Political Discussion

apple.news

There’s Already a Revolution in Abortions Happening—and the Supreme Court Can’t Touch It — Slate

The future of illegal abortions isn’t coat hangers. It’s medication.
apple.news apple.news

I don't know about that.

At least one state has made mail order abortion prescriptions illegal. Not just for the women, but any delivery service could be charged with trafficking as well as the shipper and prescriber if the intended patient lives within the state. I expect laws like this to become more common if Roe is overturned.

There will be no virtual doctor visits to get mail order abortion pills, because those will be illegal.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
Dipshit Musk might be backing out of the Twitter Deal. It put it on hold citing "Bots". Says there are too many bots on the platform. But that sounds like a Bull Shit reason to me.

This announcement from Musk yesterday came after the 5th Circuits decision. Twitter stocks went into a free fall yesterday.
Click to expand...
I’ve had a feeling this will fall through. I can’t even say why, whether there’s some unseen political/financial benefit to flirting with the takeover then ghosting; but it’s just seemed like something that won’t actually come to pass.
 
yukbon said:
Why are there no liberal bad-faith shills to troll the right, is my question. a Joe Rogan / Alex Jones type who's like "lots of people are saying Donald Trump's shrimp dick doesn't work unless he's thinking about Barrack Obama, I don't know if that's true but lots of people are saying it". Shit, someone going on air and calling it TrumpCare and encouraging people to sign up for the ACA. Quoting the bible's anti-usury passages and pushing for student debt forgiveness. That blackmailing thing that John Oliver did? Do that evvvvvery week and name names. Why is it only conservative dickheads who troll for their terrble causes, where are my chaotic good trolls.
Click to expand...


Looks like you found your next job!
 
Meanwhile, in Texas...





$5000 per kw/h prices on electricity have returned for those who don't have a fixed rate plan. Meaning the poor who take a chance for cheaper electricity get screwed.
 
www.cnn.com

As water runs short in California, commission rejects $1.4 billion desalination plant | CNN

As California battles a historic drought and a water crisis looms, the state's coastline protection agency on Thursday unanimously rejected the development of a $1.4 billion desalination plant in Huntington Beach that would have converted ocean water into municipal water for Orange County residents.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

Sounds like a case of NIMBY

A water desalinization plant is what is needed to sustain the water supply in California as they are running out of water. But residence of Orange Country don't want it built.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
www.cnn.com

As water runs short in California, commission rejects $1.4 billion desalination plant | CNN

As California battles a historic drought and a water crisis looms, the state's coastline protection agency on Thursday unanimously rejected the development of a $1.4 billion desalination plant in Huntington Beach that would have converted ocean water into municipal water for Orange County residents.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

Sounds like a case of NIMBY

A water desalinization plant is what is needed to sustain the water supply in California as they are running out of water. But residence of Orange Country don't want it built.
Click to expand...
"Ahead of the vote, its staff recommended against the facility, pointing in part to desalination's incredible energy consumption, its impacts on marine life, projected sea-level rise and the cost of the resulting water itself -- with that cost being passed on to customers."
From the article it does not look like it's so much residents who don't want to have it but experts saying the plant does more damage than good
 
Jan said:
"Ahead of the vote, its staff recommended against the facility, pointing in part to desalination's incredible energy consumption, its impacts on marine life, projected sea-level rise and the cost of the resulting water itself -- with that cost being passed on to customers."
From the article it does not look like it's so much residents who don't want to have it but experts saying the plant does more damage than good
Click to expand...

I guess I didn't read far enough down through the article.

That said, now that it's mentioned, yes, I would assume it would take a lot of energy to desalinate water. Don't they have to convert it to steam and then back to water? One would hope they would have a green and renewable way of doing this.

But also, if desalination is not the future of water supply. What is? We are running out of water. Both through climate change and over use of our resources.
 
Terence Thomas said during a speech at the “Old Parkland Conference” that the leak of the abortion opinion was inconceivable. Something if you asked him was possible prior, he would have said no. This institution would never have a leak of even a single line of a draft opinion.

On top of that, he said he feels feels that the court is "being bullied into delivering what some see as the preferred outcome".

Which side of the issue do we think he stands on. Is he saying be believes the court is being bullied to uphold Roe or tear it down?
 
Last edited:
So I guess that means he's for tearing down Roe.

And the fact that he says that preserving Roe is the "preferred outcome for some" tells me that he is totally out of line with reality.

According to John Oliver, there isn't a single state where anti abortion supports exceeds 30% of the population.

I would say that the opinion he says they are being bullied into is the popular opinion. And tell me again how they are being bullied?
 
RenegadeMonster said:
So I guess that means he's for tearing down Roe.

And the fact that he says that preserving Roe is the "preferred outcome for some" tells me that he is totally out of line with reality.

According to John Oliver, there isn't a single state where anti abortion supports exceeds 30% of the population.

I would say that the opinion he says they are being bullied into is the popular opinion. And tell me again how they are being bullied?
Click to expand...
Bullies are by definition a minority and one of their favorite tactics is projection.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
So I guess that means he's for tearing down Roe.

And the fact that he says that preserving Roe is the "preferred outcome for some" tells me that he is totally out of line with reality.

According to John Oliver, there isn't a single state where anti abortion supports exceeds 30% of the population.

I would say that the opinion he says they are being bullied into is the popular opinion. And tell me again how they are being bullied?
Click to expand...

So I had to attend an event once in 2015 when Scalia (burn in hell) was the guest speaker. This was just a few months before the Court would issue its decision in the Obergefell gay marriage case, so it had already heard arguments and the opinion was in the middle of being drafted.

And while he started his speech pontificating on judicial impartiality and how it would be inappropriate for him to comment on cases pending before the Court, he proceeded to use the rest of his time praising judges who had issued opinions holding against the advancement of gay rights for their “moral courage” to issue “right but unpopular decisions.”

The highlight of the evening was this lady who got too drunk, yelled “vagina power” at him from across the room, and had to be quickly ushered out.
 
Time magazine just had a piece about how Federal Legislators stance on abortion is turning into, if you want to protect the right to abortions, vote for it in November.

Both Republicans and Democrats seem to be pushing this message now as the path forward.

Republicans are using this approach because they know at the state level, state legislators will be powerless to protect abortion rights. They simply don't care what their constituents want.

And when it comes to Democrats, they really don't have any other answer left after passing anything through the senate appears to an impossible path forward. The support just is not there.

Not only would leaving it to voters to decide in November not accomplish anything, it's also theoretically impossible of any meaningful change happening after November as most terms are longer than a year. There wouldn't be enough turnover for there to be enough support in legislators at the state level or congress.

Also, what the hell is with conservatives narratives saying "some states may choose to restrict abortions a little". A little? How about half the stats outright abolishing them with some states passing laws allowing homicide charges to be pressed...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top