comment: >
  
  For people who hate tax dollars going to families in need, the GOP sure does seem fine with creating more families in need.
context: Remember when Anita Hill came forward to tell her story of Clarence Thomas' sexual assualt?
  Remember when she didnt take one but two polygraphs to prove that she was telling the truth? 
  Remember when Clarence Thomas refused to take a polygraph himself?
  Remember when Mitch McConnell and the Rs confirmed Clarence Thomas anyways?
  Remember the day when judicial decency and integrity died? >
  
  To be fair, polygraphs are a load of shit. Innocent or guilty I would never agree to take one. For all the bad shit Thomas has done it would be insane to expect someone familiar with the unreliability of the polygraph (as a justice like Thomas surely is) to take one. >
  
  The point is that mrs Hill was giving her account, even willing to do multiple polygraphs, which at that time were still considered to be very accurate btw, and yet republicans belittled her and dismissed her testimony.
  Meanwhile Thomas did nothing to assure his innocence.
  Yes, it wasnt a criminal court procedure but again, the entire thing was a complete farce and republicans pushed him through out of spite, because dems block Bork years prior.
  Now there is a corrupt, treachorous justice on the scotus who potentially committed sexual assault. (The fact that its not clear which justice i am talking about based on this sentence alone is even worse) >
  
  That's irrelevant.  Polygraph can be easily brat, and just because you agreed to it, doesn't make you better. >
  
  Back then it wasn't widely known that - or more importantly how - they could be invalided (btw, it's not that you can beat them it's that you can make it too unreliable to be useful).
  Ultimately one of the two people lied and only one became a major political force that invalidated the right of millions of women to have control of their own uterus. >
  
  But ppl can beat them... >
  
  The point is not whether or not they can be ‘beaten’, because if no-one at the time knew that, then it becomes an acceptable standard in its time.
  The point is that one person went so far as to be willing to submit themselves to a procedure that was deemed reliable at the time, while the accused didn’t.
  Unless it was public knowledge at the time that polygraphs could be cheated, then it stands to reason that Clarence Thomas had little reason to not take the test too if he was honest. >
  
  Another win for Biden and for this country. If only we didn't have to constantly struggle against republicans to protect what should be a woman's basic right to her own body >
  
  It's only a win if it can be enacted without being delayed or out right stopped through legal challenges. Just like how Biden's student debt forgiveness isn't a win because it literally hasn't happened yet. >
  
  
  It's only a win if it can be enacted without being delayed or out right stopped through legal challenges. Just like how Biden's student debt forgiveness isn't a win because it literally hasn't happened yet.
  
  Hard disagree. Republicans will always launch legal challenges any time democrats want to help people. That doesn't take away from the fact that democrats are making a historic effort to protect people's rights and improve society >
  
  Would be great if the Dems could organize better messaging to remind voters how much the GOP obstructs. >
  
  When the Republicans say they have no intention of criminalizing women who have an abortion, they're lying. The Republicans will never stop trying to outlaw the abortion pill and trying to turn women who take the medicine into criminals for one reason. 
  Because women can do a medical abortion in the privacy of their own homes. There is no doctor for the Republicans to prosecute. No clinic to shut down. The woman gets the pills in the mail and she can make her own decision about her healthcare. 
  The Republicans will never let that stand. They demand punishment for every abortion and they'll to use their cruel hammer of anti-abortion laws to destroy women's reproductive rights. >
  
  The Republicans said they just wanted abortion to be a "state issue."  They were lying.
  Within about a nanosecond of the Dobbs decision, they introduced legislation to ban abortion nationwide.  The state bans were always going to be just a stop-gap measure until they could get the nationwide ban.
  They will say (depending on the state) "well it's just a ban at 15 weeks.  We can all agree on that, right?"  They're lying about that, too.  Frankly, they're lying about the "heartbeat" bans as well.
  They want it from the moment the baby daddy skeets into the baby factory, and they're coming for birth control after that because "it's god's will." >
  
  They're already coming for birth control. Senator Joni Ernst blocked a bill to codify the right to access to birth control last year. Other politicians are targeting Plan B due to the belief that life begins at fertilization. Because IUDs can be used as emergency contraceptive in some cases, those are being targetted as well. I've had an IUD for three years so I wouldn't have a period, as it was causing a lot of issues monthly. It's amazing how shot your sex drive gets when you become afraid that even the slim chance of it failing could result in a non-viable ectopic pregnancy that people are actually facing difficulty aborting in some areas. 
  And of course the actual science behind emergency contraceptives don't matter to these people, as we have seen countless examples of logic and facts meaning nothing. Not to mention the hypocrisy, as I'd be willing to bet these very legislators and supporters of banning them have had a mistress take Plan B, if not an abortion outright