All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[kidfresh512]

With Roe Overturned, Your Abortion Searches Could Become Criminal Evidence

The result: Your phone's data, your social media accounts, your browsing and geolocation history, and your ISP's detailed records of your internet activity may all be used as evidence if you face state criminal or civil charges for a miscarriage.

The risks aren't just hypothetical.

Latice Fischer spent two years in jail because she had a miscarriage in 2018 after Googling abortion pills, and Mississippi authorities used her search as evidence when they charged her with second-degree murder. Indiana resident Purvi Patel's text messages to her friend and her online abortion pill purchase were both used as evidence against her when she was jailed in 2015 for alleged feticide. She spent three years in prison before her conviction was overturned.

Meanwhile, Georgia police attempted to use federal DNA criminal databases in 2018 to track down the origin of a 20-week-old fetus. Government surveillance of period and pregnancy data came to light again in 2019, when the director of Missouri's health department was discovered tracking menstrual cycles of Planned Parenthood patients.

In Oklahoma, three new laws aren't explicitly aimed at abortion seekers or providers but nonetheless stand to sharply increase police access to geolocation data. One law requires wireless carriers to immediately provide call location data to police on request, and to work with the Oklahoma Bureau of Investigation. Another raises questions around mandatory reporting requirements as it formalizes 911 operators into "first responders." A third gives county officers, including sheriffs, the green light to hire more data processing and IT staff.

This was an interesting article on the real life consequences using technology in the "normal ways" we all would to search for something or just take our phones with us somewhere. How it could now be used against women who are seeking or having abortions in the states that are banning it.

I hadn't heard of some of the cases cited.

[shooshoomanjoe]

OK I admit, I'm ignorant on rights. If the right to an abortion is in the 14th amendment, why do republicans say we can't ban guns because it's in the 2nd amendment?

[babyblob]

OK I admit, I'm ignorant on rights. If the right to an abortion is in the 14th amendment, why do republicans say we can't ban guns because it's in the 2nd amendment?

The 14th is Life Liberty and property. There is nothing in it about abortions or protecting abortions. Since the Word Abortion is not there it is not protected by the 14ths. There is no Amendment with protects abortion. State laws.

[GindyPosts]

Is it the only thing they are doing?
If not, don't you have better targets than the Democratic Party at a time like this?

Right now, the Democratic Party isn't exactly winning people over with how they are sitting on their hands and expecting us to vote when their response to all this is the usual inaction and begging for money.

[babyblob]

Is it the only thing they are doing?
If not, don't you have better targets than the Democratic Party at a time like this?

There are lots of better targets. And there are lots of ways to show that the Dems are doing something to try and protect rights and to stand with woman then stand around singing. It was a photo op moment that didnt do crap but piss off their own base.

[kidfresh512]

Right now, the Democratic Party isn't exactly winning people over with how they are sitting on their hands and expecting us to vote when their response to all this is the usual inaction and begging for money.

How else do the lawyers that have to fight all the upcoming legal challenges, and the campaigns we want in all states to go against the GOP candidates get funded?
It makes perfect sense to be requesting donations and campaign contributions right now.

Even though we knew this was coming thanks to the leaked draft it is now real. People's lives will be effected right now. LGBT people's lives were overtly threatened in the opinion use Pride month gatherings and to get support and donations. It makes perfect sense.

The idea that they "expect us to vote" is the main problem. That apathy is part of the reason the GOP are so successful and do not have to reach out and expand their base at all. Their voters vote as habit, as necessity. They want to assert their beliefs and control over the rest of us and will vote all the time to do that.

[GindyPosts]

The idea that they "expect us to vote" is the main problem. That apathy is part of the reason the GOP are so successful and do not have to reach out and expand their base at all. Their voters vote as habit, as necessity. They want to assert their beliefs and control over the rest of us and will vote all the time to do that.

I'm sorry, but I am not in the mood to support them given that we've had years, if not decades, to codify Roe knowing that the GOP would kill it when they had the chance, but Democrats always went "eh, not right now" either because they had to cater to the fringe members of their party or because they just didn't feel like it. If apathy is the problem, it's because the Democrats haven't exactly "earned" the right for people to vote for them other than "the other party is worse".

[Mister Mets]

Right now, the Democratic Party isn't exactly winning people over with how they are sitting on their hands and expecting us to vote when their response to all this is the usual inaction and begging for money.

What should Democrats do right now?

OK I admit, I'm ignorant on rights. If the right to an abortion is in the 14th amendment, why do republicans say we can't ban guns because it's in the 2nd amendment?

Republicans would respond that the right to abortion is not in the 14th amendment, and that Roe V Wade was poorly decided.

In 1981, Joe Biden voted for a bill to let states determine abortion access. He is an Irish catholic who got elected to the Senate by defeating a Republican incumbent.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/29/u...on-rights.html

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was critical of the rationale.

https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/ju...w-school-visit

Lawrence Tribe, a noted law professor, responded to it at the time by writing "One of the most curious things about Roe is that, behind its own verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgment on which it rests is nowhere to be found."

https://www.usccb.org/issues-and-act...-it-created-it

I think a better use of all the time, energy, and money might be an organized, comprehensive nationwide campaign to engage, educate, and energize Democratic voters. Focus and inform voters in every state about the particular procedural and logistical problems they will face and need to overcome in order to circumvent the GOPs machinations.
That's the amount of effort the Republicans are putting into fixing elections nationwide right now and Democrats will have to commit an equal or superior amount to overcome it.
So far, I haven't seen anything like that. I'm not even sure Democratic leadership in Washington communicates with the state parties and has a plan. If anyone can confirm it, I'd be grateful.

This is probably the best approach. It's hard, but it's the main way to get political results.

We're seeing problems with leaving these things to courts, or trying to focus away from the difficult arguments by talking about things that aren't important (focusing on individual candidates rather than why people should vote for any Democrat over any Republican.)

Something WBE might be interested in for his project

Senator in 2010 deposition: 13-year-olds can consent to sex

This is the context of legal understanding regarding something teenagers did in a summer camp without the support or approval of any adult staffer. If there's a different legal understanding, it can lead to prosecutions of children.

[useridgoeshere]

I'm sorry, but I am not in the mood to support them given that we've had years, if not decades, to codify Roe knowing that the GOP would kill it when they had the chance, but Democrats always went "eh, not right now" either because they had to cater to the fringe members of their party or because they just didn't feel like it. If apathy is the problem, it's because the Democrats haven't exactly "earned" the right for people to vote for them other than "the other party is worse".

Giving up is definitely a choice, but only voting matters and only one party wants to change the trajectory. Donations and protests are purely performative without electoral victories. The whole “should’ve codified Roe” thing feels like 20/20 hindsight. I don’t remember anyone pushing for it, demanding it, or thinking it was necessary. And I do think that Democrats at the state level have done stuff to protect women’s healthcare rights in many states.

[kidfresh512]

I'm sorry, but I am not in the mood to support them given that we've had years, if not decades, to codify Roe knowing that the GOP would kill it when they had the chance, but Democrats always went "eh, not right now" either because they had to cater to the fringe members of their party or because they just didn't feel like it. If apathy is the problem, it's because the Democrats haven't exactly "earned" the right for people to vote for them other than "the other party is worse".

Then there is no reason to complain then is there? No one will come to your house and "make you" be in the mood to vote. Not participating means you are fine with where the rest of participants are leading you. Complaining when you don't participate or aren't in the mood is pointless.

[Kirby101]

I'm sorry, but I am not in the mood to support them given that we've had years, if not decades, to codify Roe knowing that the GOP would kill it when they had the chance, but Democrats always went "eh, not right now" either because they had to cater to the fringe members of their party or because they just didn't feel like it. If apathy is the problem, it's because the Democrats haven't exactly "earned" the right for people to vote for them other than "the other party is worse".

And again we ask, when did the Dems enough control in Government in the last 40 years to do that. When did they have a filibuster proof majority? Blame the Democrats and abstain from voting, make sure more Republicans get elected to make things worse. Great strategy. The only States now that are protecting abortion are the Blue ones. And by the way, if more people had voted for Hillary, there would now be three more liberal Justices upholding Roe. How did saying it didn't matter work out?

[Farealmer]

It's mainly about bragging rights to be honest.

I would look pretty dumb if I ended up being wrong on this.

How privileged you are that if it happened all you would need to worry about is looking dumb. I don't think you are a troll Mets, like others do, but damn, sometimes you make it hard to hold that belief.

[Farealmer]

With gay marriage, someone I talked to about it brought this up.

Niel Gorsuch was in the majority in Obergefell V Hodges. So that is not going to happen with the court's current make up.
In fact, he wrote the majority opinion.
I don't see him going back on something that he wrote.

[kidfresh512]

With gay marriage, someone I talked to about it brought this up.

It doesnt have to be right now, look how long they attacked Roe v Wade. Does that mean we are one car wreck during a republican presidency, with a republican congress then from repealing it? The alarm bells are ringing because the threat is real. Hundreds of other laws attacking LGBT the past few years and that will only increase with GOP increased targeting.

The big lesson learned that people should have understood in 2016 when it was almost certain going to be at least 2 SC seats was you cannot trust the GOP. They have wanted for YEARS to get rid of Roe. To the point of it being a single issue to vote on for them.

[Panfoot]

LGBTQ+ rights are already dead, it's not a matter of if but when.