5mo ago

Kamala Harris’ call for ‘reproductive freedom’ means restoring Roe

www.politico.com Just a moment...

69 comments

Good for Kamala.
- Good for America.

you fucking morons
You don't need to restore Roe.
You need an actual law enshrining it as a right.
I'm not a judge, but I can definitely see why Roe was overturned. So don't play stupid games, don't rely on a Court to interpret a certain Law a certain way, just enshrine it in law. Black ink on white paper.
- Oh of course, we'll just go ahead and do that tomorrow! Sheesh, what were we thinking? Thank you so much for your enlightening remarks. It was so obvious this entire time!

Rather just restore, improve. It was said Roe is incomplete and should be revisited for better and clearer coverage.

Don't restore it, make a better law and make it a human right.

How would "restoring" work? Is that legislation, or modifying the supreme court, etc?
- Basically legislation. Dobbs just said there wasn’t a constitutional right, but that doesn’t mean there can’t be a federal law that makes that a right. A federal law could effectively restore this right (although it wouldn’t make it a constitutional right, which would be harder to take away).

So why hasn’t Biden?
- Kind of tough when Republicans are in charge of the house of representatives.
  
  No I mean the title implies as though she can restore roe. If she can do it why can’t Biden? Answer is either Biden doesn’t want to or he can’t and it will be the same for Kamala
  
  Last I checked, the house of representatives doesn't keep him from speaking out and pushing the issue.
- biden's not running LOL

Another mythical carrot to lure voters to the polls, again. I cant imagine people falling for this lie, again.
- oh, are we using "number of lies told" as a metric to judge? ok, here
  https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/23/opinion/trumps-lies.html
  
  Don't feed the troll.
  
  Deflecting and burying your head in the sand doesn't get rid of the fact that Democrats have promised time and again to protect rights when in reality they've weaponized them so they can raise campaign money.
- "I don't believe Kamala actually wants to restore Roe v Wade, so I'm going to support the party that took it away in the first place!"
  Makes sense to me!
  
  Point to where I said I would vote for the orange rapist?
- I mean, if the Republicans get control, they will absolutely push for a nationwide abortion ban:
  https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/22/fact-sheet-house-republicans-endorse-a-national-abortion-ban-with-zero-exceptions-in-latest-budget/
  The elimination of birth control:
  https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-republicans-block-bill-protect-americans-access-contraception-rcna155448
  And no-fault divorce (read as "woman initiated divorce"):
  https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jun/25/republicans-no-fault-divorce
  Some have even openly discussed removing womens right to vote:
  https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/09/21/politics/john-gibbs-womens-suffrage-19th-amendment-kfile
  Now, regardless of whether or not the Democratic party would actually PROTECT these things or not is irrelevant. They definitely would not express interest in restrictions the way the Republicans do.
  This is why it's important to vote an all blue ticket. The alternative is literal Christofascism.
  
  Still not voting a blue ticket, theyve had 50 years to fix this shit and ignored women's rights in order to raise money and stay in power. Theyve held women's reproductive rights hostage and demand we bail them out everytime an election comes around. They have proven they can't be trusted

69 comments