Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Supreme court strikes down Louisiana law restricting abortions.
Collapse
X
-
Last edited by seanD; 07-02-2020, 07:17 PM.
-
Originally posted by seanD View PostWell, it's not racism driving black women to abort their offspring if that's where you're going."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostConvenience. Plain and simple.
And it was so unfortunate that it came along at the precise moment in an exchange between us when I had put a series of points to you, and to which you were thereby unable to respond."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by seanD View PostI assumed because that seems to be the current flavor of leftist politics. Everything is racism or influenced by racism."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostOh you are back. How did the assessment go? It must been quite arduous to have taken up an entire week or more, even necessitating your giving up both your days and evenings to it.
And it was so unfortunate that it came along at the precise moment in an exchange between us when I had put a series of points to you, and to which you were thereby unable to respond.That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
This was a very interesting decision! The issue here was deemed to be the same or very similar to the 2016 scotus case regarding a Texas law which Roberts CJ was in the minority for. Due to this Roberts CJ considered this issue as already settled by scotus and while he disagreed with the majority he still took their side by following the 2016 precedent.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Watermelon View PostThis was a very interesting decision! The issue here was deemed to be the same or very similar to the 2016 scotus case regarding a Texas law which Roberts CJ was in the minority for. Due to this Roberts CJ considered this issue as already settled by scotus and while he disagreed with the majority he still took their side by following the 2016 precedent.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Whateverman View PostAs several people in this forum have said, Roberts made it clear that it's possible for states in the future to have laws similar to this one, as long as they avoid crafting the same problems found in this decision and in the one for Texas. Roberts may have temporarily become a liberal hero with this decision, but he's far from a liberal in general.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Watermelon View PostBut the problems found with this law was the underlying purpose of this law i.e to restrict access to abortions.
He seems to have been clear that he wouldn't necessarily rule against a similar law crafted differently.
edit: I'm just saying that while this decision is a minor(ish) loss for the pro-life crowd, there's reason for them to be encouraged by the ruling. I'm mostly pro-choice myself.Last edited by Whateverman; 07-03-2020, 12:00 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostJust hopped on for a few minutes. Yeah, the assessment went well. Did a cybersecurity health check for a company that builds the Sea Sparrow missiles for all of NATO. They did well. Kept me very busy. Now, since it is the 4th weekend, I will most likely be out of pocket until Monday. I will have more time next week."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Whateverman View PostThat's right, but it'd be fairly easy (according to Roberts' written decision) to craft a similar law that had an apparently different intent. In other words, he's not against the law, per se, but what it was intended to accomplish (as far as I understand the ruling).
He seems to have been clear that he wouldn't necessarily rule against a similar law crafted differently.
edit: I'm just saying that while this decision is a minor(ish) loss for the pro-life crowd, there's reason for them to be encouraged by the ruling. I'm mostly pro-choice myself.
The decision in 2016 held that a law cannot impose restrictions that would cause an undue burden to woman seeking abortions. Following this precedent Roberts sided with the majority.
So the key point here is not what the law says but what it does. Abortion clinics requiring admitting privileges is not the thing that’s unconstitutional and if it’s application in a State doesn’t cause the massive closures of abortion clinics then that would be fine. So there’s no need to draft a new law it just needs to contain provisions that would allow the majority of abortion clinics to remain in service. That’s why this ruling is specific to Louisiana but Roberts stayed that this law would be fine in Ohio as it wouldn’t result in massive closures due to something to do with ambulances.
I wouldn’t call this a minor loss as it revealed the makeup of this SCOTUS having 5 judges who, regardless of reason, hold the positions:
1. Abortion is a constitutional right
2. Undue burden placed on a woman’s ability to receive abortion services are unconstitutional.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Whateverman View PostAll human life doesn't have equal rights. It never has, and it never will.
This seems to be the central point though. Abortionists devalue certain lives in favor of others. Kinda like the way slave owners devalued black lives 150 years ago. Makes it easier to kill someone when you can dehumanize them.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Postespecially the right to life
---
Infants can't drive cars, and sometimes older people are denied that same right, so it's patently obvious that all human life in this country doesn't have equal rights. Pre-pubescents can't get married, non-police officers can't drive faster than the speed limit, kids can't vote - there are a host of limitations on the rights different human life has.
If abortion is legal, the unborn do not have the same right to life that a born baby does. Literally.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Whateverman View Post....Infants can't drive cars, and sometimes older people are denied that same right, so it's patently obvious that all human life in this country doesn't have equal rights.....
People don't have a "right" to be happy, but they do have a right to pursue it.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
|
16 responses
113 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by One Bad Pig
Today, 11:55 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
|
53 responses
314 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 11:32 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
|
25 responses
111 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 08:36 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
|
33 responses
196 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Roy
Today, 07:43 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
|
84 responses
357 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by JimL
Today, 11:08 AM
|
Comment