[RajT88]

I think that's the unspoken part of conservative policy in this area: the victims deserve the consequences of their immoral activity.

Don't want to get robbed? Don't grow drugs. Don't want to have your naked photos/videos posted on the internet? Don't have sex before you're an adult. Or not married, or whatever.

[codemonkey-zeta]

Eh, that seems like a stretch. I doubt it's so subversive.

Sure it's the de facto state of things, but when conservatives don't like things they tend to do so outright, e.g. the recent Supreme Court ruling.

Plus is it really policy keeping Visa away from these trades? Or internal forces withing Visa?

[jessaustin]

The recent ruling itself is a facade. All of these Federalist Society pranksters pretend to care about abortion, but of the six FS justices only Barrett has an ideological commitment. The actual ideological commitment they all share is Borkism. Since 1977 the judiciary has steadily chipped away at antitrust law, and they've done so largely by pretending to care about dead babies. Republicans nominate lots of judges, and these Borkists have always said the right things (at lower court levels, they don't even have to make many anti-abortion rulings, and at all levels there are vastly more cases about commerce than about abortion) to be on the list. Soon enough, additional attacks on abortion rights will no longer be as politically useful, and the masks will come off.

[RajT88]

> when conservatives don't like things they tend to do so outright

Going to disagree with you on that one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_whistle_(politics)