350

Biden’s top priority for a second term: restoring abortion rights (www.politico.com)

submitted 10 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

144 comments fedilink hide all child comments

…

“The president has been adamant that we need to restore Roe. It is unfathomable that women today wake up in a country with less rights than their ancestors had years ago,” Fulks said.

Biden has been poised to run on what has been described as the strongest abortion rights platform of any general election candidate as he and his allies look to notch a victory in the first presidential election since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022.

Last month, Biden seized on a case in Texas, where a woman, Kate Cox, was denied an abortion despite the risk to her life posed by her pregnancy.

“No woman should be forced to go to court or flee her home state just to receive the health care she needs,” Biden said of the case. “But that is exactly what happened in Texas thanks to Republican elected officials, and it is simply outrageous. This should never happen in America, period.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world -11 points 10 months ago

Sounds like a whole lot of "fuck all" then.

[-] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 17 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Well it won't feel like "fuck all" when a Republican led FDA revokes authorizations for abortion medications, morning after pills, or maybe even birth control across the country, even in states where it's legal. Or sends federal law enforcement after doctors and others providing mail order abortion services. Or starts trying to withhold funding from states that supplement Medicaid to cover abortions. Or sues states trying to protect health information from anti abortion and anti trans states who want it to harass them. I mean the list of horrible possibilities goes on. The executive department can't do everything on its own, congress has the most power, but it is still important on its own. Not to mention needing a president friendly to reproductive rights to sign any bill that manages to get passed, or veto any unfavorable bills.

But seriously, save at least a little vitreol for the political party actively working to restrict reproductive Healthcare rights. If even a handful of Republican members of congress, a single digit percentage, were in favor of protecting reproductive rights, this would all be over yesterday. By all means though primary the crap out of any democrat not strongly supporting reproductive rights enough or not supporting overturning the filibuster to do so, I know I will.

[+] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world -16 points 10 months ago

Should've voted for someone better in the 2020 primaries then. You keep trying to guilt me into making better choices. I'm just turning it back around. Make better choices in the primaries.

[-] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 14 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The democrats did pass a bill codifying roe v wade though when they held the house then. Biden was in support and would have signed it. It failed in the senate. Not a single republican in support. 98% of democrats in support. Even ending the filibuster wouldn't have been enough as the lone democratic holdout and 50th senator needed was Manchin (pro life).

I'm just skeptical of the motives of all the people in this thread acting like Biden himself banned all abortions, could bring them back whenever he wanted, and is choosing not to out of some weird extortion scheme for the next election. None of that is even remotely true. And where is all the hate for all the people that did this in the first place and are actively working to make it even worse?!

I have no concerns that Biden would happily sign a bill codifying roe v wade if one were to make it to his desk, considering all he's done since taking office. I supported Sanders in the primaries, and I think his strong support was helpful at pushing Biden and the party platform further to the left in many areas, even if my preferred candidate didn't end up on top. For primaries I'm talking any senators who may be soft on this, though honestly the only two I know of are Manchin (who's leaving), or Sinema (which, yeah that whole situation, also not in the party anymore so job done). Or if you're a republican, pushing them. Would honestly be the most helpful thing of all to try and get more pro choice Republicans in office in red states.

this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024

350 points (96.5% liked)

politics

19159 readers

4546 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News