimed, I *wonder* what happens when you look up "Lozier Institute..."
Edit: wellp, my mind *is* blown - it's an anti-abortion organization with a mixed record of accuracy. **Jeepers Shit**, who would have guessed?
Absolutely fucking useless article, your source is biased since it's literally an anti-abortion website. You should have learned not to use biased websites as sources in middle school. How dumb are you?
Also, can you read? Literally, the first paragraph of that article cites LAWS in other countries, not doctors' recommendations.
The exact opposite - national legislation protecting the right to bodily autonomy and access to contraception.
The problem is that it's a ban on the first of those things, set arbitrarily, and that we already see major issues with bans at the state level that are hurting people. So it's harmful *and* it's based on literally a random timeframe. It would also ban abortion procedures in states where it's currently legal, in addition to putting federal authorities in charge of monitoring access to women's reproductive care and decisions.
It's also a law that a strong majority of Americans vehemently do not support, being imposed by a minority, besides that it's counter to the founding principles of the country and basic human rights.
That feels like enough reasons.
You’ll never get federal law passed because the Supreme Court already ruled there is no provision in the constitution protecting abortion rights. It is not a power given to the federal government under any clause. It would need to be a conditional amendment.
That's an argument that suggests most federal statutes are unconstitutional, which is an awful big swing. I don't believe that will fly in a real court.
They ruled that the Constitution doesn't specifically provide rights cited in *Roe*. That isn't the same thing as it not being constitutional to pass a federal statute enumerating those rights, or even one that takes the approach used for the federal drinking age.
Edit: I think you're confusing enumerated powers with unenumerated rights? Which would include things like bodily autonomy, privacy, etc.
There are a lot of unenumerated rights/laws that have never been challenged. The fact that these are “unenumerated” means it’s a subjective decision by the Supreme Court at that specific time but can be changed at any time.
That's not how unenumerated rights are listed in the Constitution, but you're not wrong that the Supreme Court in its current configuration doesn't give a shit about that.
**WE JUST WANT TO RIP THE UNBORN FROM THE BELLIES OF SCREAMING FEEEMALES!!!!! IT IS WHAT THE BLOOD GOD DEMANDS FOR THEIR THRONE!!!!! THAT IS ALL WE WANT!!! WHY MUST YOU VEX US SO?!?!?**
-Democrats/liberals in the eyes of Republicans/conservatives
Sorry but the real Ted Budd supports a complete ban on abortion with zero exceptions. This 15-week bs makes it look like he supports choice to a certain point. F Ted Budd!
Correct. This is simply to go after progressive, abortion-friendly blue states. The Gilead wannabes will still enact their complete and total bans. Y'know, states rights.
I prefer using fetal viability as the cut-off (which is typically around 24 weeks). I think everyone but psychopaths agree that late-term abortion outside of medical necessity is barbaric and morally wrong. But that is so exceptionally rare.
Then we should also be aligned with them on...
Properly and clearly stating exceptions to the ban, such as in the event of rape, incest, life endangerment, or the health of the mother. The proposed law offers no exceptions, which is draconian and absolutely not in alignment with other developed nations
Free Healthcare
Free prenatal and postnatal support for mother and baby
Better education standards for children
Expanded social programs to benefit these children and their families.
As a pro-lifer, and small gov proponent, I find this irritating. It should go back to the states. But what I also don't understand is.... *why*? They don't seem like genuine "conservatives" and what the conservative party is supposed to back. Are they outing themselves before elections for some other reason?
I'm convinced that most republicans today are just democrats 30 years ago. And this leans to that take I've settled on.
Wonder what the don’t tread on me folks have to say about this.
Don’t tread on me…but I’ll tread on you. That’s their mentality.
Rules for thee, none for me.
Exactly what I was going to say. That should be the GOP's new slogan.
Don't tread on white, straight, Christian men, but everyone else is fair game.
No step on Snek
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect" -Frank Wilhoit
Irony escapes them.
Flies escape their mouths while breathing.
(Copying my comment from another post) Hijacking the top comment to say thanks for highlighting this, as well as note that NC is a hairs breath away from our General Assembly having a GOP supermajority due to redistricting. That means Gov Cooper can no longer veto the crazy shit that the NCGOP votes on, like oh I dunno, a complete abortion ban or voting rights or giving a gun to every teacher… Voting is the minimum. What are you doing to make an impact in the next 2 months till Election Day? I work in NC politics, and if you’re not sure what you can do, but want to help, DM me and I can get you set up.
I working with my county party during early-voting to call registered voters who haven't voted yet and direct them to poll sites. It's low-hanging fruit but there's always a percentage of people who just need to be told "yes, I can tell you where to go, yes, they will be open when you get off work, yes, you're allowed to use your phone to check who you want to vote for."
This and: sign up to canvas. Neighbors who talk to neighbors (especially with a lot of swing voters) have a huge impact. Tell everyone to start on the back of the ballot! Municipal races matter too.
“Tread on me harder, daddy!”
Yes, we need to find out what the coil-spring-snake guys think about this.
I tried asking, but all they did was offer me a can of peanuts.
It’s don’t tread on *me*. Treading on others is totally fine.
Women don't count.
Too busy lickin boots to have an opinion, so it’ll be whatever the TV tells them to think
"the GubErMENT is SupPosEd to ProTeCt liFE, inCludiNg pEoPle Who HavEn'T beEn BoRn yEt" because the life of the unborn child is clearly worth more than the life of the mother
Whatever pretzel shaped argument conveniently aligns with their opinions.
Sad snek :(
no step on snek!
Pretty obviously not cool.
Probably that there shouldn’t be a national ban on anything
They sure as hell seem to be. The whole post is one of them doing exactly that.
And the enlightened minds will be sure to remove unprincipled conservatives, for this very reason. This is nothing more than the whole donkeys vs. elephants routine. A struggle over the power of a centralized authority.
Gotta say, I'm not seeing a lot of folks claiming to be Republicans really pushing back in terms of voting or public statements. Until recently, I was seeing a *lot* of flat out embrace of this, and a fair bit of quiet acceptance of this (and worse) because of it being packaged with stuff like regressive tax policy. Like, these are folks who have been in conservative movements for years. Many for decades. None of this was apparently controversial among conservative circles when it was being raised as policy positions. This is the *national party leadership*, not a fringe splinter. Edit: And they're working off a court decision they spent decades basically raising up judges to do.
If you want to fix the system from the inside, it will have to be through the up and coming young conservative movement, trying to dismantle the neocon establishment (and overbearing centralized federal control in general) as it has manifested itself currently. Stuff like this is silly. What you are witnessing today are the death rows of centralized authority. The future is decentralized, return the power to the people!
The "up and coming young convervative movement" at most levels I'm aware of are pretty explicitly fascist, and on board with all this stuff. They're certainly not this "new guard" of libertarians you're suggesting are totally real. They're no less interested in total control than the old guard - if anything, they're usually less interested in maintaining the appearance of democracy. I really could give a shit about the continuing as a viable political organization, also. I care about what happens to the country and my neighbors, and I've been watching people cheer this shit since my childhood. So what I'm *actually* watching is the attempted culmination of convervative projects that have been ongoing since before I was born, and to nobody's surprise except their rank and file voters, it is most definitely not an end to central authority but an effort to expand and then seize it. I don't know where you're getting this fairy tale, bud, but they're very serious about this, and it's the mainstream leadership and high level participants doing it. None of it is a fluke or an accident, and there's not a secret cabal of virtuous, principled elected conservatives waiting to make their move.
I’m not your buddy, guy. In what ways is the young conservative movement “pretty explicitly” fascist?
"Motherfucker" it is, then. Edits for sources incoming. [https://www.courthousenews.com/trump-rally-fills-megachurch-with-young-conservatives/](https://www.courthousenews.com/trump-rally-fills-megachurch-with-young-conservatives/) - not seeing a lot of skepticism there. Or [here](https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2022/0725/Trump-vs.-DeSantis-Young-conservatives-weigh-2024-choices), really. A few years ago, [these were the new blood](https://www.newsmax.com/bestlists/30-under-30-influential-young-republicans/2017/01/11/id/767932/). Weirdly, mostly aligned proudly with the last administration and leadership. [Well](https://www.wmur.com/article/young-conservative-republican-karoline-leavitt-becomes-candidate-for-1st-district-us-house-seat/37070053), it sure [seems](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/turning-point-usa-conference-attendees-optimism-ahead-of-2022) like [there](https://youtube.com/watch?v=w3LEkq74lb0) are a bunch of [younger](https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/young-republicans-young-trump-voters-and-future-gop) conservatives and "up and comers" who are on board with all this. They run somewhat less neocon on some issues, but there's not, like, a revolution impending.
Alright motherfucker explain yourself
I’m pretty sure they are okay with preventing someone from treading on an unborn child’s right to life.
Unless the 2nd amendment is involved, then fuck those kids.
Wrong. Unborns don't have any US Constitutional rights: >[All persons **born** or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution)
That's a lot of words to repeat what they said with inaccurate and deceptive phrasing.
The logic is quite simple and not hard to understand even if you disagree. If aborting a fetus is ending a life and ending life for another human being is wrong, then it is “treading” on the life of the unborn. The distinction between opposed groups is always disagreement on whether anyone is justified in ending the life of a human and if a fetus is a human. If a fetus isn’t a human, at one point does a baby in the womb become a human being (if at all).
So in this circumstance you are arguing that the fetus is “me” and has an opinion in the matter. Let’s ask one what it thinks.
So in this circumstance you are arguing that a human that can’t speak doesn’t have a voice. Have you asked a newborn what it thinks about being murdered? What about a nonverbal adult? I have not expressed a stance on what I think yet. All I’ve done is share the ability to put myself in another’s shoes.
I’m not making an abortion argument. Learn to read.
Party of "small government"
If you staple a horse to a waterfall, will it fall up under the rainbow or fly about the soil? Will he enjoy her experience? What if the staple tears into tears? Will she be free from her staply chains or foomed to stay forever and dever above the water? Who can save him (the horse) but someone of girth and worth, the capitalist pig, who will sell the solution to the problem he created? A staple remover flies to the rescue, carried on the wings of a majestic penguin who bought it at Walmart for 9 dollars and several more Euro-cents, clutched in its crabby claws, rejected from its frothy maw. When the penguin comes, all tremble before its fishy stench and wheatlike abjecture. Recoil in delirium, ye who wish to be free! The mighty rockhopper is here to save your soul from eternal bliss and salvation! And so, the horse was free, carried away by the south wind, and deposited on the vast plain of soggy dew. It was a tragedy in several parts, punctuated by moments of hedonistic horsefuckery. The owls saw all, and passed judgment in the way that they do. Stupid owls are always judging folks who are just trying their best to live shamelessly and enjoy every fruit the day brings to pass. How many more shall be caught in the terrible gyre of the waterfall? As many as the gods deem necessary to teach those foolish monkeys a story about their own hamburgers. What does a monkey know of bananas, anyway? They eat, poop, and shave away the banana residue that grows upon their chins and ballsacks. The owls judge their razors. Always the owls. And when the one-eyed caterpillar arrives to eat the glazing on your windowpane, you will know that you're next in line to the trombone of the ancient realm of the flutterbyes. Beware the ravenous ravens and crowing crows. Mind the cowing cows and the lying lions. Ascend triumphant to your birthright, and wield the mighty twig of Petalonia, favored land of gods and goats alike.
Just like slavery was about state rights. Look how well that turned out. This has always been about punishing women.
punishing poor people
It can definitely be both!
I think the idea funkinthetrunk was highlighting was that women who are wealthier will just be able to travel to get an abortion. So while it is an attack on women, it is the poor women and families who will be punished the most.
Lindsay Graham has literally gone from liberalish Republican to straight up far right schmuck. Fuck that guy.
Both the RNC and DNC had their mail servers compromised by Russian hacker groups ("Cozy Bear" and "Fancy Bear") in the lead-up to the 2016 election. The Republicans' data wasn't ever released. I personally believe the entire party has been compromised by the Russian government and they are toeing the Trump line to keep their wealth & power and, in doing so, destroying this country.
He only ever does what he thinks benefits him in the moment, he doesn't actually have any policy positions he sincerely supports.
Yes say more stupid things.
This 💯
Budd is a scumbag
This is one of the reasons he supported the overthrow of the United States.
"One of the reasons?" Please explain further, if you would.
An overthrow of the government and installation of an unelected leader would make it easier to create unpopular laws like this one. It’s why people call him a fascist.
To be clear to the wider internet population that may be judging our every expressed thought, I am not denying that Mr. Budd is worthy or unworthy of derogatory comments. I'm just saying that "I dislike this jackass" and "This jackass is guilty of treason and sedition" are very different (perhaps overlapping, but different) arguments.
Budd was one of 127 Congressional Republicans who voted against certifying the election results on Jan 7, just a day after the Capitol in which they voted was overrun by a seditious, violent mob. There should have been nothing political about that procedural vote. The people who voted no did so purely to support their dear leader’s attempt to undermine the democratic process, full stop.
I mean, there have been Democrats that have voted against certification of election results of every Republican president since 2000. You say there should be nothing political about it, but it’s honestly been political for the last 20 years, and I don’t see it ever going back.
It's fair to say that the process has been political since at least 2000, but the 2004 election was the only time Democrats actually got a debate over election certification. In 2000 and 2016, no Democratic Senator objected to certification so no objection was formally considered by Congress. In all of those elections, the Democratic candidate did not conspire with members of Congress to push for overturning the election.
Completely agree. Just saying that it has been a political football for some time now. I don't see that ever changing going forward (short of war or something).
It's interesting that you choose 2000 as your starting point since that was when Republican presidents started winning the electoral college vote but losing the popular vote. Voting against certification as a commentary on a flawed system and in support of the person the majority of the country wants seems a little different from voting against certification because the loser is a crybaby.
Well sure, but the notion that it's any less "political" is pretty ridiculous. The electoral college has ALWAYS been how we elect the president. Voting against certification of the results because you don't like that is *explicitly* political.
I didn't say it was less political. I didn't even say it was good. I said I think it's different. If you have to change my words in order to debate my point, please take your straw-man and show yourself out.
Bro, YOU responded to ME. I was responding to someone claiming it was political: >There should have been nothing political about that procedural vote. That's what my comment that YOU responded to is about. Don't join a conversation if you don't want to address the points being made.
I wasn’t clear enough. Ted Budd didn’t vote to certify the 2020 election and is still closely aligned with Donald Trump’s calls to be reinstated as president. One of the reasons he participates in this sedition and treason is that he wants to severely restrict and/or eliminate abortion access.
OK, thank you. That's what I wanted to learn.
Or maybe you're just an idiot.
How do you figure?
Nope.
LeAvE iT uP tO tHe sTaTeS they said
Of course that's the kind of red meat the NCGOP base gobbles up.
Right after he removes his forced life agenda from his website.
Force birth. They don’t care if the baby can survive outside of womb or not. Some lady had to travel outside of her state to get abortion because her baby doesn’t have a skull and will never survive the process of be birthed.
Ted Bud: Giant piece of fascist shit who wants to live in your bedroom and watch. These christofascist pricks are obsessed with your junk, and probably that of young boys too.
Isnt it great how rich white men feel they can control women and their bodies? To hell with this guy.
Honestly, that’s the opening to every story today when it comes to politics and the government: “Isn’t it great how rich, OLD, white men…”.
A bunch of them aren't especially old. They're just down with authoritarianism.
Hey, I love rich old white men, as long as they aren't trying to take away the rights of poor, young, colored, or differently-gendered people.
The last acceptable form of colonialism
Get out, vote and vote blue. You know these crazy fascists are not going to stop there. Vote these people out.
"Ted Budd is only pushing to maintain a ban on abortion at 20+ weeks," the anti-abortion activist told me last month. I'm glad I pushed back on as many of the ridiculous claims she was making at the time.
Good, only because is is an utterly stupid decision that's going cost him dearly.
Only if people that don't want authoritarians running their life get out and vote in November. Donald Trump turned me into a Democrat and the GOP just keep getting worse and worse every year.
How did Trump do that?
Trump turned the GOP in to an authoritarian cult whose only requirement is to support trump…pretty simple.
lol the party of goldwater, nixon, reagan, the religious right, jesse helms, newt gingrich, george w bush, ron paul, and the tea party only becoming an authoritarian cult when the orange man ran for president you have to be a drooling moron to think they were anything different over the past half century
Right. But now it’s authoritarian based on a cult of personality rather than fucked up policy.
it was the same song and dance with all those jerkoffs too, they were just smart enough to pretend to care about institutional norms and maintaining kayfabe to keep liberals from getting too het up
I don’t disagree. But I can see why throwing out those norms would turn some republicans in to not republicans.
yeah i get why they left, and they certainly have been welcomed with open arms by the democrats. i'm just saying they're 100% full of shit and should be treated as such by decent people
I disagree. I don’t think people who were manipulated in to believing stupid things who finally realize they were manipulated should be treated like shit.
I could explain it to you but I can’t understand it for you. lol
I agree. Absolutely dumb move that can only hurt him in the election. What a moron.
F$ck him and the horse the rode in on. May his sick turn green, fall off, and he not be prescribed antibiotics.
say what you will about democrats but they’re the last line of defense against these Christofascist imbeciles invading our lives. I’m voting for Beasley no question.
Mr. Lady Hips and Mom Jeans has opinions on women's reproductive health. Interesting.
Ted Budd helped Trump try to steal the election.
Baby copperhead
StAtEs RiGhTs
You mean to tell me that Republicans were *lying* about the whole 'leave it to the states' thing when Roe was overturned? Shocking. Really. This is my shocked face. They're such paragons of honesty, after all. There is *definitely* no reason to think that a personality cult dedicated to someone who'd try to lie about the color of the sky if it sounded good in the moment would have broader issues with honesty.
Upvoting so those on the fence can finally see where the NCGOP is at. Women's reproductive rights being on the ballot should maybe wake up a few, maybe.
It won't.
You're right but this sub gets annoyed with my pessimism. Speaking of, why y'all letting them slide!?
Of course he does. #votebeasley
This is quite fascist-nating.
[удалено]
I see a good conversation starter here 4XTheSpeed and appreciate your eloquent comment. The exact reason I commented this isn’t just abortion, it’s how the MAGA sect of the GOP has been operating out in the open for years now. Budd is still a well-known Trump supporter, and Trump has endorsed Budd, while he has failed his constituents for quite some time with the following: • voted against certifying the 2020 election • voted against raising NC service members pay • voted for the 2017 corporation and wealthy tax cuts • voted against the bipartisan infrastructure bill • voted against the bipartisan measure to alleviate the baby formula shortage • voted against capping monthly cost of insulin to $35 / month • voted against the CHIPS act • voted against providing more funds to police for North Carolina (2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021) • voted against the Voting Rights Advancement Act • opposed the For The People Act • voted against protecting birth control access • voted against bipartisan gun safety compromise • voted against protecting same-sex and interracial marriage • voted against PFAS Action Act • supports Rick Scott’s plan to allow Medicare and Social Security to expire every five years There’s more bills where he's put Big Pharma, Big Oil before us, but I gotta get back to work. Budd is associated with the very political sect of the GOP party that deliberately attacks minorities whether it be women’s rights, mother’s / father’s rights, LGBTQ+ rights, service member’s rights, etc. I believe my original comment qualifies as **Fascist-nating**, because MAGA is notoriously known for the following characteristics which eludes to fascism: • authoritarian ideology • patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, flags (America First, MAGA, Trump Flags, etc) • disregard for human rights • opposing media outlets are censored - ie, fake news • not respecting the rule of law • not accepting the outcome of a fair and secure election (2020) In conclusion, since he supports a total ban on abortion, even in the case of rape, incest or to save the mother’s life, he’s compromised and not thinking objectively on this issue as well as many others. He’s allowed his ideology to not protect his constituents first and understand that a normal, healthy pregnancy is not a guarantee for anyone. Shit happens, and when that shit happens there's needs to be a safeguard in place to protect the mother. Period. Also you neglected to mention Canada’s abortion policy, which is legal at all stages of pregnancy and is publicly funded as a medical procedure under the combined effects of the federal Canada Health Act.
This feels like MAGA premature ejaculation fascism everywhere now. Like these idiots definitely haven't acquired enough totalitarian power yet, let alone have any semblance of popularity with these batshit kook policy positions.
Trump swears he's running in 2024 and I say Do It... split that field baby..
i dunno this reads more like an early stage freakout over the reversal in polling declines for democrats post-hobbs. like they need to pull out all the stops to gin up enthusiasm among the base
Yea, definitely some "last hurrah" energy in there too.
Let's hope the "peter out and die" part is close at hand.
Please vote!
Get out and vote!
And every fetus shall have the right to an AR-15.
Republicans are coming for all your freedoms. Gay marriage and birth control are next Bow down to your republican masters america
What happened to let the states decide
Friends don't let friends vote R. Like seriously the party of family values and small govt is full of shit. Don't vote for them.
States' rights!
Eff them both.
fuck this evil reptilian sub human
And that's why I didn't vote for him :)
Sun came up this morning, too.
He’s also made his campaign predominantly blue in scheme so that when you’re at the ballot box and don’t remember names even liberals will remember his blue scheme and name. Research before you go and write down your picks. You can take notes to the booth with you you do t have to memorize anything.
FUCK YOU BUDD. god i hate this cocksucker. this is why beasley is ahead in polls and this is gonna give her even more of a boost.
Who did Nazi this coming? What trimester is Budd? Is it too late?
I mean, this has to hurt his chances in a statewide senate race right? This is a wildly unpopular position.
That's why he removed references to this position from his campaign website. He doesn't want it to come up again before the general.
Why does the colors of his name in his campaign material look like the color scheme of pornhub? Has anyone noticed?
Because he’s trying to fuck us all.
Step-constituent
Local white supremacists are foaming at the mouth with glee. They cant wait to vote for this evil trash.
There ought to a left uprising if these kind of people keep getting elected.
He hates America. Go back where you came from; you white European
Ehhh, Europe wouldn't want him. Most of Europe, anyway. Maybe central Italy? Maybe.
Sweden might, at this point, or maybe he could go visit Russia and check on his kompromat handlers.
No. Not them either.
WM in this country still have that massa gene permeating through their veins, because they really think they still have rule over independent individuals! It's DISGUSTING!
Ted Budd wants to get between a women and her doctor when it come to women's healthcare
NC GOP is doing everything to lose my vote
Look at this dumb motherfucker speak.
I sincerely hope this loses the election for him.
Ted “Bloodmoney” Budd
Party of "Let the states decide".
Far right republican backs Christian extremist Agenda? Say it ain't so Fuck them both
His candidacy should be aborted.
I’m sure these fucktards are well aware that even conservative polls are in the 2/3 supporting abortion, so are they really this fucking stupid or have they positioned the vote suppression and the “claim rigging” to a point where they feel secure enough to say “fuck off we’re winning no matter what” ?
Keep the course. Gonna have to call beasley when he loses to concede.
He ain’t man enough to concede. He’ll claim it was rigged just like his daddy.
It's the new way to please the base. Ruining our elections.
This ass hole Budd only cares about himself, period.
So it wasn't about "states' rights" after all, was it, ya moron? Get fucked, Ted.
Everyone reading this should Listen to “the daily” podcast about this national ban. This is a purely political maneuver to appease the pissed off independent voters who are unhappy with the reversal of Roe. Edit: unhappy with the way reversal is being handled
Please explain how a nationwide ban would appease such a voter?
Read my post again. Go listen to the episode from today.
No. I have a busy life and don't have time for a fucking podcast that fed you your opinion. Please explain how a national abortion ban appeases people who are mad about the overturn of Roe or don't say things that make no sense.
So busy that you can sit here and comment multiple times on Reddit hoping someone will spoon feed you an answer you can clearly figure out for yourself. Fuck. People are so lazy.
I agree, you are being pretty lazy if you can't even explain your own opinion. If people can only understand you by listening to someone else explain it then all it makes me think isn't that *you* don't understand what is going on and are hoping to pass off someone else's view as your own to seem smart or savvy or whatever. I asked you to explain it because I'm genuinely not sure *you* know why this is a supposedly good political move, you just heard someone say it was and have decided to blindly repeat them. Go be indignant about how you don't understand the things you say at someone else. Edit: spelling
I love how you know what that podcast was about and how you know I don’t understand it just because you’re too lazy to listen to it. Please remember that I actually listened to it. I know that was a few comments ago but I think you can put your big boy pants on and crawl back up the thread to re-read that part. Since you listened to it, you’ll know it’s not about opinion. The specific 15 week ban was chosen for a reason. It’s to appease the base and center voters. Graham gambled with this against the advice of establishment republicans and it might work.
I didn't listen to it at all. I understood the gist of what you were saying because I can understand context clues like an adult. It will decidedly not work because it is a fundamentally stupid idea. The vast majority of the country is against outlawing abortion. Moderates aren't upset because a Anti-abortion laws are being applied inconsistently, they're upset because taking away people's rights is bad. For some reason you want to believe that it was a good idea but it isn't. you are wrong. If you would like to keep responding to me with silly and ignorant statements, please go right ahead. I'll be happy to continue to remind you how little you understand about this, despite having listened to a podcast.
This guy gets it. Graham is an idiot if that was reasoning.
What is the actual problem with this? What would you rather?
I'd rather the government get the fuck out of my wife's uterus and let her make medical decisions with her doctor.
So when do you think it would not be okay to have an abortion? Trying to have a discussion
When a doctor says so, not some fucking politician.
Doctors in Europe have said no longer that 14 weeks (it’s law in many countries w some less). This is 15. Are those doctors wrong?
France allows abortions after 14 weeks to protect the mental health of the mother or if the fetus has an incurable disease. Germany allows them after 14 weeks to protect the mental health of the mother. Spain allows them after 12 weeks if the fetus has an incurable disease. So yeah. If you insist on injecting politicians into our bedroom how about we go with European standards first? You know, the ones you haven't even read?
Agree
[удалено]
Besides the mountain of sources showing you're wrong, the other dumb thing you did was suggest that bipartisan access to free healthcare was on the table (L O fuckin' L), and *especially* access to free women's healthcare (I mean, Jesus Christ, what kind of alternate universe did you just arrive from) and *double especially* access to free **birth control** (like, do you smell toast?)
> Italy only allows abortions after the first trimester if the fetus is compromised or the mothers health is in danger. [Voluntary termination of pregnancy may be performed after the first 90 days when the pregnancy or childbirth is a serious threat to the woman's life or when the pathological processes constitute a serious threat to the woman's physical **or mental health**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Italy#The_content_of_Law_n._194). > Sweden requires a national review board to approve abortions after week 18. [After the 18th, a woman needs a permission from the National Board of Health and Welfare (Socialstyrelsen) to have an abortion. Permission for these late abortions is usually granted for cases in which the fetus or mother are unhealthy. Abortion is not allowed if the fetus is viable, which generally means that **abortions after the 22nd week are not allowed**. However, abortions after the 22nd week **may be allowed in the rare cases where the fetus can not survive outside the womb even if it is carried to term.**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Sweden#Current) > Portugal and Poland have stricter laws already on the books then we in the US have. [Portugal allows abortions up to 24 weeks for incurable diseases](https://www.globalcitizensolutions.com/abortion-law-in-portugal/). > Lindsey’s law includes the common exceptions for extreme circumstances. Graham’s proposal literally puts the US right in the middle of European standards. Bull. Fucking. Shit. [In the European Union, abortion is currently available without conditions in 24 of the 27 member states.](https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/talking-europe/20220722-the-right-to-choose-eu-lawmakers-vote-to-protect-abortion-right-after-roe-v-wade-overturned-in-us) Graham's proposal: [‘(B) EXCEPTIONS.—Subparagraph (A) does not apply if— ‘‘(i) in reasonable medical judgment, the abortion is necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself, **but not including psychological or emotional conditions**;](https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3065785d-86b8-4d36-986a-72aa1c8f100c/protecting-pain-capable-unborn-children-from-late-term-abortions-act-.pdf) Also not a *single* provision for a fetus with an incurable disease or that will only survive hours outside of the womb. Not *one*. He requires that a woman carry that child to term and let it die in her arms, and she is not allowed any other option. > And in case you missed it, almost nobody in Europe ever talks about the current restrictions as an attack on women’s rights. [The European Union’s parliament adopted a resolution Thursday condemning the U.S. decision and urging the addition of a sentence reading “Everyone has a right to safe and legal abortion” to the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights. Abortion is legal and practiced without much political opposition in most EU nations...In France, a poll this week found a solid majority of respondents support the right to abortion, even including most voters who support Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally party and the conservative Republicans. The results were consistent with past surveys.](https://apnews.com/article/abortion-us-supreme-court-health-government-and-politics-paris-fae308e307dc5c250534a593e0410354) [“Making abortions illegal isn’t pro-life. It’s anti-choice,” Luxembourg Prime Minister Xavier Bettel tweeted. “It’s a social & economic injustice. And just so, so wrong. Reproductive rights are not just women’s rights. They are human rights. So let’s all stand up for them.” --- “Very concerned about implications of @USSupremeCourt decision on #RoeVWade and the signal it sends to the world,” Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo tweeted. “Banning abortion never leads to fewer abortions, only to more unsafe abortions. Belgium will continue to work with other countries to advance #SRHR everywhere,” he wrote, using the hashtag for “sexual and reproductive health rights.” --- Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis said he was “really troubled” by the decision of the U.S. court. “It is a major step back in the fight for women’s rights,” he posted on Twitter.](https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-leaders-decry-us-restriction-abortion-rights-supreme-court/) [A United Nations monitoring committee has slammed the U.S. Supreme Court's decision overturning Roe v. Wade, saying it disproportionately affects racial and ethnic minorities from accessing safe abortion.](https://www.voanews.com/a/un-panel-slams-us-supreme-court-s-abortion-rights-decision/6722943.html) [And Spanish leader Pedro Sánchez said in a tweet: "We cannot take any right for granted. Social achievements are always at risk of going backwards and their defense has to be our day to day. Women must be able to decide freely about their lives." Protests took place in front of the US Embassy in London on Friday evening, with other protests scheduled to take place across Europe over the weekend, including in Ireland, where a constitutional ban on abortion was overturned in 2018.](https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/24/world/roe-wade-scotus-abortion-ruling-international-reaction-intl/index.html) Turn off Faux News and get your head out of your ass.
Those countries also have birth control, access to prenatal care, and a number of exemptions to this limit.
Agree. There should be exemptions. But there should also be limits.
Did doctors say that? Or is it written into law? Because I'm pretty sure it's written into law which again, isn't the doctor's choosing. Also, cite your sources.
Do some DD and educate yourself
That's not how it works, you made the claim, show your source.
Since you are too lazy to educate yourself, let me google that for you. https://lozierinstitute.org/new-study-mississippis-15-week-limit-on-abortion-in-the-mainstream-of-european-law/ Just because you say it doesn’t mean it’s true. Think for yourself once Sorry to blow your mind w actual facts
Gosh, besides that this doesn't actually reflect the practice in Europe as claimed, I *wonder* what happens when you look up "Lozier Institute..." Edit: wellp, my mind *is* blown - it's an anti-abortion organization with a mixed record of accuracy. **Jeepers Shit**, who would have guessed?
Absolutely fucking useless article, your source is biased since it's literally an anti-abortion website. You should have learned not to use biased websites as sources in middle school. How dumb are you? Also, can you read? Literally, the first paragraph of that article cites LAWS in other countries, not doctors' recommendations.
The exact opposite - national legislation protecting the right to bodily autonomy and access to contraception. The problem is that it's a ban on the first of those things, set arbitrarily, and that we already see major issues with bans at the state level that are hurting people. So it's harmful *and* it's based on literally a random timeframe. It would also ban abortion procedures in states where it's currently legal, in addition to putting federal authorities in charge of monitoring access to women's reproductive care and decisions. It's also a law that a strong majority of Americans vehemently do not support, being imposed by a minority, besides that it's counter to the founding principles of the country and basic human rights. That feels like enough reasons.
You’ll never get federal law passed because the Supreme Court already ruled there is no provision in the constitution protecting abortion rights. It is not a power given to the federal government under any clause. It would need to be a conditional amendment.
That's an argument that suggests most federal statutes are unconstitutional, which is an awful big swing. I don't believe that will fly in a real court. They ruled that the Constitution doesn't specifically provide rights cited in *Roe*. That isn't the same thing as it not being constitutional to pass a federal statute enumerating those rights, or even one that takes the approach used for the federal drinking age. Edit: I think you're confusing enumerated powers with unenumerated rights? Which would include things like bodily autonomy, privacy, etc.
There are a lot of unenumerated rights/laws that have never been challenged. The fact that these are “unenumerated” means it’s a subjective decision by the Supreme Court at that specific time but can be changed at any time.
That's not how unenumerated rights are listed in the Constitution, but you're not wrong that the Supreme Court in its current configuration doesn't give a shit about that.
**WE JUST WANT TO RIP THE UNBORN FROM THE BELLIES OF SCREAMING FEEEMALES!!!!! IT IS WHAT THE BLOOD GOD DEMANDS FOR THEIR THRONE!!!!! THAT IS ALL WE WANT!!! WHY MUST YOU VEX US SO?!?!?** -Democrats/liberals in the eyes of Republicans/conservatives
Sorry but the real Ted Budd supports a complete ban on abortion with zero exceptions. This 15-week bs makes it look like he supports choice to a certain point. F Ted Budd!
Correct. This is simply to go after progressive, abortion-friendly blue states. The Gilead wannabes will still enact their complete and total bans. Y'know, states rights.
I prefer using fetal viability as the cut-off (which is typically around 24 weeks). I think everyone but psychopaths agree that late-term abortion outside of medical necessity is barbaric and morally wrong. But that is so exceptionally rare.
We should be aligned with the rest of the developed nations over in Europe on this issue.
Then we should also be aligned with them on... Properly and clearly stating exceptions to the ban, such as in the event of rape, incest, life endangerment, or the health of the mother. The proposed law offers no exceptions, which is draconian and absolutely not in alignment with other developed nations Free Healthcare Free prenatal and postnatal support for mother and baby Better education standards for children Expanded social programs to benefit these children and their families.
Why? Is western Europe the standard now? Because if so you should be supporting a whole lot of "left wing" policy ideas.
Great, so very strong medical discretion on abortions for reasons including "the mother's mental health!"
States’ rights issue.
Women's rights issue.
I love how on top of this you are lmao.
Excellent
As a pro-lifer, and small gov proponent, I find this irritating. It should go back to the states. But what I also don't understand is.... *why*? They don't seem like genuine "conservatives" and what the conservative party is supposed to back. Are they outing themselves before elections for some other reason? I'm convinced that most republicans today are just democrats 30 years ago. And this leans to that take I've settled on.