The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down

Status
Not open for further replies.
dowie said:
No, it isn't clear at all, again the point I made before is you'd have to assume that state legislatures take no action to resolve the anomaly here of legally allowing for a 15-week limit and exempting mothers while also having on the books a law that could make doctors criminally liable.

It might result in that but that isn't clear, especially when state legislators and the governors have made comments about holding sessions on this... ergo the assumption of do nothing seems suspect:
eu.azcentral.com

Arizona anti-abortion laws, including from Territorial days, that could return if Roe v. Wade is reversed

Arizona's strictest anti-abortion laws, both old and new, are blocked by Roe. The oldest, from 1901,\u00a0requires prison time for abortion providers.
eu.azcentral.com eu.azcentral.com
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

They don't need to resolve the anomaly. 13-3603 exists. It is already there. The fact that a crime may be prosecutable under separate laws doesn't negate one of them. Once Roe v Wade is gone state prosecutors would have the option to use 13-3603.

dowie said:
So the conclusion of Roe v. Wade being overturned is that the legislature would do nothing and allow a total ban to slip into place as the status quo seems flawed. They're clearly going to take the opportunity to legislate on this.

Firstly the democrats would clearly be opposed to a total ban and secondly, you've got republicans like the representative quoted above arguing for a 15-week limit. The house is currently 31 Republicans and 29 Democrats, the state senate is 16 Republicans and 14 Democrats...
Click to expand...

The simple fact is the state legislature knows 13-3603 exists. They specifically chose not to override it with the new 15 week law. They could easily have done so.
 
There are still laws on the books from before Roe in some states and the minute Roe is overturned they come back into effect. Red states are going to go big on this, these 15 week laws that were passed such as the one in this SC case were written like that to give the SC an out, they seem perfectly reasonable, so why not overturn Roe. This has been a concerted effort by Republicans at state, national and judiciary level for years. There is no way certain justices weren't advising on what laws to pass that would be acceptable to the anti abortion justices on the SC. They have not got their super majority of evangelical justices, the 15 week ban case and so they are finally getting Roe thrown out. Expect carnage at state level to follow.

PlacidCasual said:
Whilst Roe vs Wade mains the law those trigger laws have been cheap consequence free red meat for the more conservative element of the Republican base. Should Roe vs Wade be overturned they come into force and women will begin to be affected. Most things I've read have suggested a broad consensus for abortion in the US if not mirrored amongst it's representatives. Those women will vote for their needs and Republican representatives will start to lose support in state and national legislatures as a consequence. It is not very satisfactory but I suspect many of those trigger laws will be watered down or removed over the coming years as the electoral calculus moves away from hard line positions. The Republicans would be wise to be ahead of that curve rather than behind it.
Click to expand...


The problem is at state level so many state are gerrymandered to make it almost impossible to flip a legislature. Yes you can flip the governor but some even have a super majority so can override any veto.

22 states with laws ready to go. More will follow

  1. Alabama—Pre-Roe ban, Near-total ban, State constitution bars protection
  2. Arizona—Pre-Roe ban
  3. Arkansas—Pre-Roe ban, Trigger ban, Near-total ban
  4. Georgia—Six-week ban
  5. Idaho—Trigger ban, Six-week ban
  6. Iowa—Six-week ban
  7. Kentucky—Trigger ban, Six-week ban
  8. Louisiana—Trigger ban, Near-total ban, Six-week ban, State constitution bars protection
  9. Michigan—Pre-Roe ban
  10. Mississippi—Pre-Roe ban, Trigger ban, Six-week ban
  11. Missouri—Trigger ban, Eight-week ban
  12. North Dakota—Trigger ban, Six-week ban
  13. Ohio—Six-week ban
  14. Oklahoma—Pre-Roe ban, Trigger ban (effective November 1, 2021), Near-total ban, Six-week ban
  15. South Carolina—Six-week ban
  16. South Dakota—Trigger ban
  17. Tennessee—Trigger ban, Six-week ban, State constitution bars protection
  18. Texas—Pre-Roe ban, Trigger ban, Six-week ban
  19. Utah—Trigger ban, Near-total ban
  20. West Virginia—Pre-Roe ban, State constitution bars protection
  21. Wisconsin—Pre-Roe ban
  22. . Wyoming—Trigger ban
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
Those quotes are saying they have fans on the alt right. Jordan Peterson is right of centre, you can be a supporter of free speech and right wing. That isn't alt-right.

This is alt-right
www.splcenter.org

Alt-Right

The Alternative Right, commonly known as the "alt-right," is a set of far-right ideologies, groups and individuals whose core belief is that “white identity” is under attack by multicultural forces using “political correctness” and “social justice” to undermine white people and “their” civilization.
www.splcenter.org www.splcenter.org
Click to expand...
I agree, that is why I said 'branded', of course they can't claim he himself (or the others) are alt-right, but they can discredit their views by associating those as resonating with the alt-right.. The number of times they used the word alt-right and the even the titles of many articles (e.g. NBC's "Canadian Author Finds Fame As Alt-Right Intellectual") to get this associative narrative going is fairly obvious.

Each to their own, I found the meme a good representation of how this uprising of intersectional ideologies (which I see as being far left) has really skewed the political landscape quite some way to the left..
 
dowie said:
Introducing new laws != banning abortion. The claim that 26 states will ban abortion seems to be hyperbole, some of them will severely limit it to 6 weeks but this is really muddling things if broad claims like that are made and other states that aren't doing that are thrown into the mix.

I mean look at the details, they mention Florida introducing a 15-week limit, that's in line with some European countries... that isn't banning abortion.

Ditto to Arizona, in your article above they simply have it listed as "Pre-Roe ban" but in reality a quick google indicates it's again a 15-week limit for most abortions. I've not googled the rest but that was the first non-descript one in the list.

France, Ireland, Italy all have 12-week limits for most abortions, Spain has a 14 week limit and Sweden has an 18 week limit....

Would the statement that most EU countries have banned abortions be a reasonable one? If not then why conflate US states due to implement similar limits to European nations with other far more restrictive states that have 6 week limits?

Or indeed the ones that seem to have actually gone for a near-total ban - that seems to be 3 states not 26 (unless there are some others among the non-descript entries on that list).
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing that.

Mind sharing why roe vs wade is being removed and has been something republicans have been using as a selling point for x number of years? I'm unfamiliar with what the difference is to what you're suggesting they will do

Thanks.

Also, I have a strong suspicion, that you'll argue (rightly or wrongly) about this abortion change and how it's not what people fear, then, like January 6th,the events try to take place that people feared, and then 2 years later, you'll still be arguing that it's not that bad and not a real abortion ban :p

Edit
No one tell dowie about the arizona gop senate candidate that proposes that condoms should be banned in all States, or the US senator that suggest all birth control should be illegal unless for a married couple.

Tune in next week where the taliban enact a policy that the republicans then steal as their own.
 
Last edited:
Pudney said:
They don't need to resolve the anomaly. 13-3603 exists. It is already there. The fact that a crime may be prosecutable under separate laws doesn't negate one of them. Once Roe v Wade is gone state prosecutors would have the option to use 13-3603.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they did *need* to resolve the anomaly, I'm pointing out that even the governor himself is stating he doesn't know how a reversal would affect Arizona, that not all Republicans would be in favour of a total ban there and that their majority is rather thin.

To assume that nothing will be updated, that state legislatures will do nothing when power is handed back to state legislatures to pass laws here is a bad assumption IMO. They might all do nothing but that seems highly unlikely in all cases and just looking at that first unclear case of Arizona there are clearly people on both sides who are opposed to a total ban. That they haven't prioritized removing some 50+ year old legislation that doesn't currently apply isn't exactly a reliable indication that they won't do so when it does esepcially given the public statements I've already shown.

I suspect the more realistic scenario is you'll have a tightening of limits of abortion in a lot of those states.

Apex said:
Mind sharing why roe vs wade is being removed and has been something republicans have been using as a selling point for x number of years? I'm unfamiliar with what the difference is to what you're suggesting they will do
Click to expand...
We don't know for sure it is being removed, there is a leak of an early draft suggesting it could be overturned. This is because Mississippi has decided they want to go with a 15 week limit on aboritons.
Apex said:
Also, I have a strong suspicion, that you'll argue (rightly or wrongly) about this abortion change and how it's not what people fear, then, like January 6th,the events try to take place that people feared, and then 2 years later, you'll still be arguing that it's not that bad and not a real abortion ban :p
Click to expand...

Perhaps clarify what you're even arguing here? Removing Roe v. Wade isn't in itself an "abortion ban" you're not making any sense there. Removing Roe v. Wade means states have more freedom to legislate their own guidelines on abortion.
 
Last edited:
No ones removing roe v wade? From what I understand it was a draft opinion written by 2 judges on the SC - something they do all the time - and was then leaked by someone, my money would be on the brand new lefty judge that was appointed.
 
Abortion is not really a left right issue. It is the long time moral majority, religious parts of America versus the urban, agnostic, liberal parts. The argument has been going on since the sixties revolution most of whose litigators and sponsors are now dead. The backlash is down to religion having more wealth and power in some areas from both sides in politics.

Anyway Roe V Wade is way off topic for this thread.
 
Hagar said:
Abortion is not really a left right issue. It is the long time moral majority, religious parts of America versus the urban, agnostic, liberal parts. The argument has been going on since the sixties revolution most of whose litigators and sponsors are now dead. The backlash is down to religion having more wealth and power in some areas from both sides in politics.

Anyway Roe V Wade is way off topic for this thread.
Click to expand...
Agree on both fronts.. It seems like some people just love their intersectional politics and like to throw it at anything.. Musk describes himself as liberal and centrist, but no surprise the mentions of alt-right are creeping in the usual left wing progressive media stories

So OT,

I didn't see this discussed:
Elon Musk plans to FIRE 1,000 Twitter staff, quintuple revenue, get 69 million users paying $3 a month and cut reliance on advertising income, presentation to investors shows
Click to expand...
which goes in hand with
Twitter job interest rises over 250% after announcement of Elon Musk’s $44 billion buyout deal
Click to expand...
and
Elon Musk Says “Expectations” Of Twitter Employees Will Be “Extreme” Following Takeover
Click to expand...

Sounds like he's planning a pretty major overhaul to which I personally wonder if he actually knows what he's getting in to and if he has the actual skills necessary to keep the platform relevant, he does have a history of over promising and under delivering.
 
Last edited:
Demon said:
Sounds like he's planning a pretty major overhaul to which I personally wonder if he actually knows what he's getting in to and if he has the actual skills necessary to keep the platform relevant, he does have a history of over promising and under delivering.
Click to expand...
:confused::confused::confused: because Tesla and SpaceX where he did exactly that are not good examples?
 
C Kent said:
No ones removing roe v wade? From what I understand it was a draft opinion written by 2 judges on the SC - something they do all the time - and was then leaked by someone, my money would be on the brand new lefty judge that was appointed.
Click to expand...

Its a draft that 5 justices have signed on to, which is why its in the majority.

You mean the "lefty" judge that hasn't been seated yet and so would have no access to this or any other SC material :rolleyes:
 
C Kent said:
I can't see folks paying to use it myself
Click to expand...

Maybe not 60 million or whatever... that seems to be like 1/5th or 1/6th of the monthly active users and so might be a bit ambitious but they do already have "superfollows" and I think some spaces can be paid for etc... so he might well look to ramp that stuff up a bit.

He could look at charging a commercial fee to corporates, news orgs etc.. based on the number of followers they have or similar etc... Some of them essentially use it as a free customer service portal/free advertising...
 
Hagar said:
Anyway Roe V Wade is way off topic for this thread.
Click to expand...

Fair point, have created a new thread for that here, just mentioning it here in case someone pops into this thread first and starts carrying on the previous abortion-related convos:

Abortion, Roe v. Wade

There was a bit of chat about this in the Elon Musk thread so figured I'd start a new thread here as it's rather off-topic to that one. There is a bit of hysteria in the US at the moment as some landmark supreme court judgment that, until now, has severely limited the ability of states to...
forums.overclockers.co.uk forums.overclockers.co.uk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom