I don't see how anyone else will.

Republicans aren't interested, third parties aren't viable.

The working class needs bodily autonomy, or what else do they have?

I acknowledge the stain on the soul of the democratic party, but I also acknowledge that if roe becomes durable law in my lifetime, a Democrat will do it.

Uh, alright.

I mean trying to deploy a "gotcha" on democrats as a monolith doesn't make sense when just achieving supermajority does nothing to guarantee either an appetite, or a true ability to pass a given legislation.

I agree with your message that it should be codified into law. I believe the appetite for roe law has never been higher, or more viable as legislation.

I don't know what you mean by talking points, youre the one who showed up with a poster board lol.

Further, if I'm helping the duopoly by talking about getting roe passed, then so be it. Roe isn't a "culture war" topic. It's a human dignity and bodily autonomy topic.

edit suggesting the edit Carter or Clinton era is appropriate comparison to the appetite for, or viability of abortion legislation today, as relates to the supreme court ruling and what should be done now is silly.

So did they have the votes or not? Looks like not.

Edit edit just having dems in seats is not a vote, automatically. To be clear, I acknowledge your points about supermajority, and move no goalposts as my original reply said "support".

Last edit: I edited several times to clarify. I understand if you are already replying and don't see em.

I don't think it's relevant to compare abortion pre 2000 to post.

So with that caveat, when was there congressional support? Enough votes in both the house and Senate? With president ready to sign?

Ok, but if you do ass last, you're still just getting ass on face the next day.

It's assface all the way down

Generally top to bottom, because otherwise drips from above will rewet areas you tried to dry

Weebs I think

Yes agree. It's just that in some shape or form, western countries have been hunting terrorists and accepting (an amount) of collateral damage, for decades. It's seen as "warfare". I think we can assume Israel, in this case, thinks it's aligned with global norms with the beeper method.

I think it's a whole lot grayer than that

The point is half the planet "accepts" drone strikes of terrorists, on the justification that those terrorists are "conducting war" where ever they are.

Note I am not holding this opinion, I'm describing it.

I would assume Israel is riding along the same idea.

Again, not my idea.

If only a cock inspecting asexual were there that day to provide some clarity

Dude probably cleaned his house, paid his bills, organized the garage, updated his resume...