A listener calls in with a concern that the media is spinning the narrative that Roe v Wade was always on shaky ground when it actually stood firm for 50 years.

Watch the Majority Report live Monday–Friday at 12 p.m. EST on YouTube OR listen via daily podcast at [ Ссылка ]

[ Ссылка ]
[ Ссылка ]

#MajorityReport #politics

SUPPORT the show by becoming a member: [ Ссылка ]

Download TMR's FREE app: [ Ссылка ]

TMR MERCH: [ Ссылка ]

OTHER LINKS:
Twitch: [ Ссылка ]
Facebook: [ Ссылка ]
Twitter: [ Ссылка ]
Instagram: [ Ссылка ]

Image Credit, Carol M. Highsmith
[ Ссылка ]
[ Ссылка ]
Image has been cropped and color has been altered.

Anyway, this is a bit of a callback to my point being. But it's something that's been niggling me since it happened. It's the Roe v Wade decision and the narrative that the mainstream media wished to cast about it. Okay. That it was basically roe v wade was on shaky ground that it never stood a chance it was always cast on shaky ground. And it was always going to be overturned and they tripped out all these legal experts and everything that pointed out how roe v wade never stood a chance in everything. And yet it stood for 50 years and survived a test. and went through various iterations of the court. And yet we didn't point at the narrative that it's the court stupid. Like it's the 6-3 court that changed and that's why Roe v Wade got overturned. And I think we on the left lost that as a counter-narrative. Go ahead. i means i I I don't know how long you've been listening to this program but it has literally been the theme of the show for a decade. that the court is a political instrument. And I would say and I would say just specifically yeah there's been you know I mean look there has been a lot of sort of legalistic academic conversations about the finding the right to an abortion in the 14th amendment. As sort of built upon privacy and like substantive due process. And that whole conversation. RBG talked about it. Obama talked about it when he was running for president a little bit. they hinted at like you know their snuggly issues with it. The bottom line is the supreme court showed that they can address whatever they want almost whenever they want. the question in front of them in the Dobbs case was not the validity of Roe v Wade. The question was can we change the viability standard based upon new information from 24 weeks to 15 weeks?

свернуть