[gunfighthacksaw]

The repeal of Roe v Wade was a gut punch for me, but I’ve known it was entirely possible for quite a long time. Plus some states have had trigger laws forever so that’s hardly surprising.

Yes, there will be instability, but it’s not the chaotic out-of-the-blue kind, unless you’re wilfully ignorant of the anti abortion movement, or extremely naive to the motivations of that bloc.

[pm90]

If you read the opinions they’re not very convincing. They’re making up principles to adhere to which did not exist before, and doing this for things that have broad support in the US population.

So it is quite chaotic out of the blue kind. Essentially the Judges are ruling by decree and will strike down any law that’s not explicitly enumerated in the constitution (and even there they will certainly weaken the law as we saw with Roe v Wade).

[rootusrootus]

A lot of people think it's possible to read the constitution literally and divine what the words mean. To them, all of this makes perfect sense, because they can't see how the previous rulings ever fit what the constitution prescribes.

I sympathize, but clearly there is far more to our laws than just the words on that document. It's just the set of principles providing some foundation. Hell, we started with "congress shall make no law..." and extrapolated that all the way to pretty much any institution funded by taxes. Clearly a literal reading has limits.

[short_sells_poo]

As a slight tangent since you seem to be knowledgeable: what is the motivation of the anti abortion bloc? I feel that godliness and a true care for life yet unborn is not it, because the bloc does not exhibit these qualities in many other areas...

[mlyle]

Eh, I do think it's being repulsed at the idea of killin' babies.

Combined with not weighting the value of the choices of women or the impact on them or their bodies very high.

Look, uh, abortion is kinda a yucky thing. There's not some bright-line moment of change and investiture with consciousness and being that happens at the moment of birth. It's only when you decide the choices and bodily autonomy of the adult woman is more important than the potential of the life growing in her that you can support abortion.

[Veelox]

> what is the motivation of the anti abortion bloc?

I'm going to take this question seriously. The pro-life bloc is sincere when they say they think killing a fetus after conception is murder. They also on average have right leaning policy. Since you didn't list specifically what you meant by "exhibit these quantities" so this is guessing. I see a lot of arguments from left leaning folks that round to "if pro-life people were REALLY pro-life they would agree with all my policies (health care, climate change, gun control, ect)" and then use this argument to say pro-life people are liars. Nope, they just disagree about when killing the pre-born humans counts as murder.

[m0llusk]

A different framing can be revealing. For some years the state in the US with the lowest number of abortions per capita was Massachusetts where abortions are not only readily available but also essentially free. The big difference is that sex education and contraception are pervasively available. In the areas that support a ban on abortions sex education and contraception have limited availability. Instead people are supposed to abstain until they commit to a partner for procreation. Abstinence is unrealistic, so this results in youthful sexual experimentation starting families. There are effectively two different ways of living here with abortion being linked to sex education and contraception and how ideas about how families should be formed and pregnancies planned or not.