mtutiger

Exactly. A lot of people are acting like this issue would be settled at the state and federal level if Roe is overturned and there's really no evidence that's the case at all.

Assuming the state they live in doesn't attempt to criminalize going to Illinois for the purposes of getting an abortion, of course.

Just my two cents, but comparing abortion to the Holocaust really trivializes what happened during the Holocaust. And if one harbors pro-life views, it's probably a line that's more of a negative than a positive toward promoting those views. I'll leave it at that.

I assume it would be a challenge to a law in a state allowing for abortions... I'm just saying that I'm not sure why anyone would have any trust in this court to act with any sort of logical consistency....

lol

You think this same court is gonna feel this way whenever someone tries to get it banned nationwide?

There are also proposals in some states (Missouri, I believe) that would attempt to criminalize going across state lines to get an abortion. People acting like the net effect of this ruling stops with states simply adopting the laws they see fit are really downplaying what's gonna come next. And that doesn't even get into the question of who, whenever abortions do inevitably happen in jurisdictions where it is made illegal, gets criminally prosecuted.

Or the mainstream right.

I would be curious to know how sabertooth would feel if another case ended up before the Supreme Court that would forbid abortion nationwide.

Agreed. Of course, two wrongs do not make a right either.

Sure sounded like Tigeraholic did.

I guess this is my problem with Buddha's framing.... it just seems like on this issue, there's no penalty at all to just throwing "Hitler" and "Nazi" around if it comes from the right of the issue. Like it's just expected. Decorum and all that, on the other hand, gets enforced on the left extreme of the issue. It's largely why I don't talk about this issue any more. Most people are in the middle, yet the extremes dominate it. Assuming Roe goes, we'll now get to see one end of the spectrum dominate and see how the people respond.

Are you accusing pro choicers of being Nazis?

Exactly. It's kinda weird to see Buddha adopt the language of absolutists to go after Rob when the absolutists on the issue have the same level of disdain for those squishes who are in the middle on the issue.

I mean, the accusation came from the hard right of the issue.

I've been compared to Hitler in a past debate for holding a position similar to yours fwiw

Where do you stand on this issue? I honestly cannot recall, but the above sentiment would probably be lodged by the furthest extreme toward those who are in the middle of the issue

I'm not even sure how much voters actually care about the manufactroversy, let alone whether it has any salience to those who may be angered by a Roe repeal.

I understand. But the issue is far from settled if/when that day comes. If one cares deeply about this issue, gotta think two or three moves down the line. As I suspect a lot of pro-choice groups are.

Right. But the danger that I see for Republicans in this decision is that, with Roe fully in tact, it's easier to campaign against the most extreme voices on the left of this issue. If you remove Roe v Wade, there's gonna be a Western Land Rush on state legislatures to pass wide ranging, extreme bans on abortion. Put another way, post-repeal, the right wing extremists get the spotlight moreso than in the past. In states like Michigan or Pennsylvania or Wisconsin with important and difficult Governors races in the fall (and R Legislatures), that can make a difference. It was a different time of course, but some of us remember what happened to Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock... there may be a lot of those sentiments floating around state capitols if they go through with this. How much of a difference it makes, idk... but in terms of base motivation, it'll make at least a little bit I'm sure. Long term, given the Washington Post story that came out a few days ago, I'm concerned that we're not done with this at the federal level and that Rs may be looking at nationwide ban. So much for states rights lol

We'll see how much it actually softens the ground, of course... the ramifications if it actually goes through are still gonna be pretty high whenever that ruling comes. Also, in terms of political organizing around the issue, gives pro-choice groups a head start.

Its all good. They may still take advantage of it in spots, particularly whenever Alexander's spot on the rotation comes up; people seem to be assuming that Peralta covers that, but the other option would be to option Willi or Harold and bring up another pitcher from Toledo (presumably Wentz or Faedo) for a start. It's not a terrible idea, but the shuttle back and forth could be Tampa-esque if they do something like that.

I dont believe the Tigers are required to carry 14 pitchers and, with Alexander hitting IL, they only have 13 on the 26 man roster currently if I'm not mistaken. I guess I dont understand, if you have Harold to cover SS, why Clemens couldn't displace Willi Castro at the moment.

It really highlights the importance of State races as well. Particularly in PA, MI, WI and others with Dem Govs coming up this cycle.

What I would say on the politics is that I've come to believe on abortion is that support for it tends to sit on sort of a bell curve: people tend to be somewhere in the middle in terms of legality up to a certain period of time... people tend not to want it totally banned, but maybe not available up until birth. 16-20 weeks or so would maybe be the median. This decision is down at the far right wing of the bell curve. And if the numbers from Texas below are accurate, Roe v. Wade repeal would be wildly unpopular nationwide. But we will see what the court does. What it means for the elections, I don't know.