Roe & Casey overturned.
-
@Jolly @Larry I tink we will have to agree to disagree.
I just don't think that there are absolutes here. There are shades of gray.
For example:
*Amendment VIIIExcessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.*
What is excessive bail? $1 MM USD? If you are someone who has not savings, maybe $10000 is excessive? How can we have a $1MM bail for such a person? That seems to be against the constitution.
Do you guys think that any weapon should be legally able to be owned by anyone?
wrote on 27 Jun 2022, 17:06 last edited by Larry@taiwan_girl said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
@Jolly @Larry I tink we will have to agree to disagree.
I just don't think that there are absolutes here. There are shades of gray.
For example:
*Amendment VIIIExcessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.*
What is excessive bail? $1 MM USD? If you are someone who has not savings, maybe $10000 is excessive? How can we have a $1MM bail for such a person? That seems to be against the constitution.
Do you guys think that any weapon should be legally able to be owned by anyone?
I'm aware what you think. But just because you think it doesn't make what you think correct. He Constitution is very clear - "Shall not be infringed". End. Of. Story. If you want to wander around looking for "shades of grey" the word "except" would need to be in that statement. It is not. Therefore, what you think simply doesn't matter. It says what it says "SHALL NOT be infringed."
It would help if you understood what the Constution was created for, and why. It is obvious to me that you do not.we were not "given" the right to bear arms by the Constitution.our right to bear arms existed already. After the Constitution was enacted into law, it was amended to clarify certain points, in this case, the right to own guns. We already had that right, it was a NATURAL RIGHT - the people wanted the Constitution amended to make that clear, not to "grant"us the right. The key words to the entire amendment are "Shall not be infringed".
N6n grey area. No "except". Just pure, unadulterated "before you guys came up with this new government we had a NATURAL RIGHT to own and possess any weapon we wanted to, and we won't agree to this new Constitution if you try to place a limit on that, PERIOD. So write it out clearly in case somewhere down the line someone pops up claiming they can limit our access to guns"
This means that if I want to go out any buy a Sherman tank, that is my right. Yes, I'm aware that over the years the leftwing "shades of grey" bull shit has chipped away at our rights and a lot of people have the view that the Constitution means whatever you happen to want it to mean. But the fact is, I have the natural right to buy a Sherman tank, and government does not have a right to stop me.
-
wrote on 27 Jun 2022, 18:14 last edited by
They say that libertarian meetups eventually devolve into arguments over whether people should be allowed to own nuclear weapons.
-
wrote on 27 Jun 2022, 19:22 last edited by
Dunno.
I do think the person was right, who said that the Constitution is a fence. Not to keep people out, but to keep the government in.
-
wrote on 27 Jun 2022, 20:44 last edited by
-
Posted by a "friend" on FB:
I was that close to saying "Well, you didn't object in 1972, did you?"
wrote on 27 Jun 2022, 20:56 last edited by@George-K said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
Posted by a "friend" on FB:
I was that close to saying "Well, you didn't object in 1972, did you?"
Were they a biologist?
Beyond that, do we now need man laws made by men for men? Women laws made by women for women? How about white laws and black laws?
-
@George-K said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
Posted by a "friend" on FB:
I was that close to saying "Well, you didn't object in 1972, did you?"
Were they a biologist?
Beyond that, do we now need man laws made by men for men? Women laws made by women for women? How about white laws and black laws?
wrote on 27 Jun 2022, 21:02 last edited by -
wrote on 27 Jun 2022, 21:09 last edited by
@George-K said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
@LuFins-Dad said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
Were they a biologist?
A nurse...
If the abortion doc's a male, their argument kinda crumbles.
-
wrote on 27 Jun 2022, 22:00 last edited by Copper
If the baby killed is male, their argument kinda crumbles.
-
Posted by a "friend" on FB:
I was that close to saying "Well, you didn't object in 1972, did you?"
wrote on 28 Jun 2022, 00:15 last edited by LuFins Dad@George-K said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
Posted by a "friend" on FB:
I was that close to saying "Well, you didn't object in 1972, did you?"
Did the nurse object last year when men passed laws that she had to take a vaccine into her body to keep her job?
Does she make the same protest regarding prostitution laws? It’s her body… Drugs? Seatbelts?
Of course, there’s also the whole point that women are lawmakers too. My bet is she also wishes that men passed laws about her body in 2009…
-
wrote on 28 Jun 2022, 00:30 last edited by Mik
The responses to the decision have been fraught with sloppy thinking and Ill considered “points”.
-
wrote on 28 Jun 2022, 01:14 last edited by
It is simple.
It's not about a woman's body, it is about murder.
This is one of the top 10 laws of all time.
-
wrote on 28 Jun 2022, 01:44 last edited by
Profile of the most likely abortion patient:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/14/upshot/who-gets-abortions-in-america.html
THE TYPICAL PATIENT ...
Is Already a Mother.
Is in Her Late 20s.
Attended Some College.
Has a Low Income.
Is Unmarried.
Is in Her First 6 Weeks of Pregnancy.
Is Having Her First Abortion.
Lives in a Blue State. -
wrote on 28 Jun 2022, 02:59 last edited by jon-nyc
Larry (and often Jolly) often suffer from is/ought confusion. Larry assumes that how he thinks the universe should be configured is how the universe is configured.
The right to bear arms shall not be infringed.
Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech.
And yet…. Time place and manner restrictions are allowed in each case.
-
wrote on 28 Jun 2022, 04:03 last edited by Jolly
And the problem with some people is that they can stare at their navel long enough to confuse the rule and the exceptions.
Seriously, the Constitution works as well as it does, because it fairly simple and it errs on the side of federal government restriction.
We'd be better off and more free, if we just quit ceding power to the feds.
-
wrote on 29 Jun 2022, 03:13 last edited by Jolly
Satan weighs in...
Link to video -
wrote on 30 Jun 2022, 13:26 last edited by
-
wrote on 30 Jun 2022, 15:03 last edited by
-
wrote on 30 Jun 2022, 16:27 last edited by
-
wrote on 30 Jun 2022, 17:49 last edited by
@LuFins-Dad said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
LOLGTFO…
Turley commented that that will be problematic, since SCOTUS just ruled that abortion is a matter for the states to decide.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
LOLGTFO…
Turley commented that that will be problematic, since SCOTUS just ruled that abortion is a matter for the states to decide.
wrote on 30 Jun 2022, 18:05 last edited by@George-K said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
@LuFins-Dad said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
LOLGTFO…
Turley commented that that will be problematic, since SCOTUS just ruled that abortion is a matter for the states to decide.
They didn’t rule out federal legislation but Biden’s idea is stupid anyway.