BREAKING: Supreme Court Will Strike Down Roe v. Wade, According to Draft Majority Opinion

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by XXJefferson#51, May 2, 2022.

  1. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    9,230
    Likes Received:
    2,271
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When I told you I am not interested in this particular tangent, I meant it. Why would I lie about that?

    I approached you about something you had said that you have since clarified, and then it morphed into this tangent which has nothing to do with why I originally addressed you. I sincerely do not care about your desire or belief that the USSC should not be in charge of Constitutional interpretations. This is fringe stuff that is never going to change. As such, I TRULY do not give a rip. Out of politeness, I briefly played along, but several redundant posts later, after giving my opinion and hearing yours, I am tired of playing along. You seem passionate about it, which is great for you, but please stop trying to force-feed it down my throat. I TRULY DO NOT CARE about this tangent. SINCERELY.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2022
  2. ButterBalls

    ButterBalls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    40,203
    Likes Received:
    27,231
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Aside from berating the other poster, I agree with your post.. The SC really needs to be held to some degree of limits when interpreting the constitution. Simply changing interpretations because of new Justices is a poor way of managing consistency..
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2022
  3. Turin

    Turin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    Messages:
    5,182
    Likes Received:
    1,545
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    1. Notwithstanding any other provision of 1 law to the contrary, the provisions of this chapter; the 2 laws of this state on the use of public funds for an 3 abortion; and the laws of this state which regulate in any 4 manner an abortion facility that, or a person who, performs 5 or induces an abortion on another, or attempts or conspires 6 to perform or induce an abortion on another, shall apply to 7 all conduct occurring: 8 (1) Within this state; 9 (2) Partially within and partially outside this state, 10 including, but not limited to, when: 11 (a) One or more doses of a multi-dose regimen of a 12 drug or chemical, or combination thereof, used to induce an 13 abortion is administered or expected to be administered by 14 any means within this state, while another dose or dosages 15 of such drug or chemical, or combination thereof, is 16 administered or expected to be administered by any means 17 outside this state;
     
  4. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    9,230
    Likes Received:
    2,271
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I can give my prior response and it still applies.

    I looked through your first link and it is many pages long. While I do not see where in that text it supports your claim, I will assume the existence of something in the legalese that may appear to do so or perhaps it is legitimately TRYING to do so. It would not hold constitutional muster if that were the case. One state does not have jurisdiction against the actions of what occurs in other states. This is a foundational principle in our system of jurisprudence.

    Jurisdiction matters. You should be happy about this.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2022
  5. Turin

    Turin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    Messages:
    5,182
    Likes Received:
    1,545
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Because once they are born, they are no longer an unborn baby, but a leech on the system.
     
  6. Turin

    Turin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    Messages:
    5,182
    Likes Received:
    1,545
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    They are considering citizens of the state to fall within this jurisdiction regardless of where they are. Its a wild intrerpretation of law to be sure, BUT JUST THE FACT THAT THEY ARE TRYING, and other states are also keying up bills of a similiar nature. SHOULD BE TERRIFYING.


    And given the makeup of the current supreme court and their radical right wing agenda they have been pushing on the country, I have no faith that they would not support this.
     
  7. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    9,230
    Likes Received:
    2,271
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It is not terrifying if you understand the law. Jurisdiction matters. What some yahoo on a state level tries to do in some proposal to a bill being debated means absolutely nothing. This is why we have Judicial oversight. In the highly unlikely event such a thing would pass the legislature, it would beyond ANY doubt be struck down as unconstitutional because they lack jurisdiction.

    If your position is that you fear that the strict constitutionalists on the court are going to overturn the concept of jurisdiction, that is more than just a little silly.
     
  8. Vernan89188

    Vernan89188 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2014
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    1,060
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And the more I see Trump supporters call facts "theoretical", the more since it all makes.

    After all they do call education indoctrination...so what ever.

    It's a fact, without abortion alot of you would not be here. Those mothers would be raising some other losers child. Most likely by her self.

    A question for the die hard anti abortion types, would that alter your view if you found out your mother aborted another man's child before she married your father?
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2022
  9. Turin

    Turin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    Messages:
    5,182
    Likes Received:
    1,545
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    They are also going to start prosecuting companies in Texas that pay to allow their employees to leave the state for an abortion.


    No. Sorry. I have no faith that they will uphold the current jurisprudence in todays political climate. Conservatives see the opportunity to make a huge power grab here, and they aren't going to hesitate to use it. They have proven this time and time again.
     
  10. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    9,230
    Likes Received:
    2,271
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Jurisdiction matters.

    This should make you happy, instead you opt to play chicken little, undoubtedly because you think it helps you politically. I too am pro-abortion. If states all of a sudden threw out the notion of jurisdiction I would be right alongside of you in vehement protest. This is not going to happen however. Deep down, you know this too.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2022
  11. DentalFloss

    DentalFloss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,263
    Likes Received:
    1,828
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then please, for the love of whatever your deity of choice is, find a copy of the Constitution and show me where upon in there a right to abortion can be found? I'm in favor of legal abortion (though I'm beyond tired of hearing about it either way), but I can't find it. Having said that, I hope the Justices DO find it, and find in favor or Mississipi, which will have the effect of restricting abortions to 15 weeks instead of 24, but without overturning RvW.

    But I'm just not seeing a LEGAL way, regardless of my personal opinion. Perhaps you can show me the light.

    If you don't have a copy of the Constitution, first off, shame one you, but you can get one for FREE (just like an ID for voting) here: https://lp.hillsdale.edu/free-pocket-constitution/

    No it won't. It's still going to be a bloodbath for the leftists/socialists/woke crowd, and it's going to be one for the ages. People that really care, one way or the other, about abortion care A LOT. But for most people it's just background noise that has no impact on their personal lives at all.
     
  12. Arkanis

    Arkanis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Messages:
    9,828
    Likes Received:
    11,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    A Constitution is not a static document to which the people must submit.

    It is imperfect, like the men who wrote it.

    It can be, in certain circumstances, interpreted according to the evolution of ideas and morals.

    Roe vs. Wade has been tested many times over the past 50 years and has always prevailed.

    Its overthrow is purely political, as evidenced by the avowed conservatism of the judges who want to overturn it.

    I don't know of any conservative on this forum - including you - who is capable of putting aside partisanship to coldly analyze the trends in the electorate.

    That's why no MAGA on this forum has doubted that Trump will win in 2020.
     
  13. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    42,198
    Likes Received:
    16,585
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Although I hear that insurrections are bad, if you are endorsing one more power to you.
     
  14. DentalFloss

    DentalFloss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,263
    Likes Received:
    1,828
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why? To increase taxes even more? To divide the American people even more? To make talking sex to 5-year-olds legal? To increase racial tensions more than they are by continuing to blame living people for things that happened centuries ago, and threatening to make they pay fines for it? More free sh*t for lazy people, like Build Back Bankrupt was full of? For more men competing in women's sports? For socialism, only done right this time?

    What the f is it you people want???

    Bigger deficits, open borders, unconstrained illegal alien voting (because we don't actually check citizenship), telling little black Johnny it's little white Johnny's fault they don't have a BMW in the driveway? More censorship, more cancel culture, more ridiculous pronoun debates??

    More violent "protests", where law enforcement is told to fall back and do nothing?

    Look, I'm not some holy roller, and I was a strong proponent of same sex marriage, interracial marriage (though that fight was won before I was even born, properly), I've got no issues with what consenting adults do with their dangly bits at all, as long as everyone else involved is also a consenting adult (human, if that needs to be said), but I am a proponent of capitalism, freedom (yes, including speech), small government with low taxes, I don't care a bit about trannys, but I'm going to call them he or she based on how they look and act, I don't think violence (especially in your own neighborhoods) is a good thing, I want the border essentially SHUT DOWN, and all illegals already here sent home, I want free sh*t programs for able-bodied adults used very sparingly, and think removing them will provide motivation for people to work instead of sitting around all day sucking at the government teat, and I want people in general to pay their own f-ing bills!!

    In the past few years the left has lost it's mind, to the point that things that just a short time ago were considered common sense are not only controversial, but if you dissent, you will be silenced, attacked, or killed.

    I do not understand the liberal mindset. Maybe it's as simple as you guys never learned that life isn't fair. Or maybe you're just teat suckers worried about your personal government funded gravy train. Or maybe you just have no problem with theft from those who have more to give those who have less a comfortable easy lifestyle without asking anything of them in return, or what. But your brains are miswired somehow and it's gotten so bad that you guys are even going after yourselves.

    Which is probably a good thing.
     
  15. DentalFloss

    DentalFloss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,263
    Likes Received:
    1,828
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That requires an Amendment. If your side is too lazy to get one, or lacks the necessary support, tough. It is most certainly a static document until changed via Amendment, and it says what it says.

    But I will note the irony that you made NO EFFORT to even attempt to find a right to abortion within it. Because it ain't there. If Congress wants to pass a federal law making abortion legal, and invalidating any State laws to the contrary, I say go for it, but they best do it now because they won't have the numbers come November. I'd even SUPPORT that, but y'all are too worried about unimportant stuff and more giveaways and illegals invading our country to actually put your power, for the short amount of time you still have it, where your words are.

    But the words of the Constitution do not change because the times do. That is why we have an Amendment process in the first damn place. Use it!
     
  16. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,157
    Likes Received:
    2,151
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The other poster just wants to bury his head in the sand on a critical issue. In his latest post he correctly discusses an issue within the scope of Article III, the power of SCOTUS of judicial review in the case of a question of law (subject matter jurisdiction). No interpretation of the Constitution is required here (or anywhere for that matter).

    Yes it's called the 10th Amendment. It prohibits the federal government from exercising powers not specifically granted to it by the Constitution. Those powers belong to the states or The People. The degree of limitation with respect to "interpreting" the Constitution is 100%, SCOTUS is prohibited from doing so, period, end of story.

    Unfortunately there's no mechanism within the Constitution to enforce it on the federal government. It's a severe defect which destroyed our Constitutional Republic (as guaranteed by Article IV Section 4) from within, probably the day after it was ratified.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2022
  17. Arkanis

    Arkanis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Messages:
    9,828
    Likes Received:
    11,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Roe vs. Wade is a judgment that deals with the individual freedom of women.
     
  18. DentalFloss

    DentalFloss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,263
    Likes Received:
    1,828
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's not the question. The question is where, in what words, clauses, paragraphs, Amendments, or otherwise, can an absolute right to an abortion be found. If you not prepared or willing to at least TRY to answer that, there is no need for you to respond again to me on this.

    Remember, I'm pro-choice to a point, and that point is when there are measurable brainwaves that are mostly indistinguishable to those of an infant. I don't have any idea where that point is, but somebody does. I just don't think it's included in the Constitution. Prove me wrong. Or at least try.
     
    Lil Mike likes this.
  19. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,157
    Likes Received:
    2,151
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The 9th Amendment protects ALL unenumerated rights (rights not specifically listed in the first 8 Amendments).
     
  20. Arkanis

    Arkanis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Messages:
    9,828
    Likes Received:
    11,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Abortion, in stages as we know it today, didn't exist in the 18th century.

    In any case, all pregnancy terminations were considered murder.

    I repeat, Roe vs. Wade is a ruling based primarily on a woman's freedom.

    And like 2A, if the Founding Fathers saw today the lethality of the guns a civilian can get, this amendment would never have been written.

    Proof that the Constitution is a document that sometimes ages badly.
     
  21. ButterBalls

    ButterBalls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    40,203
    Likes Received:
    27,231
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I really wouldn't cap that as fact(S)!

    Has no validity what so ever, just an odd something, that at best could/might describe any family regardless of political affiliation! How you parsed that ridiculous theory together is/was odd :wierdface:

    Then we have the off the wall hypothetical that could encompass any type of person, but in your head it must be a conservative! I guess you never really took in to consideration what Women utilize abortions the most!

    Abortion Demographics – Who Has an Abortion? – Concerned Women for America
    And finally..

    God only know what this teaches us LMFAO :shock:
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2022
  22. Vernan89188

    Vernan89188 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2014
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    1,060
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Uh-huh..you forgot the stats on woman who have children after an abortion, and you still failed to answer the question.
     
  23. ButterBalls

    ButterBalls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    40,203
    Likes Received:
    27,231
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh and you took NO STATS what so ever :) Ya we all know how that works ;)
     
  24. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    38,245
    Likes Received:
    14,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And what in hell does ANY of this have to do with telling women that unwanted growths in the most well-hidden recesses of their own private bodies are anyone's business but their own?
     
  25. Turin

    Turin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    Messages:
    5,182
    Likes Received:
    1,545
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    No.
    I dont.
     

Share This Page