Related Posts
Can we apply sick leaves in notice period ?
More Posts
Coach
Conversation Starter
For clinicians (RNs, FNPs, PAs, MDs, PharmDs) looking to transition into becoming a Clinical Research Associate (CRA), PPD has a program:
https://www.ppd.com/careers/2022/06/set-up-for-success-clinician-to-cra-program/?utm_campaign=careers&utm_source=linkedin&utm_medium=social&utm_content=careers,careers+blog,CRA,lifeatPPD
Anyone who has recently resigned from ibm? When you initiare a separation process from workday, it goes to manager for approval. I asked HR and there is a due date mentioned on that process. Does that mean that if manager does not approve before the due date, my resignation is declined? What is the impact and what is meant by that due date? IBM
I’ll be devil’s advocate here: the reality is the pro choice wing of America has done a bad job marketing abortion for decades. Americans are generally good, moral folks. Good, moral folks don’t kill children. The notion that an embryo or a fetus is not human is at best a weird loophole argument that ignores a belief that over half the world has: God creates life.
Pro choice marketing should acknowledge that abortion does halt life, but the rights of a woman’s body justify that. If they acknowledged that, then organizations like planned parenthood can say the silent part out loud: that pro life politicos don’t enact policies which protect disadvantaged children after they’re born. They can’t presently argue this because presumably being an unprotected disadvantaged living child is better than being aborted in the first place.
Other developed nations have had honest discussions about abortion, and the US is still debating whether a fetus is a living creature or not.
A9 - all are valid points. But at the end, can we surpass as a voting collective the conservative minority? Can science be brought to light? Most people are uneducated.
Pro
Nah. If this were about saving babies there would be universal healthcare, free daycare, clean water for all Americans, congress would be trying to help the formula shortage, congress would be doing anything they could to help drop the Black maternal mortality rate, free education. This isn’t about saving babies.
Could not agree with you more!!!
As someone said on another post, it’s because:
Politicians in red states want to go back to the 1900s where white men ruled everything, minorities had no say, women were to be submissive to men, and LGBTQ people had zero rights.
SC2 nailed it, GOP doesn’t care unless it affects them personally.
Because it's not in the Constitution.
A4... think outside the box. 14th amendment provides for equal protection. Don't you think that applies to gay marriage, interracial marriage, etc.?
It was a super dumb decision, bound to be overturned. I’m pro-choice 100% but it was a judicial stretch to decide it like that, look up what Justice Ginsburg thought about it
agreed. Everybody knew it wasn't the most legally sound opinion - but for the most part, one everybody agreed it needed to happen. the literalists have always had an issue with it, for literalist reasons. The fundamentalists just happen to align with most literalist interpretations.
Rising Star
Men don’t want us taking their high paying jobs bc then they would have to earn them. They won’t hold power if everyone besides white men can compete in the market. Women want a career, not marriage now and the men are revolting. Dishwashers are hard for them to use, this is why we question everything they say in business.
Cruelty. It has always been the driver. How can we make women, minorities, gay and trans people miserable.
I mean…there really isn’t one except we have an incredibly politicized court at present. Roe and Casey (a subsequent court case) both basically predicated the right to abortion on the constitutional right to privacy. Currently, the USSC is overturning Roe on the basis that it isn’t an enumerated right under the constitution and that states should have the right to handle the issue however they see fit (ie a States’ rights holding), but claimed that wouldn’t extend to other past decisions that aren’t related to abortion. Meanwhile, yesterday, the USSC overturned a gun control law in NY that prevented concealed weapons permits without some sort of legitimate reason why you should be able to carry a concealed weapon on the basis that it violates the 2nd and, to an extent, 14th amendment…so states’ rights don’t matter with respect to guns. Again, it’s all political right now, which is insane.
There’s a distinction for sure but the hypocrisy is still there. The gun opinion should have focused on the text “a well regulated militia.” It basically ignored express constitutional text requiring bearing arms to be well regulated.
With Dobbs, they basically said that a right doesn’t exist if it’s not enumerated. So on the one hand they’re requiring rights to be expressly enumerated for protection (abortion) and on the other hand they’re saying “well regulated” (among other 2A text) can be ignored.
🙃 welcome to the SCOTUS of 2022 and beyond
I’m pro-choice and generally liberal, but I think Dobbs was rightly decided. The Court is tasked with interpreting the Constitution (Marbury), but it can’t supplant the legislative role vested in Congress and the states (Article I & 10th Amendment). Since its inception, the American system has centered around two basic pillars: separation of powers and federalism. Separation of powers ensures that no branch of the federal government encroaches on the duties of another (Federalist 47-48). And federalism concerns states’ ability to govern their own affairs without undue influence from the federal government (Tocqueville). The abortion divide touches on both principles. Congress has chosen not to enact a law protecting abortion - that in itself is telling, and the Court cannot take the place of Congress by legislating in the guise of constitutional interpretation. Relatedly, the stark difference of opinion across the country underscores the need for states to decide the issue for themselves in the absence of congressional action. It’s easy to scapegoat the Court for not protecting abortion, but the issue is not, and never was, an issue for nine Justices to decide. Instead, the blame rests on Congress and the states for not recognizing a woman’s right to control their body and future. While I personally disagree with the Court’s finding that the right to an abortion is not “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty” (Dobbs), half of Americans do not. And because legislators are conduits for their constituents, our task is to change the hearts and minds of our neighbors. But allowing the Court to protect abortion on its own accord would compromise the delicate balance of American government. This is just my opinion - please be respectful.
This court wouldn’t uphold either a codification of roe or federal abortion ban.
Christian nationalism and imposing a minority, conservative view of American Christianity on everyone regardless of their religious beliefs.
Before anyone comes at me, Christian Nationalism and Christianity are two vastly different things.
Chief
Walk into a church sometime and see the beliefs some espouse, and the lack of outcry from the silently complicit.
Sorry, Canadian here. I’m chiming in to say that anti-abortion laws are peak capitalism. A consumer is born every minute.
Let’s not forget adoption agencies as well. White newborns are worth $$$. Especially girls. It’s actually disgusting how many businesses will benefit from this decision.
Cruelty. That has always been the point. Making sure women, minorities, gay and trans people remain second hand people
“The right to abortion is ultimately a policy goal in desperate search of a constitutional justification”
Rising Star
Is that an argument or a conclusion?
There isn’t a compelling argument. It was overturned for the same reason any other abusive behavior occurs- power and control.
Oh the most compelling reason is because republicans are evil
Does Justice Thomas know that he’s black (or that his wife is white)? Asking for a friend since I hear he’s coming after substantive due process.
His age is probably catching up to him so probably not.
There is no “compelling” argument.
A6 Point taken and viewpoint appreciated. However the SC has struggked historically with "a well regulated militia", as have commentators, so it is not 2022 and beyond. The best explanation I have heard is, if there was to be a need, people would show with their own arms to be formed into regular militia (this doing away with folks showing up with pitchforks and shovels as well as duspensing with the need for the government to have a stockpile to hand out from the armory).
Wwjd
Pro
Well let’s see, Jesus was a Jewish rabbi and in Judaism abortions are not just encouraged but are actually required* when the mother‘s life is in danger. So Jesus definitely wouldn’t support the total down on abortion they we are seeing in some states.
Yeah - read the majority opinion.