General - When have you seen the GOP, in total, support the murdering of babies, women and children? For those of you whining about today's SC decision regarding abortion, why not direct your energy to the politicians that can change the current law(s) in applicable states to permit the murder of babies as you would like?
Doolie - I don't need you to legislate morality. I don't need your religion to tell me what is right or wrong or what I should believe in. The GOP murders children daily - and they further the murderous rampage by not funding health care or resources children and families need. The GOP wants young girls to carry their rapists babies to full term - essentially using women's bodies as vessels. Now they will go after birth control and same sex marriage because of their far right religous righteousness. If you want to go back to medeival times then do it - don't drag me into it.
" When have you seen the GOP, in total, support the murdering of babies, women and children?" - every single time they voted against gun law reform after "babies, women and children" where gunned down by military style weapons that were legally purchased.
What is your party doing to inspire people to vote for them? The left is looking at historic election defeats and I hear nothing but whining and inaction where I should be hearing anger and seeing legislation.
El Smurfo, they did try and advance the Women's Health Protection Act. however that was just a performative piece they knew wouldn't pass because they wanted codify the right to an abortion up until birth for any reason, something 70%+ of Americans don't agree with, and they couldn't even get full buy in from their own party. Had the Act more closely mirrored something like CA's laws, it had a chance at passing, but then they'd loose their best fundraising tool and chance to improve their chances heading into the November elections.
SAC - I'd be interested in reading the nations on your list that are possibly greater than America. Since you state you continue thinking about this, how about listing a few & citing how they are greater than America.
Okay, Doulie, what metrics fo you want to use to determine "greatness"?
Here are a couple:
Deaths by violent crime
Literacy
Gap between rich and poor
Access to health care
Ability to retire with a social safety net
Violence against women
Levels of dangerous pollution
Me too! Can't imagine this happening in my 20's. Going to re-read my research report from August 1981 that I produced during Peter Haslund's first Washington D.C. field trip through SBCC. Of course my topic was abortion rights.
The more things change...
I'm pro-choice along CA's lines but even the most pro-life states have exceptions when it comes to protecting the life of the mother. We're also only reverting 1973 where it was left to the states not the stone age or wild west. Again, this could have easily been avoided via federal legislation.
Many could benefit from a few law and civics classes for a better understanding of the constitution and how our government and it's three branches work. But the political elite don't want us knowledgeable, they want us emotional. Emotional people are easier to control, easier to secure votes, easier to illicit campaign donations. This issue for example, could have been rectified in the federal legislature long ago. It could have been rectified earlier this year if they went with an approach like CA's rather than the 'up until birth for any reason'. But they're not interested in solving issues, they're interested in keeping us divided, scoring political points, the next election and campaign donations.
VOR, so true that Donald Trump and the GOP advanced many lies about "election fraud" in order to inflame the emotions of their ignorant supporters and suck up hundreds of millions of dollars to "fight back" and "investigate" said non-existent fraud while using the money to pay themselves and exact political revenge on those they considered disloyal.
"unrelated partisan rhetoric" - where? We brought up non-partisan facts. Trump lied about the election fraud. FACT. January 6th was a planned insurrection. FACT. It's not "partisan" if it's acknowledged fact.
Happy to, but I'm are you'd do a more complete job. Have it and I'm glad you agree that Trump's MAGA parasites have been conning millions of Americans out of their hard earned dollars.
Kimberly Guilefoy got 60k of that money to deliver a two minute incitement to riot on Jan 6th, just one of the con artists and grifters getting rich off of you and yours.
Disbar Barrett, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch for perjury under oath! Investigate Kavanaugh rape cases and investigate Thomas and Wife for their role in the insurection! The Supreme court has no credibility and are endangering the American people with overturning NY concealed guns law and overturning Roe vs Wade. The President has to act now.
Thomas should be impeached for his wife's direct involvement on the attack against the United States government. Thomas is dystopian far-right right extremist. “Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous,’” Thomas wrote, “we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”
The Supreme Court MUST be expanded and new rules on term limits and recusals be implemented. It's terrifying to think what else this court could do if nothingis done. Meanwhile, I hope the Democrats can get their act together nationally before November to win seats rather than lose them which seems likely... That of course would only make things worse for the county.
I don’t really understand the outrage about either decision. The constitution specifically recognizes the right to keep and bear arms. This was already addressed in the Heller and McDonald decisions, and yesterday’s ruling simply clarified how second amendment cases must be evaluated by lower courts. The gist of it is the second amendment says what it means and means what it says. California’s assault weapons ban, magazine ban, handgun roster, and many other laws are unconstitutional and will soon be relegated to history, and any new laws passed that run afoul of the second amendment will be immediately blocked by injunctions and similarly ruled unconstitutional before they can ever go into effect. Regarding the ruling on abortion, there is no mention of abortion in the constitution. The Supreme Court in the Roe and Casey cases acted more as a legislative body than a judicial body by creating law rather than interpreting it. Today’s ruling to leave the abortion issue to be dealt with through legislation seems entirely consistent with our constitution.
Thus my comment on recommending law and civic classes Chip. Many here don't realize they're being intentionally gas-lit by the very people who have the power codify abortions rights via federal legislation. Democrats have the White House and majorities in the House and Senate, if they can't even reach consensus amongst themselves then they're intentionally keeping this issue open and using it to drive campaign donations and votes with empty promises that they will 'fight for your rights'.
CHIP your interpretation and understanding of the constitution is very limited and challenged. There is nothing in the constitution about interracial marriage or contraception either. Amazing how many white males come out from under the rocks to celebrate forcing girls and women to carry their rapists babies to full term - even in the case of incest.
Which is why we have the legislature to make laws for issues not contained in the constitution. GT, just more extremism from you as no one here is advocating for that. I guess just like how I can be a vaccinated anti-vaxxer I can be a pro-choice pro-lifer? The twist and turns you guys go through to justify your divisive rhetoric is truly amazing.
VOR you need a civics class. "Which is why we have the legislature to make laws for issues not contained in the constitution. " The idea that something needs to be specifically mentioned in the constitution is a constitutional theory (originalist) adopted by this far right extremist court. Nazi Germany had originalist judges too.
1. The framers at the Convention in Philadelphia indicated that they did not want their specific intentions to control interpretation.
2. No written Constitution can anticipate all the means that government might in the future use to oppress people, so it is sometimes necessary for judges to fill in the gaps.
3. Intentions of framers are various, sometimes transient, and often impossible to determine. Text is often ambiguous and judicial precedents can be found to support either side. In such cases, why not produce the result that will best promote the public good? It's better than flipping a coin.
4. Non-originalism allows judges to head off the crises that could result from the inflexible interpretation of a provision in the Constitution that no longer serves its original purpose. (The amendment process is too difficult and cannot be relied upon to save us.)
5. Non-originalism allows the Constitution to evolve to match more enlightened understandings on matters such as the equal treatment of blacks, women, and other minorities.
6. Brown vs Board of Education (on originalist grounds, it was decided incorrectly).
7. Originalists lose sight of the forest because they pay too much attention to trees. The larger purpose--the animating spirit--of the Constitution was the protection of liberty, and we ought to focus on that.
8. Nazi Germany: Originalist German judges did not exercise the power they might have to prevent or slow down inhumane programs.
VOR: You told me if I found one untrue statement among your stream of snake oil anti-vax disinformation on another thread, you would stop posting for the rest of the month. Why are you still here? Get a hobby...
Comments Penalty Box
No Comments deleted due to down vote
4 Comments deleted by Administrator
88 Comments
-
11
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 10:28 AMThe GOP has devolved and become ISIS.
-
1
-
7
-
Jun 24, 2022 10:37 AMYes, very accurate comparison GT, spot on as usual!
-
2
-
4
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:15 PMGeneral - When have you seen the GOP, in total, support the murdering of babies, women and children? For those of you whining about today's SC decision regarding abortion, why not direct your energy to the politicians that can change the current law(s) in applicable states to permit the murder of babies as you would like?
-
5
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:19 PMDoolie - I don't need you to legislate morality. I don't need your religion to tell me what is right or wrong or what I should believe in. The GOP murders children daily - and they further the murderous rampage by not funding health care or resources children and families need. The GOP wants young girls to carry their rapists babies to full term - essentially using women's bodies as vessels. Now they will go after birth control and same sex marriage because of their far right religous righteousness. If you want to go back to medeival times then do it - don't drag me into it.
-
3
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:21 PMMANY in the GOP are still engaged in an ongoing attempt to overthrow fair elections - just like the Islamic State.
-
4
-
3
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:21 PM" When have you seen the GOP, in total, support the murdering of babies, women and children?" - every single time they voted against gun law reform after "babies, women and children" where gunned down by military style weapons that were legally purchased.
-
1
-
3
-
Jun 24, 2022 02:58 PMWhat is your party doing to inspire people to vote for them? The left is looking at historic election defeats and I hear nothing but whining and inaction where I should be hearing anger and seeing legislation.
-
-
5
-
Jun 24, 2022 03:11 PMEl Smurfo, they did try and advance the Women's Health Protection Act. however that was just a performative piece they knew wouldn't pass because they wanted codify the right to an abortion up until birth for any reason, something 70%+ of Americans don't agree with, and they couldn't even get full buy in from their own party. Had the Act more closely mirrored something like CA's laws, it had a chance at passing, but then they'd loose their best fundraising tool and chance to improve their chances heading into the November elections.
-
-
-
Jun 24, 2022 07:48 PMWe are, Doulie, we are doing so.
-
-
-
Jun 24, 2022 07:49 PMDoulie: Though I am spending more $$ on abortion funds than political causes or direct donations.
-
12
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 10:31 AMI keep running out of reasons to continue thinking America is the "greatest nation on earth."
-
2
-
4
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:28 PMSAC - I'd be interested in reading the nations on your list that are possibly greater than America. Since you state you continue thinking about this, how about listing a few & citing how they are greater than America.
-
6
-
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:33 PMDoulie - Europe. All the reasons.
-
6
-
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:36 PMMany of the countries with much lower infant mortality for starters.
-
3
-
-
Jun 24, 2022 05:51 PMAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Okay, Doulie, what metrics fo you want to use to determine "greatness"?
Here are a couple:
Deaths by violent crime
Literacy
Gap between rich and poor
Access to health care
Ability to retire with a social safety net
Violence against women
Levels of dangerous pollution
I mean, just pick a bunch man.
-
1
-
-
Jun 25, 2022 09:16 AMSACJON: Sadly, I feel the same
-
7
-
-
Jun 24, 2022 10:32 AMI'm just grateful that I'm 73 and heading toward the end of my existence instead of 23 and fearful of the future looming ahead...:(
-
2
-
-
Jun 24, 2022 07:53 PMMe too! Can't imagine this happening in my 20's. Going to re-read my research report from August 1981 that I produced during Peter Haslund's first Washington D.C. field trip through SBCC. Of course my topic was abortion rights.
The more things change...
-
6
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 10:41 AMThis is a sad day for America. Women are going to die as we revert back to the stone ages and the Wild West.
-
1
-
6
-
Jun 24, 2022 10:54 AMI'm pro-choice along CA's lines but even the most pro-life states have exceptions when it comes to protecting the life of the mother. We're also only reverting 1973 where it was left to the states not the stone age or wild west. Again, this could have easily been avoided via federal legislation.
-
2
-
5
-
Jun 24, 2022 10:44 AMMany could benefit from a few law and civics classes for a better understanding of the constitution and how our government and it's three branches work. But the political elite don't want us knowledgeable, they want us emotional. Emotional people are easier to control, easier to secure votes, easier to illicit campaign donations. This issue for example, could have been rectified in the federal legislature long ago. It could have been rectified earlier this year if they went with an approach like CA's rather than the 'up until birth for any reason'. But they're not interested in solving issues, they're interested in keeping us divided, scoring political points, the next election and campaign donations.
-
4
-
1
-
Jun 24, 2022 10:58 AMOh please enlighten us great one
-
7
-
1
-
Jun 24, 2022 10:59 AMVOR, so true that Donald Trump and the GOP advanced many lies about "election fraud" in order to inflame the emotions of their ignorant supporters and suck up hundreds of millions of dollars to "fight back" and "investigate" said non-existent fraud while using the money to pay themselves and exact political revenge on those they considered disloyal.
You are so right about those awful elites.
-
5
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 11:17 AM"But the political elite don't want us knowledgeable, they want us emotional. " Yes - that is your far-right nationalism coming through.
-
7
-
1
-
Jun 24, 2022 11:22 AM"Many could benefit from a few law and civics classes" - tell us again then, how was Jan 6 NOT an "insurrection?"
-
2
-
6
-
Jun 24, 2022 11:58 AMAlex, now do Clinton's 'fraudulent election' / 'illegitimate President' and the Russian collusion hoax
-
4
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:03 PMWhat about? What about? But...but....but... Bengahazi! hEr EmAleS! Hahaha!
-
-
4
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:12 PMFYI, you three brought unrelated partisan rhetoric into this, my comment at 10:44 is non-partisan.
-
6
-
1
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:17 PM"unrelated partisan rhetoric" - where? We brought up non-partisan facts. Trump lied about the election fraud. FACT. January 6th was a planned insurrection. FACT. It's not "partisan" if it's acknowledged fact.
-
1
-
4
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:22 PMLiar = fact and non-partisan. Insurrection = inaccurate and partisan.
-
5
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:24 PMHow was Jan 6th not an insurrection? Sounds like you need that law class you keep bragging to Chip about.
-
4
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:36 PMHappy to, but I'm are you'd do a more complete job. Have it and I'm glad you agree that Trump's MAGA parasites have been conning millions of Americans out of their hard earned dollars.
Kimberly Guilefoy got 60k of that money to deliver a two minute incitement to riot on Jan 6th, just one of the con artists and grifters getting rich off of you and yours.
-
5
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 10:56 AMDisbar Barrett, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch for perjury under oath! Investigate Kavanaugh rape cases and investigate Thomas and Wife for their role in the insurection! The Supreme court has no credibility and are endangering the American people with overturning NY concealed guns law and overturning Roe vs Wade. The President has to act now.
-
7
-
1
-
Jun 24, 2022 11:01 AMBarrett; "Roe V. Wade is settled law".
So she lied about her intent.
Shocker.
When the right wing shows you what they intend to do, believe them.
More unwanted children but at least those unwanted kids will be able to carry firearms around in the future.
-
7
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 11:04 AMThomas should be impeached for his wife's direct involvement on the attack against the United States government. Thomas is dystopian far-right right extremist. “Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous,’” Thomas wrote, “we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”
-
-
-
Jun 24, 2022 07:58 PMLeopards Eating Peoples' Faces Party.
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/leopards-eating-peoples-faces-party
-
5
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 11:10 AMThe Supreme Court MUST be expanded and new rules on term limits and recusals be implemented. It's terrifying to think what else this court could do if nothingis done. Meanwhile, I hope the Democrats can get their act together nationally before November to win seats rather than lose them which seems likely... That of course would only make things worse for the county.
-
3
-
-
Jun 24, 2022 11:43 AMCB- was this created before or after today's regression into third world status? Either way, it is spot on and terribly sad.
-
3
-
-
Jun 24, 2022 11:53 AMCB said they created it this morning following the announcement
-
2
-
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:00 PMThanks, Ed!
-
2
-
7
-
Jun 24, 2022 11:58 AMI don’t really understand the outrage about either decision. The constitution specifically recognizes the right to keep and bear arms. This was already addressed in the Heller and McDonald decisions, and yesterday’s ruling simply clarified how second amendment cases must be evaluated by lower courts. The gist of it is the second amendment says what it means and means what it says. California’s assault weapons ban, magazine ban, handgun roster, and many other laws are unconstitutional and will soon be relegated to history, and any new laws passed that run afoul of the second amendment will be immediately blocked by injunctions and similarly ruled unconstitutional before they can ever go into effect. Regarding the ruling on abortion, there is no mention of abortion in the constitution. The Supreme Court in the Roe and Casey cases acted more as a legislative body than a judicial body by creating law rather than interpreting it. Today’s ruling to leave the abortion issue to be dealt with through legislation seems entirely consistent with our constitution.
-
4
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:01 PM"I don’t really understand the outrage about either decision." - Not surprising at all.
-
2
-
4
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:06 PMThus my comment on recommending law and civic classes Chip. Many here don't realize they're being intentionally gas-lit by the very people who have the power codify abortions rights via federal legislation. Democrats have the White House and majorities in the House and Senate, if they can't even reach consensus amongst themselves then they're intentionally keeping this issue open and using it to drive campaign donations and votes with empty promises that they will 'fight for your rights'.
-
8
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:06 PMThe Constitution never mentions women so it's perfectly reasonably to strip them of all their rights too. Right Chip?
-
8
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:11 PMCHIP your interpretation and understanding of the constitution is very limited and challenged. There is nothing in the constitution about interracial marriage or contraception either. Amazing how many white males come out from under the rocks to celebrate forcing girls and women to carry their rapists babies to full term - even in the case of incest.
-
2
-
4
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:15 PMWhich is why we have the legislature to make laws for issues not contained in the constitution. GT, just more extremism from you as no one here is advocating for that. I guess just like how I can be a vaccinated anti-vaxxer I can be a pro-choice pro-lifer? The twist and turns you guys go through to justify your divisive rhetoric is truly amazing.
-
4
-
1
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:20 PM"I don’t really understand the outrage about either decision." I bet he has to ask his grandkids how to use email too.
-
4
-
2
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:34 PMVOR you need a civics class. "Which is why we have the legislature to make laws for issues not contained in the constitution. " The idea that something needs to be specifically mentioned in the constitution is a constitutional theory (originalist) adopted by this far right extremist court. Nazi Germany had originalist judges too.
1. The framers at the Convention in Philadelphia indicated that they did not want their specific intentions to control interpretation.
2. No written Constitution can anticipate all the means that government might in the future use to oppress people, so it is sometimes necessary for judges to fill in the gaps.
3. Intentions of framers are various, sometimes transient, and often impossible to determine. Text is often ambiguous and judicial precedents can be found to support either side. In such cases, why not produce the result that will best promote the public good? It's better than flipping a coin.
4. Non-originalism allows judges to head off the crises that could result from the inflexible interpretation of a provision in the Constitution that no longer serves its original purpose. (The amendment process is too difficult and cannot be relied upon to save us.)
5. Non-originalism allows the Constitution to evolve to match more enlightened understandings on matters such as the equal treatment of blacks, women, and other minorities.
6. Brown vs Board of Education (on originalist grounds, it was decided incorrectly).
7. Originalists lose sight of the forest because they pay too much attention to trees. The larger purpose--the animating spirit--of the Constitution was the protection of liberty, and we ought to focus on that.
8. Nazi Germany: Originalist German judges did not exercise the power they might have to prevent or slow down inhumane programs.
-
4
-
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:33 PMChip, you know very well that there are limits on the type of firearms that the public can own.
You folks love to leave out the whole "well regulated" piece.
-
3
-
1
-
Jun 24, 2022 12:34 PMVOR: You told me if I found one untrue statement among your stream of snake oil anti-vax disinformation on another thread, you would stop posting for the rest of the month. Why are you still here? Get a hobby...
Pages