NationStates

Oil exporting People wrote:

Pimps Inc wrote:So Roe of "Roe v Wade" died. Is that a premonition for the future?

Great Confederacy Of Commonwealth States wrote:Perhaps a shimmer of hope. Law outlives man, and no matter how long a man lasts, the law with outlast him. 'Roe v. Wade' lives on.

She never had an abortion, was a Pro-Life Catholic, and fought to get the law overturned.

Eol Sha wrote:I decided to look her up. Norma McCorvey, or "Jane Roe", had a very complex relationship with the court case she was party to. Long story short, she ended up opposing Roe v. Wade and even tried to get the Supreme Court to reverse the 1973 ruling back in '05.

Not really at all complex. She never even had an abortion, being rather ambivalent about the whole court case until she became a Pro-Life Catholic as I noted above.

She was ambivalent about a case she took all the way to the Supreme court even after the baby was born?

Corrian wrote:So how much do you bet hackers are working overtime in this administration to try to dig up what they can on Trump?

You'd need a government to back you.

Trump was right about one thing though:

"You look at what's happening, last night in Sweden. Sweden! Who would believe this, Sweden!"

Yes indeed. Who would believe, Sweden? Last night? Sweden? Sad. So sad.

Gravlen wrote:Trump was right about one thing though:

"You look at what's happening, last night in Sweden. Sweden! Who would believe this, Sweden!"

Yes indeed. Who would believe, Sweden? Last night? Sweden? Sad. So sad.

What

Fartsniffage wrote:
She was ambivalent about a case she took all the way to the Supreme court even after the baby was born?

More like she always chased the money due to how popular she became due to the case.

In a way, she wanted the abortion, but by the time the three-panel circuit court ruled against Texas, Texas immediately filed for appeal, so she could never get an abortion. She was furious at the two lawyers who had put her into it and she held on hope to have an abortion. In a sense, her case became more of a plight for all women, and not a plight for Roe in the end.

After that, due to the publicity, she stood on the side of the faction who paid her best and validated her, that being the pro-life faction.

Soldati Senza Confini wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:
She was ambivalent about a case she took all the way to the Supreme court even after the baby was born?

More like she always chased the money due to how popular she became due to the case.

In a way, she wanted the abortion, but by the time the three-panel circuit court ruled against Texas, Texas immediately filed for appeal, so she could never get an abortion. She was furious at the two women.

After that, due to the publicity, she stood on the side of the faction who paid her best and validated her, that being the pro-life faction.

What a wonderful character assassination.

Gravlen wrote:Trump was right about one thing though:

"You look at what's happening, last night in Sweden. Sweden! Who would believe this, Sweden!"

Yes indeed. Who would believe, Sweden? Last night? Sweden? Sad. So sad.

Last night Sweden happened. Sweden something something but you know Sweden. It's a Sweden thing, even if nothing happened.

Has he tweeted about Quebec yet?

Jamzmania wrote:

Soldati Senza Confini wrote:
More like she always chased the money due to how popular she became due to the case.

In a way, she wanted the abortion, but by the time the three-panel circuit court ruled against Texas, Texas immediately filed for appeal, so she could never get an abortion. She was furious at the two women.

After that, due to the publicity, she stood on the side of the faction who paid her best and validated her, that being the pro-life faction.

What a wonderful character assassination.

It's not a character assassination if it is true.

Her lending her voice to the highest payer doesn't make her a bad person. I hold no scruples when it comes to money and, admittedly, I'd have done the same, so I understand her. I am not about to put her on a pedestal for something she held no convictions about.

Everyone has a price, everyone. Pro-life advocates and the churches who recruited her to do their work as a pro-life advocate offered the right price for her to abandon her initial pro-choice convictions. This being both validation and money. Pro-choice feminists decided after a while not to give her any more validation than she already had, so she became disenchanted with them and found an enchantment with the validation of Flip Benham and, in turn, of the Evangelicals as well as the Catholics.

I cannot knock her off for wanting to do the practical thing. I can simply demythologize the person. The lesson for you should be not to take your heroine "Roe", or anyone else, as heralds of virtue. Humans are not virtuous. We're gray as shit, and it shows even in our mythologized heroes.

Dahon wrote:

Gravlen wrote:Trump was right about one thing though:

"You look at what's happening, last night in Sweden. Sweden! Who would believe this, Sweden!"

Yes indeed. Who would believe, Sweden? Last night? Sweden? Sad. So sad.

Last night Sweden happened. Sweden something something but you know Sweden. It's a Sweden thing, even if nothing happened.

Has he tweeted about Quebec yet?

Why would he tweet about Quebec when he needs to educated people about the Bowling Green Massacre?

Fartsniffage wrote:She was ambivalent about a case she took all the way to the Supreme court even after the baby was born?

She later stated she wasn't even interested in doing the court case, and if I recall correctly, didn't even show up for most if any proceedings for it. She also never did, even prior to becoming Pro-Life, try to defend it or doing anything else for it.

Oil exporting People wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:She was ambivalent about a case she took all the way to the Supreme court even after the baby was born?

She later stated she wasn't even interested in doing the court case, and if I recall correctly, didn't even show up for most if any proceedings for it. She also never did, even prior to becoming Pro-Life, try to defend it or doing anything else for it.

She volunteered to some pro-choice groups like A Choice For Women; that same year, Operation Rescue, a pro-life organization set up camp across next door, which is when she began talking with Flip Benham and she converted.

She never showed up because she was angry the two ladies had told her she could get an abortion and in the end couldn't. So she never actually gave much thought to the proceedings because there was no interest for her anymore.

Corrian wrote:

Maichuko wrote:took less than a minute to start bitching about the Media. and say Fake News.
Hes comparing himself to Thomas Jefferson Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln.

...He compared himself to Andrew Jackson?

Yes he said Jackson, like him was unfairly attacked by the media.

Dahon wrote:

Gravlen wrote:Trump was right about one thing though:

"You look at what's happening, last night in Sweden. Sweden! Who would believe this, Sweden!"

Yes indeed. Who would believe, Sweden? Last night? Sweden? Sad. So sad.

Last night Sweden happened. Sweden something something but you know Sweden. It's a Sweden thing, even if nothing happened.

Has he tweeted about Quebec yet?

Nah, Quebec was a patriot defending himself against terrorists. *nod*

"The news media has this concept that they can take Donald Trump down," Trump supporter Jim Sava said. "There's nothing they can do to take him down. ... The only person that could take Donald Trump down is Donald Trump."

Not exactly wrong.

Corrian wrote:"The news media has this concept that they can take Donald Trump down," Trump supporter Jim Sava said. "There's nothing they can do to take him down. ... The only person that could take Donald Trump down is Donald Trump."

Not exactly wrong.

"Hey Jim, you were right!"

Jamzmania wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
Is it normal to fire people for their opinions?

No, despite the best efforts of many SJWs.

lmao

1. Trump cultists are literally and quite explicitly demanding that a Fox News host is fired for being critical of their cult leader.
2. Firing people for having an opinion that inconveniences their employers has been a thing since long before weak widdle fascists and petulant reactionaries came up with the "SJW" slur.

Gauthier wrote:Damn that rally looks and sounds like a faith healer revival.

And people cheering when Trump promises to deliver anything positive despite his history. So cultish.

Joking and condescension asides, we really do need to address the fact that Trump and his clique of crooks and bigots have radicalized millions of people.

Liriena wrote:

Gauthier wrote:Damn that rally looks and sounds like a faith healer revival.

And people cheering when Trump promises to deliver anything positive despite his history. So cultish.

Joking and condescension asides, we really do need to address the fact that Trump and his clique of crooks and bigots have radicalized millions of people.

Radicalised? I don't think they did. He's the conduit for hopes they already had.

Bakery Hill wrote:

Liriena wrote:Joking and condescension asides, we really do need to address the fact that Trump and his clique of crooks and bigots have radicalized millions of people.

Radicalised? I don't think they did. He's the conduit for hopes they already had.

Have you read some of the stuff his fanatics say? I know fiercely devoted Catholics who do not worship the Pope's every word as fiercely and blindly as Trump radicals do for Trump's.

Liriena wrote:

Bakery Hill wrote:Radicalised? I don't think they did. He's the conduit for hopes they already had.

Have you read some of the stuff his fanatics say? I know fiercely devoted Catholics who do not worship the Pope's every word as fiercely and blindly as Trump radicals do for Trump's.

That's what hope does. They want reliable well paying jobs, they want to take pride in their country. It's exactly why so many people in Russia vote for Putin and look back on the Soviet Union and sigh. If he can't deliver see how quickly that fanaticism turns to hatred. If he does deliver, get ready for eight years of Trump and a new Republican era.

Right now it could go two ways, Putin or Berlusconi. All we can do is strap in.

Bakery Hill wrote:

Liriena wrote:Have you read some of the stuff his fanatics say? I know fiercely devoted Catholics who do not worship the Pope's every word as fiercely and blindly as Trump radicals do for Trump's.

That's what hope does. They want reliable well paying jobs, they want to take pride in their country. It's exactly why so many people in Russia vote for Putin and look back on the Soviet Union and sigh. If he can't deliver see how quickly that fanaticism turns to hatred. If he does deliver, get ready for eight years of Trump and a new Republican era.

Right now it could go two ways, Putin or Berlusconi. All we can do is strap in.

I have a problem with the underlying implication that it's just economic anxiety and bruised national pride behind those sentiments. As far as I can tell, a lot of it is cultural resentment and a sadistic desire to hurt liberals.

Bakery Hill wrote:

Liriena wrote:Have you read some of the stuff his fanatics say? I know fiercely devoted Catholics who do not worship the Pope's every word as fiercely and blindly as Trump radicals do for Trump's.

That's what hope does. They want reliable well paying jobs, they want to take pride in their country. It's exactly why so many people in Russia vote for Putin and look back on the Soviet Union and sigh. If he can't deliver see how quickly that fanaticism turns to hatred. If he does deliver, get ready for eight years of Trump and a new Republican era.

Right now it could go two ways, Putin or Berlusconi. All we can do is strap in.

Yeah I'm desperate for better economic conditions but that doesn't translate to hopping onto the authoritarian bandwagon.

Trump is scared of answering even the most basic of questions.
The fact that he treats the press like this is fucking disturbing.

Genivaria wrote:Trump is scared of answering even the most basic of questions.
The fact that he treats the press like this is fucking disturbing.

How should he treat the enemies of the American People? Huh? How? Give them comfy chairs and nice little drinks with umbrellas in them? I don't think so.

Genivaria wrote:Trump is scared of answering even the most basic of questions.
The fact that he treats the press like this is fucking disturbing.

Trump said that he knew where the question was going, when he clearly fucking didn't.

But I do.

The reporter was going to ask what Donald Trump planned to do to protect the Jewish community. Easy question to answer, even for the bloviating moron, but his one-track mind is so goddamn paranoid that he assumed the reporter was going to accuse him of being anti-Semitic/racist/bigoted/etc.

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.