Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, eliminating constitutional right to abortion

This

Just in this thread, @Andre0087 was admonishing Democrats for identity politics, as if ALL politics aren't identity politics. I mean after 40 years of the GOP using every possible issue as a dog whistle for "we don't want to create (insert beneficial policy here - single payer, Medicare for All, fair taxation, voting rights, etc) for any Americans because some of the benefits will go to those nasty coloreds, homos or feminazis," and there are still otherwise rational people buying into the idea that Democrats are only trying to pander to minorities. Hell, even @Rocket River repeated this nonsense in his thread about his desire for a moderate policy - he accused the Democrats of being more concerned about gender classification.

It's horseshit and the moderates need to grow the **** up and stop undermining the only people willing to fight to keep things from going backwards.

 

I'm in disagreement of abusing human rights, period.

I don't agree with hiding behind rules that support abusing human rights. So if a constitutional republic thinks its okay to for example enslave others than that constitutional republic is wrong. Period. Seems like you'd just stand behind a government abusing human rights though.

 

This is only weird to you because you try to put me in the "centrist party apologist" box. I want good candidates. Progressives need to stop b****ing about the party and actually run good candidates who can relay their message effectively. Fetterman is an example of one. I have no problem with progressive ideals - I have a problem with people who don't know how to message and basically alienate the middle in pushing their views. You simply can't win elections that way - the current progressive standard-bearers repeatedly prove that. Meanwhile, an openly socialist Fetterman is likely going to dominate in a purple-state during a red-wave because he actually knows how to talk to people in the middle (assuming he gets past his health issues). If you want to win, you need to attract the middle - that's what people like Fetterman and Biden and Pete do so well, and what Warren and Sanders don't. As long as progressives are hurting the rest of the party's ability to accomplish things, I will absolutely be against them. It has nothing to do with policy.

 

Next up, birth control. Republicans just keep getting closer to women having no say in whether or not they have a child.

 

"abusing human rights"
"enslave others"

Oh I get it. YOU get to decide what those things are amiright?

 

What is marriage?

 

In my example I said that the majority once believed that black people should have less rights, you still plowed on with your argument that the majority should be resepected.

So, do you think that black people had equal rights in 1910?

 

It's pretty amazing that someone like yourself thinks there are just ideological and partisan disagreements on what SLAVERY means, or even human rights. How F-ed up are you that you think you can just walk in here and make comments like this that Slavery is just a matter of opinion.

I don't get to decide, and you don't get to decide.... the consensus agreement that slavery is evil should be enough... but no... not with you. You demand ideological difference in all things... even slavery, and you demand your minority opinion to be dominant over the majority.

Seriously with all due respect... Just shut the F up.

 

I'm not against a progressive agenda but you need to sell it to the people and I'm sure as hell not against everyone having equal rights under the Constitution. I'm talking about the people that were chosen by Democrats to be in positions of power. Kamala should have never been VP she was picked because of here ethnicity. Pete is in way over his head as secretary of transportation in the worst supply chain issues seen in decades.

 

Heck women weren’t allowed to vote over 100 years ago. The Republicans are still blocking the Equal Rights Amendment from being finalized. They don’t want equality. If they did they wouldn’t block ERA

 

We've been on this BBS for like 20 years together. I've read thousands of your posts. I think you're incredibly smart (sometimes to my own chagrin) and well-intentioned. It's possible I'm wrong and have misjudged you, but if you respect my opinion even a little bit, it might be worth giving pause over the fact I consider you one of the most ardent Democratic establishment apologists here (and there are many of them).

 

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears you would like men not to be able to marry men and women not be able to marry women.

Why do you oppose that? How does that affect you?

 

which church is that? the Church of the Constitution?

 

6-3. Even Roberts voted to overturn it.

It appears that the bullying tactics backfired.

 

They're getting a little rowdy...

 

The Church of GOP bullshit to restrict rights and use God as an excuse for said restrictions.

 

Guess you aren't familiar with Jesus. Surprising.

 

Technically @Major has been on the board longer..

 

Agreed, but too often, the moderates in the Democratic party are undermining the message/agenda. I'm not just talking about the outright saboteurs like Manchin and Sinema - Pelosi herself frequently throws shade at the younger, more progressive Democrats in interviews, speaking about them as if they're immature children who don't know what they're doing. During the debates for the Democratic Presidential nomination, Buttigieg and Klobuchar tag-teamed on Warren's ideas for better tax policy and health-care by repeating that they were somehow unfeasible. Moderate journalists and talking heads like James Carville and Heidi Heitkamp equate progressive policies as the equivalent to Republican authoritarianism.

It's the equivalent of one sales person trying to sell a customer a product while a second one stands behind him and makes snarky asides about what a piece of **** that product is. Maybe the product isn't ideal - maybe there's a better one for the customer - but all the 2nd sales person is going to do with his particular choice of actions/words is chase the customer away from the store.

I'll be the first to admit that the idealism that drives progressives also renders them somewhat obtuse on messaging - Defund the Police is the obvious example but there are many more. But moderates are practically gleeful to give progressives an extra push when they stumble, and it makes things so much worse.

Mike Pence was picked because Trump needed evangelicals. Hillary Clinton was picked to be Secretary of State to help unite the Clinton and Obama camps of the Democratic party. That being said, in both cases, both individuals were more than capable of fulfilling the roles of their office (and believe me, I don't love saying that about Pence). This is politics as usual - when there's numerous individual capable of performing a job, ultimately political reasons seep into the final decision., Holding Kamala and Pete somehow responsible for the Democrats' struggles seems rather unfair given that the issues at hand are way, way, way bigger than their respective offices. For example, if you think some logistics company CEO could have cured the worldwide supply chain issues, then you're setting up EVERYONE for failure.