|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,848
Last seen: 14 minutes, 33 seconds
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: Enlil]
#26949462 - 09/22/20 02:23 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Frankly, the only states that would ban abortion are the dirt poor ones anyway.
Is a direct counterargument to:
Quote:
Enlil said: People will leave those states.
Poor people generally don't have a lot of mobility. Though I will laugh when Alabamans are applying for asylum in Cali.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,515
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: Kryptos]
#26949479 - 09/22/20 02:30 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I didn't say anything about poor people. I said poor states.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,848
Last seen: 14 minutes, 33 seconds
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: Enlil]
#26949507 - 09/22/20 02:46 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Which brings us back to the theory vs. practice debate.
In theory, people can move to another state. In theory, I can move to Germany and leave the US to the MAGA hats. In theory, I'd love nothing more than to do so. In practice, poor states are full of poor people who cannot afford to leave. In practice, my job application to a position in Germany, which was well in progress, was denied due to the quarantine. In practice, I cannot leave the US because, well, we're the disease-ridden shithole country now.
|
tyrannicalrex
Strange R



Registered: 04/24/03
Posts: 38,334
Loc: subtropics
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: JHOVA] 2
#26949539 - 09/22/20 02:57 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JHOVA said:
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
Kryptos said:
the supreme court can reverse roe v wade and thats a big deal to Christians and conservatives.
Maybe they can, but it will NEVER happen, and there's far more important things than the abortion issue. That issue in particular gets people all emotional and upset so it works to get votes from uneducated (about abortion and the actual scientific facts of biology etc..) people who only go by their gut/knee jerk emotional reaction to it. Trisomy 21 was invented for a reason, there shouldn't be ANY down syndrome babies born ever again, ever. Yet they still refuse to test sometimes, and the very poor people around the world don't have good healthcare so they don't get the test either. I say hand out free morning after pills to 8 and 9th graders on up to college and also free condoms in high schools along with the birth control.
|
Nonagon Infinity
Mycologist



Registered: 06/02/20
Posts: 756
Loc: Polygondwanaland
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
|
Quote:
tyrannicalrex said: Trisomy 21 was invented for a reason, there shouldn't be ANY down syndrome babies born ever again, ever. Yet they still refuse to test sometimes, and the very poor people around the world don't have good healthcare so they don't get the test either.
I know this is a little off-topic for the thread, but I don't think that a world without ANY down syndrome babies would necessarily be a better world. People with down syndrome can still have a lot to offer, and having down syndrome doesn't necessarily mean a lower quality of life. If someone wants to abort because they aren't equipped to support a child with down syndrome, I think that's completely valid and well within her rights. However, I think using the trisomy test as a tool for eradicating down syndrome isn't the most ethical idea...
-------------------- Nonagon Infinity Opens the Door
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,848
Last seen: 14 minutes, 33 seconds
|
|
Quote:
tyrannicalrex said: Maybe they can, but it will NEVER happen
I think it'll happen pretty quickly. Throw some meat to the Evangelical base for their support, and then while they're celebrating, start pumping in the pro-corporate anti-labor agenda, starting with ACA.
Quote:
Nonagon Infinity said:
Quote:
tyrannicalrex said: Trisomy 21 was invented for a reason, there shouldn't be ANY down syndrome babies born ever again, ever. Yet they still refuse to test sometimes, and the very poor people around the world don't have good healthcare so they don't get the test either.
I know this is a little off-topic for the thread, but I don't think that a world without ANY down syndrome babies would necessarily be a better world. People with down syndrome can still have a lot to offer, and having down syndrome doesn't necessarily mean a lower quality of life. If someone wants to abort because they aren't equipped to support a child with down syndrome, I think that's completely valid and well within her rights. However, I think using the trisomy test as a tool for eradicating down syndrome isn't the most ethical idea...
I think it's unethical to create a life that is, from the very beginning, crippled. For lack of better term. Sure, there are plenty of people with downs that have provided value to the world, including one of my good friends, who has pretty severe downs and autism, but is a math savant, but there are many more downs people that will need lifelong care.
Even my friend's quality of life is probably not great, because even though he's got a PhD in math and a fairly prestigious position, his social life has been pretty crippled for as long as I've known him since high school.
Then again, I think having kids is kind of unethical, because you're forcing someone to exist without their consent. It's not a very popular opinion. Either way, it's pretty shitty to not give your kid every possible advantage in life, which includes screening for developmental disorders.
|
tyrannicalrex
Strange R



Registered: 04/24/03
Posts: 38,334
Loc: subtropics
|
|
Great point, I was being extreme. Kryptos put it more succinctly. I apologize to anyone I offended with the statement.
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,782
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 14 minutes, 46 seconds
|
|
Humans polute by our own nature. Agree with less human life, but, with that comes less chance of genius and/or destroyer; definitely shaking the dice.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
tyrannicalrex
Strange R



Registered: 04/24/03
Posts: 38,334
Loc: subtropics
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: SirTripAlot]
#26949709 - 09/22/20 04:29 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Also a good point. I am pro choice and used an extreme single thing to get my point across. I don't think I'd be where I am as a nurse if my life had gone differently. I went through one with a GF. It was an amicable decision with both of us and we knew it wouldn't be best for the child.
This gets me right here about the topic at hand.:
On Monday, McConnell warned that Democrats will try "every conceivable dirty trick" to prevent a Trump nominee from being confirmed.
WTF? Like they didn't?
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,848
Last seen: 14 minutes, 33 seconds
|
|
Quote:
tyrannicalrex said: Also a good point. I am pro choice and used an extreme single thing to get my point across. I don't think I'd be where I am as a nurse if my life had gone differently. I went through one with a GF. It was an amicable decision with both of us and we knew it wouldn't be best for the child.
This gets me right here about the topic at hand.:
On Monday, McConnell warned that Democrats will try "every conceivable dirty trick" to prevent a Trump nominee from being confirmed.
WTF? Like they didn't?
Same. I would not be where I am without abortion access. I'd probably be a college dropout single dad.
McConnell is a Republican, part of the GOP party.
Gaslight Obstruct Project <--
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,515
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: Kryptos]
#26950154 - 09/22/20 09:28 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Abort early and abort often is my motto.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
imachavel
I loved and lost but I loved-ftw



Registered: 06/06/07
Posts: 31,564
Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 3 hours, 23 minutes
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: Enlil] 1
#26950177 - 09/22/20 09:45 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: She didn't singlehandedly make any of those rulings, though.
Also, whether it's a "regression" in your opinion or not, Roe v. Wade is bad law and was based on other bad law. I'm as pro-choice as they come, and I believe abortion should be allowed up until the moment of birth and perhaps even for a period of time after that. Still, if we want a Constitutional right to privacy, we should amend the Constitution.
As far as states banning abortion, it won't make a big difference. People will leave those states. Frankly, the only states that would ban abortion are the dirt poor ones anyway.
I wish you were right. I wish overturning Roe vs Wade made no difference. I wish it was unconstitutional but
"The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides a fundamental "right to privacy" that protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose whether or not to have an abortion. This right is not absolute, and must be balanced against the government's interests in protecting women's health and protecting prenatal life. Texas law making it a crime to assist a woman to get an abortion violated this right."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade#:~:text=Supreme%20Court%20of%20the%20United%20States&text=The%20Due%20Process%20Clause%20of,not%20to%20have%20an%20abortion.
So as a Constitutional right it is still as it is possible to overturn and states can "interpret it" as they want. You are spreading bad information.
I mean I don't give a fuck. I cannot care less about Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Much of pro abortion law predates her including Roe vs Wade and like any other law especially an amendment to the Constitution those things do just not pass because of one person. It takes quite a few people to write a law.
I doubt Trump could overturn this. But if states can already ban abortion and Roe vs Wade is a Constitutional Amendment why would overturning the Amendment not make it any easier to ban abortion?
Roe vs Wade is very interpreted. More then anything it seems to protect a person from being charged as a murderer for getting an abortion and in most states it guarantees a persons right to get one. But why would overturning Roe vs Wade not change a states ability to ban abortions. Like you said most states do not want to ban abortion anyway.
A) babies are hard to feed. They cost money. Orphanages cost money. Foster care systems cost money. Welfare costs money. States providing lawyers costs money. Kids displaced from family to family generally grow up to join gangs and go to prison and this costs money.
B) well b is pretty much A. B is that people lobby for A. Lobbying back against A costs money. Fighting lobbyists costs money. Rewriting laws costs money. Basically who needs a baby that cannot be fed loved educated because a right wing group calls it murder? No I am not going pro liberal I am saying those people need to shut the fuck up. All those hardcore right wing anti abortion protestors are not going to feed a baby that a bad irresponsible parent is going to be forced to give birth to.
In a perfect world I call it murder. In a perfect world where a baby is as easy to care for and raise as a puppy I would call it murder to kill one for no reason. With the exception a woman can still die giving birth so in a way its a form of cruelty to force someone to give birth. There are of course C sections. Yet a woman can die in a C section as well.
But I am here to say that states can ban abortions without Roe vs Wade being overturned. So you are incorrect. But if you were correct I would quote it for posterity.
But instead I am denying your claim. For posterity. Or whatever reason. Just some basic clarity.
--------------------
I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 107,128
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 1 minute
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: Enlil]
#26950182 - 09/22/20 09:50 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I wish I was straight so I could be responsible for at least a couple abortions
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
imachavel
I loved and lost but I loved-ftw



Registered: 06/06/07
Posts: 31,564
Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 3 hours, 23 minutes
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: koods]
#26950188 - 09/22/20 09:53 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I didn't know you weren't straight?
--------------------
I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
|
imachavel
I loved and lost but I loved-ftw



Registered: 06/06/07
Posts: 31,564
Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 3 hours, 23 minutes
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: koods]
#26950191 - 09/22/20 09:54 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Like you would ram your cock into the babies head and kill the baby?
--------------------
I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 107,128
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 1 minute
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: imachavel]
#26950225 - 09/22/20 10:06 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Yes I have a 15” steel tipped cock
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
drliquidglitch
Stranger

Registered: 02/21/20
Posts: 46
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: koods]
#26950545 - 09/23/20 06:24 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Even if you can't be responsible for conception, you can always be responsible for pushing pregnant women down the stairs.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,515
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: imachavel]
#26950584 - 09/23/20 07:16 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
The Constitutional "right to privacy" is a farce. It was pure fiction created by the court in Griswold v Connecticut. That is the foundation that Roe v. Wade was built on. Griswold should be overturned, which would undermine Roe v Wade.
As I said, if we want a constitutional right to privacy, we should amend the constitution.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
RJ Tubs 202



Registered: 09/20/08
Posts: 6,175
Loc: USA
Last seen: 23 days, 10 hours
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: Kryptos]
#26950784 - 09/23/20 09:39 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said:
Then again, I think having kids is kind of unethical, because you're forcing someone to exist without their consent.
I'm still pissed off nobody asked me before I was conceived.
|
tyrannicalrex
Strange R



Registered: 04/24/03
Posts: 38,334
Loc: subtropics
|
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg just died [Re: RJ Tubs 202]
#26950802 - 09/23/20 09:52 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
FUCK!
WASHINGTON — There's only one principle at work as Republicans here get ready to nominate and confirm a new justice to the Supreme Court: power. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., made that clear when he amended the logic he used in 2016 to justify ignoring the appointment of Merrick Garland, who was President Barack Obama's last pick for the Supreme Court. Back then, McConnell said the Senate shouldn't vote on a Supreme Court justice in an election year.
"The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court justice," McConnell said in February 2016. "Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.” Now, he says that dictum only applies when the president is from a different party than the Senate majority leader.
"It is blatant hypocrisy," Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-New York, said on MSNBC Monday. "Mitch McConnell said let the people decide. He's absolutely full of it."
It may be more that McConnell's true motivations have been revealed. In reality, the confirmation of a new justice to succeed the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg is not about the limited history and precedent he cites, it's not about the sanctity of his institution, and it's not about concepts of consistency and fairness.
McConnell is exercising raw political power for the purpose of acquiring and maintaining more power. Other explanations are quickly stripped away when matched against facts.
|
|