2022 SCOTUS rulings

Political discussions
User avatar
SDHornet
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19443
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by SDHornet »

AZGrizFan wrote: Tue May 10, 2022 1:53 pm
UNI88 wrote: Tue May 10, 2022 1:51 pm

Victimhood does not become you so I fixed your post ... :D
Remind me again how many BLM/ANTIFA idiots are rotting in jail? How many have been charged/convicted? How many were bailed out by the Hollywood elite? And how many who are openly violating the law in this case have been arrested/charged?

And then do the same for 1/6 protestors.

You’ll find (if you’re nonpartisan) that the law is NOT applied evenly. Not even close.
:coffee:
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18038
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by GannonFan »

kalm wrote: Tue May 10, 2022 6:28 pm
GannonFan wrote: Tue May 10, 2022 1:33 pm

Like I said, they could stand outside of every church every day and harass people coming in and going out and that would be perfectly fair game. Did I not say that? They want to protest at parishioners homes, hey, have at it. That's fine too. Going into the house of worship, well, that crosses the line. I think anti-abortion folks going into Planned Parenthood crosses a line too, no?

As for the judges, I believe there's at least a federal law that bars protests at judges homes, especially when done to intimidate or to attempt to persuade them to rule in a particular direction with a decision pending. I think that makes sense. Heck, we have more than enough examples of disgruntled claimants going to judges houses and shooting people. No need to add to that tragic ledger.
It’s almost like you’re saying they have a right to privacy or something. :|
Who? And privacy is fine when it doesn't involve another human being. I know, hate to bring science into it, but science is pretty clear. Life is life. And I'm already on record that I would be fine with abortion continuing as is until science can provide us a way to have the fetus be viable outside of the woman's womb as early as possible. As for the judges, again, we've made it a point we don't want opinions of judges, at any level, being impacted by threats or other outside persuasions. Heck, we've even made a law saying that.

Another thing about this abortion debate is that it never gets into the nuance. On both sides, the loudest voices win. But there are plenty of cases where abortion needs to continue - babies that are already dead in the womb, pregnancies where the fetus implants outside of the uterus, babies that are so medically compromised in the womb they have no hope of survival, etc. Even when abortion is restricted or banned, we're going to still need to have the procedure of an abortion taught to physicians and still practiced in those cases where we should. But that's a nuance neither side likes to talk about when they're yelling at the other side.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

Manchin to vote no on donk Roe vs Wade bill.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/joe-ma ... -wade-bill
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

GannonFan wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 6:56 am
kalm wrote: Tue May 10, 2022 6:28 pm

It’s almost like you’re saying they have a right to privacy or something. :|
Who? And privacy is fine when it doesn't involve another human being. I know, hate to bring science into it, but science is pretty clear. Life is life. And I'm already on record that I would be fine with abortion continuing as is until science can provide us a way to have the fetus be viable outside of the woman's womb as early as possible. As for the judges, again, we've made it a point we don't want opinions of judges, at any level, being impacted by threats or other outside persuasions. Heck, we've even made a law saying that.

Another thing about this abortion debate is that it never gets into the nuance. On both sides, the loudest voices win. But there are plenty of cases where abortion needs to continue - babies that are already dead in the womb, pregnancies where the fetus implants outside of the uterus, babies that are so medically compromised in the womb they have no hope of survival, etc. Even when abortion is restricted or banned, we're going to still need to have the procedure of an abortion taught to physicians and still practiced in those cases where we should. But that's a nuance neither side likes to talk about when they're yelling at the other side.
Life is life when? That doesn’t seem very clear.
Image
Image
Image
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

Image
Image
Image
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18038
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by GannonFan »

kalm wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 3:11 pm
GannonFan wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 6:56 am

Who? And privacy is fine when it doesn't involve another human being. I know, hate to bring science into it, but science is pretty clear. Life is life. And I'm already on record that I would be fine with abortion continuing as is until science can provide us a way to have the fetus be viable outside of the woman's womb as early as possible. As for the judges, again, we've made it a point we don't want opinions of judges, at any level, being impacted by threats or other outside persuasions. Heck, we've even made a law saying that.

Another thing about this abortion debate is that it never gets into the nuance. On both sides, the loudest voices win. But there are plenty of cases where abortion needs to continue - babies that are already dead in the womb, pregnancies where the fetus implants outside of the uterus, babies that are so medically compromised in the womb they have no hope of survival, etc. Even when abortion is restricted or banned, we're going to still need to have the procedure of an abortion taught to physicians and still practiced in those cases where we should. But that's a nuance neither side likes to talk about when they're yelling at the other side.
Life is life when? That doesn’t seem very clear.
If we stick to the science, it's at conception, and there's no real argument against it. No one would say a tree isn't a tree until it breaks through the ground - it starts being one the moment a seed begins the biological process of growing. If we talk about when a "soul" enters the body or something along those lines, then we're not talking about science anymore (and I don't begrudge spirituality or anything of the like, it's just a different conversation). Like I said, I'm fine with abortion continuing at this point, even for unwanted pregnancies, because science hasn't developed to a point yet where we can let a fetus, at the earliest stages, live outside of the woman's womb, maybe in some kind of artificial womb. But when science does deliver on that, we're still left with the undeniable conclusion that, even when it's just a collection of cells, just because it's at its earliest doesn't mean that it's not a human life even then. Of course it is. :coffee:
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

GannonFan wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 7:00 am
kalm wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 3:11 pm

Life is life when? That doesn’t seem very clear.
If we stick to the science, it's at conception, and there's no real argument against it. No one would say a tree isn't a tree until it breaks through the ground - it starts being one the moment a seed begins the biological process of growing. If we talk about when a "soul" enters the body or something along those lines, then we're not talking about science anymore (and I don't begrudge spirituality or anything of the like, it's just a different conversation). Like I said, I'm fine with abortion continuing at this point, even for unwanted pregnancies, because science hasn't developed to a point yet where we can let a fetus, at the earliest stages, live outside of the woman's womb, maybe in some kind of artificial womb. But when science does deliver on that, we're still left with the undeniable conclusion that, even when it's just a collection of cells, just because it's at its earliest doesn't mean that it's not a human life even then. Of course it is. :coffee:
A seed requires nurture, various inputs of rain and weather plus some luck to become a tree. It is not a tree as a seed. Many seeds never become trees.

Hence Chizzy’s old line of God being the #1 in world serial abortionist rankings.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Skjellyfetti
Anal
Anal
Posts: 14411
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 9:56 pm
I am a fan of: Appalachian

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by Skjellyfetti »

Do "stand-your-ground" laws apply to the fetus in utero? Maybe abortion could be legal in states with a stand-your-ground law. The woman asks the fetus to exit her uterus. If the fetus refuses to comply, she is justified in killing it.
"The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes"
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

Skjellyfetti wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 7:28 am Do "stand-your-ground" laws apply to the fetus in utero? Maybe abortion could be legal in states with a stand-your-ground law. The woman asks the fetus to exit her uterus. If the fetus refuses to comply, she is justified in killing it.
No. A woman is not the queen of even her own castle. Sorry.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by AZGrizFan »

Skjellyfetti wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 7:28 am Do "stand-your-ground" laws apply to the fetus in utero? Maybe abortion could be legal in states with a stand-your-ground law. The woman asks the fetus to exit her uterus. If the fetus refuses to comply, she is justified in killing it.
I'll try that with my kid.

"You won't leave my house???" BLAM BLAM BLAM!!!
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

These protestors are violating fed law (picketing outside a judge’s house, and VA & MD state laws (picketing outside a private residence (maybe also judge’s too, although state might only apply to state judges). How come there haven’t been mass arrests? If Biden DOJ is blatantly ignoring fed law and this blatant attempt at judge intimidation, there’s no reason the conk govs in VA amd MD shouldn’t send in state troopers in mass amd clear these people out.
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
Ibanez
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 60482
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:16 pm
I am a fan of: Coastal Carolina

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by Ibanez »

BDKJMU wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 9:47 am These protestors are violating fed law (picketing outside a judge’s house, and VA & MD state laws (picketing outside a private residence (maybe also judge’s too, although state might only apply to state judges). How come there haven’t been mass arrests? If Biden DOJ is blatantly ignoring fed law and this blatant attempt at judge intimidation, there’s no reason the conk govs in VA amd MD shouldn’t send in state troopers in mass amd clear these people out.
Now you care about protestors breaking the law...? :suspicious:
Turns out I might be a little gay. 89Hen 11/7/17
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

Ibanez wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 10:45 am
BDKJMU wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 9:47 am These protestors are violating fed law (picketing outside a judge’s house, and VA & MD state laws (picketing outside a private residence (maybe also judge’s too, although state might only apply to state judges). How come there haven’t been mass arrests? If Biden DOJ is blatantly ignoring fed law and this blatant attempt at judge intimidation, there’s no reason the conk govs in VA amd MD shouldn’t send in state troopers in mass amd clear these people out.
Now you care about protestors breaking the law...? :suspicious:
At least he's consistently inconsistent. :coffee:
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

Ibanez wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 10:45 am
BDKJMU wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 9:47 am These protestors are violating fed law (picketing outside a judge’s house, and VA & MD state laws (picketing outside a private residence (maybe also judge’s too, although state might only apply to state judges). How come there haven’t been mass arrests? If Biden DOJ is blatantly ignoring fed law and this blatant attempt at judge intimidation, there’s no reason the conk govs in VA amd MD shouldn’t send in state troopers in mass amd clear these people out.
Now you care about protestors breaking the law...? :suspicious:
The 1/6 protestors that tresspassed were charged enmasse . The fact that these aren’t shows the DOJ is just another corrupt 3 letter agency...
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

There you have it. The donks are for partial birth abortion.
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

BDKJMU wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 2:57 pm
Ibanez wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 10:45 am

Now you care about protestors breaking the law...? :suspicious:
The 1/6 protestors that tresspassed were charged enmasse . The fact that these aren’t shows the DOJ is just another corrupt 3 letter agency...
Image
Image
Image
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

BDKJMU wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 5:00 pm There you have it. The donks are for partial birth abortion.
:lol:
Image
Image
Image
houndawg
Level5
Level5
Posts: 23236
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
I am a fan of: SIU
A.K.A.: houndawg
Location: Egypt

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by houndawg »

BDKJMU wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 2:57 pm
Ibanez wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 10:45 am

Now you care about protestors breaking the law...? :suspicious:
The 1/6 protestors that tresspassed were charged enmasse . The fact that these aren’t shows the DOJ is just another corrupt 3 letter agency...
Somebody shit on the lawn? :?
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

kalm wrote: Fri May 13, 2022 6:37 am
BDKJMU wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 2:57 pm
The 1/6 protestors that tresspassed were charged enmasse . The fact that these aren’t shows the DOJ is just another corrupt 3 letter agency...
Quick reminder to the morons out there: There’s a big difference between a bunch of people tresspassing through a govt building taking selfies, and hundreds of people outside multiple SCOTUS’s private homes threatening them, terrorizing their families, and trying to intimidate them over a major court case.
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

BDKJMU wrote: Fri May 13, 2022 8:13 am
kalm wrote: Fri May 13, 2022 6:37 am

Quick reminder to the morons out there: There’s a big difference between a bunch of people tresspassing through a govt building taking selfies, and hundreds of people outside multiple SCOTUS’s private homes threatening them, terrorizing their families, and trying to intimidate them over a major court case.

Image

Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

BDKJMU wrote: Fri May 13, 2022 8:13 am
kalm wrote: Fri May 13, 2022 6:37 am
Quick reminder to the morons out there: There’s a big difference between a bunch of people tresspassing through a govt building taking selfies, and hundreds of people outside multiple SCOTUS’s private homes threatening them, terrorizing their families, and trying to intimidate them over a major court case.
Image
You must have emptied a full gallon with that whitewashing of January 6.
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

BDKJMU wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 5:00 pm There you have it. The donks are for partial birth abortion.
Did it really attempt to legalize abortion nationwide until birth with effectively no limits? I keep seeing that as a conservative talking point but I haven't seen the actual language that backs it up.

From the bill(S.4132 - Women’s Health Protection Act of 2022):
(8) A prohibition on abortion at any point or points in time prior to fetal viability, including a prohibition or restriction on a particular abortion procedure.
(9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when, in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health.
Preventing government from prohibiting abortion before fetal viability or when the pregnancy risks the patient's life or health is not "no limits".
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18038
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by GannonFan »

UNI88 wrote: Fri May 13, 2022 10:39 am
BDKJMU wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 5:00 pm There you have it. The donks are for partial birth abortion.
Did it really attempt to legalize abortion nationwide until birth with effectively no limits? I keep seeing that as a conservative talking point but I haven't seen the actual language that backs it up.

From the bill(S.4132 - Women’s Health Protection Act of 2022):
(8) A prohibition on abortion at any point or points in time prior to fetal viability, including a prohibition or restriction on a particular abortion procedure.
(9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when, in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health.
Preventing government from prohibiting abortion before fetal viability or when the pregnancy risks the patient's life or health is not "no limits".
I think the debatable point is what constitutes a "risk to the pregnant patient's life or health". That phrase is rather open ended and could mean really anything, physical or mental, that could impact a woman's health.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by AZGrizFan »

GannonFan wrote: Fri May 13, 2022 10:49 am
UNI88 wrote: Fri May 13, 2022 10:39 am

Did it really attempt to legalize abortion nationwide until birth with effectively no limits? I keep seeing that as a conservative talking point but I haven't seen the actual language that backs it up.

From the bill(S.4132 - Women’s Health Protection Act of 2022):


Preventing government from prohibiting abortion before fetal viability or when the pregnancy risks the patient's life or health is not "no limits".
I think the debatable point is what constitutes a "risk to the pregnant patient's life or health". That phrase is rather open ended and could mean really anything, physical or mental, that could impact a woman's health.
….and what constitutes “fetal viability”….
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
Post Reply