Hacker News Reader

Comment by starkd | Hacker News Reader

There was a time when the democrat party stood for abortions being "legal safe and rare". None other than Bill Clinton said this. Perhaps this decision will now allow state legislatures to pick a reasonable time limit. This does not have to be a wedge issue.

View on HN

Hahahahaha no. I live in Louisiana, which had a law passed a while ago that said the moment RvW was struck down, all abortions are illegal. No exceptions for rape or incest or risk to the mother; someone put a baby in that womb, and you, as womb-bearer, will carry it to term no matter what.

It was a wedge issue when the GOP picked it up and made an unholy alliance with the raving fire-and-brimstone preachers of the South that got Reagan in office. It has continued to be a wedge issue that the GOP has relied on to get their asses in office for pretty much my entire life.

It cuts both ways. What you're saying about the GOP is 100% true. It also became the Democrats' fundraising angle for 30+ years, despite their total inaction on passing an actual law recognizing the right to abortion. Democrats like Joe Biden supported bans on federal funding for abortion via medicare, which led to the present condition when people have to rely on clinics/non-profits for abortion care.

The only winner in the partisan fight are the elites in both parties. We need a working class party to resist both of the parties of American capitalism.

God yes, I sure would have preferred to vote for Bernie over both Joe and Hillary. I was super delighted to get to vote for an actual socialist candidate over a Democrat when I was living in Seattle, and the amount of rich Seattleites who were constantly butthurt over her policies was a regular source of delight.

It's also not 1970 anymore. There's a prophalactic pill, there's morning after pill, and there's freedom of movement between states. Women are capable of exerting self-responsibility over their reproduction, and they are not helpless victims.

> there's freedom of movement between states

If you have money, or a network of help, and a safe home situation...

It's easy to say "everyone in a regressive state should move". It's easy to say "everyone in a regressive country should move". Not everyone has that option as readily available as you might imagine.

There are inconviences behind everything you go to do. Simply saying "not everybody can afford something" is not an argument. It's a convenient escape hatch. If people spent half the effort to actually help any women in such a situation than they do at protesting, most such extreme situations could be solved.

Except access to contraception is based on the same reading of the constitution that Roe v Wade depended on and has now been gutted. There are now legitimate pushes to outlaw contraception for unmarried people.

Read the decision. Kavanaugh and Roberts were very specific that the reasoning doesn't affect other issues.

Nobody has any reason to believe anything Kavanaugh says, the man has a known history of lying.

So now I must travel hours to receive a procedure that may save MY life? If I have an ectopic pregnancy you are going to make me cross multiple states potentially to have a life saving procedure that can currently be performed at any small hospital in the country if not for legal restrictions? That's certainly part asinine.

Most of the legislation either includes or is eventually amended to provide for those exceptions. 12 to 15 weeks is generally should be more than enough time.

There's also a hell of a lot of people in this state who can't afford to take multiple days off from their four jobs that barely pay the bills between them to travel halfway across the country for an abortion if they find out after it's too late for any pills. Most of the Bible Belt has similar trigger laws; the closest states that still have legal abortion are Minnesota, Kansas, and Illinois.

The GOP is working their hardest to send everyone back to 1970. Or further. 1850 looks pretty good to them.

Rich people aren't, but a lot of people getting in trouble with this aren't rich people. Rich people will still get their abortions,law or not.

Birth control is next on the chopping block. Justice Thomas already stated that Griswold v. Connecticut should be reconsidered.

Wrong. Read the decision. They specificaly rule it out.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/24/contracep...

https://www.businessinsider.com/justice-thomas-said-the-cour...

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/24/thomas-constitution...

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/24/us/clarence-thomas-roe-gr...

SB 342 (the more recent one) that JBE signed has an exception for the life of the mother

Ah yeah, I missed that one happening, thanks!

> democrat party

I wonder if this one has a partisan axe to grind

Reply on news.ycombinator.com