Debrief: The Abortion Ruling
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 сен 2024
- A SmartHER take on the landmark abortion case decided by the Supreme Court. What To Know. Why It Matters. What's Next & What To Watch.
.
Plus: A lingering question: Are you truly free? What or who defines our liberty remains at the heart of this case and so many of our news stories. We don't avoid this topic - we drive through it and look forward to your thoughts.
Excellent. How in the world did you do such a great job covering such a heated and emotional subject? Thank you.
This is how news should be delivered!!!! I'm sitting at the pool listening to your report with head phones in, head back, relaxed while listening to a fair, balanced and concise report on ABORTION. Never thought I could listen to such a hot topic like abortion and feel relaxed!! Normally my blood is boiling and I'm ready to fight someone 😂... instead I feel informed and engaged, Thanks!
Phenomenal, phenomenal job bringing the world truly non-partisan news!! Breath of fresh air. Your voice and voices like it are like a calm in the storm and can truly help in fostering reasonable discussion and debate around this issue. When people have the whole story, the real facts, all the facts they are actually able to make informed opinions, refine opinions, and even change opinions! Thank you 😊
Brilliant reporting, Jenna! Can’t say how much I appreciate your ability to step back and tell the whole story without bias or emotion. You should start a journalism course or school to teach your skills, they are so needed!
Wow, the first news report I have seen that actually does not include rhetoric or fear mongering. How Refreshing!!! You really nailed this one for me. Thank you so much.
So appreciate the support!
Thank you for giving more educational backstory & context! This is so well done! I appreciate your character & goals for your news are great!
Thank you for this discussion! I especially appreciated the background you gave on the other cases and explanation of the precedent they set, but would have liked more info on WHY the majority said the precedent set by these other cases was wrong. This would have helped me understand the ruling better.
As it shouldn’t. Complete unrestricted decision making is not what liberty means, so the constitution cannot mean this either. Thank you for bringing this part of the conversation up. As humans we should have moral restrictions, without conscience and morality a society cannot function. So as a woman I have liberty to live as I want, but I do not have the right to harm another life. So yes I can decide if I want to me a mom, but I cannot decide to murder in order to make that decision because murder is always wrong.
Murder is not the correct term for an no bias debate. End a life care or life-saving care provides a more unbiased debate on value of both lives. To me I look at it the same I would any other life ending care. What do we require to pull life support, what do we require of others to save a life. Often times in healthcare we are faced with decisions we may not morally or emotionally agree with but we cannot base our care on our moral perception. This happens often when with triage care. For example if car crash victims come in & a lifesaving resource is limited, who caused the accident does not come into play, the probability of survival is how we decide who gets what. If we are using women as life support we have to can't put more on that then termination of mechanical life support. Then you have the dilemma of using another body to sustain someone. What other instances would we require that? It's a unique situation and a hard one to remove the emotional and personal moral ideals but ultimately as a society we need to figure out when, where, and why these things would be required.
Two comments about what you say toward the end.
First, many of the anti-abortion laws which were passed in recent years were specifically intended to wind up in front of the Supreme Court and chip away at Roe. Especially once Kavanagh was appointed.
Second, Mitch McConnell changed the dynamics of judicial appointees - and specifically the Supreme Court - when in 2016 he denied Obama the ability to appoint Scalia's replacement. He further changed the rules when he rushed through Ginsberg's replacement just weeks before the 2020 election.
Beautifully balanced as always! So appreciate this so much. Wanted to write an email of thanks, too, but don’t find one anywhere. Do you have a smarthernews email?
Well said all around!
You are a gem Jenna. Thank you.
It is also important to note that Norma later came out very publicly to share her regrets concerning her abortion and spent many years of her life as a pro-life/ anti-abortion advocate.
She actually never had an abortion. She had a daughter who is still alive!
You are a great human 🙌🏻
Love it!
I appreciated this deeper dive and perspective.Thank you for your reporting. When you considered, “how did we get here?”, I think some background how the composition of Supreme Court changed also needs to be considered. A part of that background is the unusual way Congress acted in 2016 refusing to hold confirmation hearings, then the expedited turnaround in 2020. This is seen as an important factor to many folks and it certainly impacted the composition of the court.
Absolutely. All these twists and turns absolutely matter.
Awesome job reporting on a very hot and emotional topic. Keep up the great work that you are doing.
Outstanding. I live in Canada but rely on you for honest reporting and the "whole" story. Thank you for doing what you do.
Jenna, you are a breath of fresh air. This piece didn’t change my passionate opinion and grave concern for our country, it was never going to. But the information gave me intelligent layers of history to consider, and I have a much better understanding of of how crucial the term “We the People” really is.
Thank you!
I appreciate the objective stance you held in this video about this issue. I don't think people can get past their subjective views to understand the ruling. I could of done this video word for word reading your transcript and people wouldn't listen to a word I say because I am a man. I think critical thinking and context should always take precedent. Ones personal conviction should follow the facts not precede them. This was my first time listening to any of your content and your reasoning on why you started this page is needed in todays media. I stopped following all mainstream media and even local news due to their reporting styles(both CNN/FOX news).
very good information thank you for your time jenna
this is the problem with conservative minded people and the republicans.we have an economic disaster going on.food and gas are probly higher than its ever been.reports say we might go through another resetion soon.we have an explosion of homeless people because they lost their jobs.what do the conservatives do,,they start with the abortion rights thing again that has been debated for years and which will not help the current serious situation all of us are in right now.what ive said has nothing to do with if u are pro or con,its about why now with all thats going on.
Thanks for all your work.
Thank you for this.
Thank you for always finding a smart & non-partisan angle on these controversial subjects!
Wow; didn’t know the State describes our liberty. Thanks
Just a comment for ya!! 👍✌
You are a delightful individual. I appreciate your news so much.
Thank you for covering this topic is such an educated & dignified way.
Very informative. Thanks. This info took a lot of time to gather
Thank you so much!
A constitutional right is not something you're granted as an American citizen. They are ieinalienable rights you have as a human. The constitution is a restriction on government. It lets them know they are not to be taken away or infringed upon. Yes you can say you only get to enjoy these rights because you live here. Although you see people everyday letting the government walk all over them.
Two comments about what you say toward the end.
First, many of the anti-abortion laws which were passed in recent years were specifically intended to wind up in front of the Supreme Court and chip away at Roe. Especially once Kavanagh was appointed.
Second, Mitch McConnell changed the dynamics of judicial appointees - and specifically the Supreme Court - when in 2016 he denied Obama the ability to appoint Scalia's replacement. He further changed the rules when he rushed through Ginsberg's replacement just weeks before the 2020 election.