A leaked video appears to show Republican officials at a meeting held by an anti-abortion group pushing for women to be prosecuted for having abortions.
The Catholic Church condemned the ruling by the Supreme Court.[141] Blackmun wrote in his diary, "Abortion flakâ3 CardinalsâVaticanâRochester wires!"[141]
John Cardinal Krol, the archbishop of Philadelphia who was also the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and Terence Cardinal Cooke, the archbishop of New York, both issued statements condemning the ruling.[175] Krol called the ruling "an unspeakable tragedy for this nation" that "sets in motion developments which are terrifying to contemplate."[175] Cooke called the decision a "horrifying action" and added:[175]
How many millions of children prior to their birth will never live to see the light of today because of the shocking action of the majority of the United States Supreme Court today?[175]
Don't apologize for Biden. He could have tried to pack the court, he could be given weekly speeches denouncing their decision, he has the IRS and FBI could have made Thomas' and Alito's life a living hell with daily announcements of fresh bribery charges, he could pick a fight with the Catholic Church pointing out that it is a foreign power influencing the US government. Instead he went gently into that good night.
Now will I vote for him? Yes because the alternative is worse. Can I support him? Not for a second.
During Thursdayâs speech, Biden deviated from his prepared remarks, skipping over the word âabortionâ and instead using the phrases âreproductive freedomâ or âfreedom to choose.â
Yes, he is catholic. Yes, most Catholics disagree with abortion. No, Biden doesnât think his religious beliefs should dictate how women live their lives. He literally says it plain as day for even the very stupid among us to understand. Good luck!
This seems extremely deceptive, possibly deliberately so. Being influenced by catholic teachings does not mean you agree with everything they believe. Even someone who rejects every single moral teaching of the church could still be influenced by them in some ways.
In this case, we donât need to speculate from some vague statement about the church because Biden has explicitly stated he supported roe v wade, has appointed judges that have pursued this pro-choice ideology, and has even stated that he would sign a bill to reinstate the previous protections for women. Such a bill was put forth in congress but was blocked in the senate. He does not have any direct control over this issue, so itâs hard for me to see what else he even could have done.
It comes off as very intellectually dishonest to ignore all that and claim heâs âclearly on the record saying he supports the abortion banâ then point to something he didnât even say and is only tangentially related.
PS: There are tons of legitimate criticisms of Biden so itâs especially strange to invent ones that are so far from the truth.
Biden being for women's rights would have been a drastic out of common place executive order restoring women's rights instead of one advancing research into a field that requires Roe versus Wade
Executive orders can only interpret and change the execution of federal law. They canât invent new ones. If there were a federal abortion ban in place, Biden could decline to enforce it, though this would not change the actual law and would likely be challenged in court.
The abortion bans are all by state governments which Biden has no authority over. Read up on federalism and the way the US government works. It sounds like some of your frustration stems from a lack of political knowledge. The presidency is not a dictatorship and we do not want it to be. If Biden could restore reproductive rights unilaterally then a republican could also remove them unilaterally, which would be even worse than the current situation.
The president is not a dictator. It doesn't work like that.
Also, do you really think presidents should just be able to change the size of SCOTUS whenever they want to? What if Trump gets in and decides to shrink it to only the conservatives?
I know enough about our legislature to know that they would not approve 100 SCOTUS justices. I'm not sure why you think they would allow any president to do that unless they were a rubber stamp legislature, which they are not.
Why would the Senate even let one extra justice through?
You would need 51% of them to do that. Which would necessarily either include Manchin and Sinema or two Republicans. If you honestly believe either of those scenarios would result in even increasing the size of SCOTUS to 10 justices, you really don't understand the U.S. government.