Leaked Majority Opinion- SCOTUS seems on track to overrule Roe v Wade entirely

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Excellent question. I applaud your demand for documented facts. Some people may fall prey to charlatans, but not you!

Here are some answers..



Or..




Or the old but reliable standby.. https://www.google.com/search?q=What...ave+abortions?


You might be tempted to conduct your own informal poll at your workplace. I don't recommend that. It won't end well.

Interesting. It's not 25%, but it is higher than I honestly thought. 630K legal abortions of 3.75M births in the US in 2019 is 16.4%.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...us-since-2000/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...es-since-1990/

Interesting that the rate and number have gone way down since the 90's, mostly attributed to advancements in birth control.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Is a fire responsible for burning the wood that you feed it with, or are you responsible for the destruction of wood for wishing to get warm? You can argue that the burning of the wood was incidental because you didn't know the fire was going to burn it. Or choose to burn it, but you still put it there to begin with.

That's a great analogy! Now do sex and abortion!

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Interesting. It's not 25%, but it is higher than I honestly thought. 630K legal abortions of 3.75M births in the US in 2019 is 16.4%.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...us-since-2000/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...es-since-1990/

Interesting that the rate and number have gone way down since the 90's, mostly attributed to advancements in birth control.

Now that I've thought more on it, I think it's even lower than that. I was dividing abortions by births, but really I should add the abortions to the births in the denominator. You'd also have to add into the denominator miscarriages and stillbirths. So it's lower but I'm not going to bother researching it more.

[ClydeR]

Interesting. It's not 25%, but it is higher than I honestly thought. 630K legal abortions of 3.75M births in the US in 2019 is 16.4%.

That's the percentage of births, not the percentage of women. The percentage of women, 25%, is highly relevant to the political consequences of overruling Roe.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

That's the percentage of births, not the percentage of women. The percentage of women, 25%, is highly relevant to the political consequences of overruling Roe.

Took me a bit to decode what you are saying and rereading the one study (repeated three times, 1992, 2008, 2017) from the Guttmacher survey of a few thousand women (think the highest sample I saw was 9500 which is a valid sample group assuming it's unbiased) who've had abortions which concludes this. It's hard to find the details of the study but I'm sure it's as accurate as anything else.

Still a much higher figure than I'd have thought. But I'd also guess abortion isn't water cooler conversation in white collar America so I'm probably biased myself.

Edit to add, for what it's worth, Guttmacher was an affiliate of Planned Parenthood, files amicus briefs in favor of abortion and testifies to elected officials in favor of abortion.

[Seran]

That's a great analogy! Now do sex and abortion!

That's too easy. Besides, Republicans also block abstinence and contraceptives anyway. No birth control, no sex education, no abortion, you'd think they were obsessed with popping out babies.

[Suppressed Poet]

Is a fire responsible for burning the wood that you feed it with, or are you responsible for the destruction of wood for wishing to get warm? You can argue that the burning of the wood was incidental because you didn't know the fire was going to burn it. Or choose to burn it, but you still put it there to begin with.


Stop the spread of violent hate speech and you slow down the number of crazies taking it as a clarion call to arms.

So when Chicago mayor Lori Lightfoot says/tweets this:

'To my friends in the LGBTQ+ community—the Supreme Court is coming for us next. This moment has to be a call to arms,' Lightfoot tweeted.
'We will not surrender our rights without a fight—a fight to victory!'

Is that not “hate speech” and inciting an insurrection? By your repeated definition, it sure does sound like both to me…

[Tgo01]

Tucker Carlson mentions AMERICAN VOTERS are being replaced by people from other countries who are more likely to vote Democrat.

He doesn’t mention race at all, either the people being replaced or the people doing the replacing.

But the far left hears him use the word “replace” and they automatically accuse him of spouting white replacement theory. Because I guess according to the left “American” must mean white.

[Gelston]

You'd wonder why all these people who claim to have never heard of Replacement Theory pretend to have never heard of it, despite it being discussed in other threads with the same denials, don't simply agree that extremism shouldn't be on air. Carlson, Pierro and Hannity could simply be spoken to to stop by their network.

Only Lachlan Murdoch supports Carlson speaking about it, and said so in an interview.

Show me the other threads please.

[Methais]

That's too easy. Besides, Republicans also block abstinence and contraceptives anyway. No birth control, no sex education, no abortion, you'd think they were obsessed with popping out babies.

How does one "block" abstinence? Are they forcing dicks to enter vaginas now?