Trump lashes out against cross border shopping

So you don't agree with the SCOTUS? Get in line.

I find it funny that you call judges "activists" when you don't agree with the ruling. You don't see it? Be self aware dude.

 

You don't like judgements. Got it. TALK LAW with me.

 

@Mac-7 How was the SCOTUS's ruling that abortion was legal not just? Explain it.

I'm all ears.

 

I will be thrilled for you to talk about it! What judgement?

 

The liberal judges have really stretch believability to make their rulings sound rational

And then only far lefties see it their way

 

The states all had laws against abortion and gay marriage

Then the unelected judges got involved

 

LOL NY state removed all their anti abortion laws and turn themselves into the tourist state for those who wish/needed an abortion

 

New York did it the right way

They passed a law by popular vote

But activist libs were too impatient to follow the democratic process in 49 other states

 

This is coming from a friend.....you are thinking too much about abortion and gay ****.

Chill out.

 

@Mac-7

Did you get turned out? You can tell me. This is the trust tree.

 

So constitution rights should be government by popular votes in your opinion?

Love also the idea also that the only the women and families that would be harm by the return to pre-abort rights times would be the poor.

All others could just get into a car or a plane an get a nice safe abortion.

Only poor women with a large percent already having children they need to take care of would need to either have another child or risk their lives by having an unsafe illegal abortion.

If the right get their wish to control the wombs of poor women who are unlucky enough to live in the wrong states, it will be interesting to see the number of dead women and the children that will be without a mother that will result.

 

Those are examples of activist liberal judges writing laws from the bench

 

No

Constitutional rights should arbitratedby judges

But bad, liberal activist judges who make up rights from the bench are not good either

The proper functioning of the SC depends of good judges who stick to the original meaning of the law not what they think it should be

The rest of your argument that outlawing abortions puts a hatdship on women is a political and emotional argument for legeslatures to consider not judges on the high court

 

1) it doesn't. The Gov't has no legitimate authority to make law banning abortion.

2) Like the fact that we now live in a propaganda state.. Like how we are moving towards a quazi totalitarian police state/ individual liberty is being trample on. Like how Fear of an external threat is being used to get the people to trade essential liberty for security.

 

Years ago, Canada restricted access pf yarn imports.

Yesterday, it came to my attention that some yarn in my home was made in Canada, of American cotton.

That's why.

 

because American companies outsource the labor... even apple is now outsourcing, if we want more American jobs, we have to put tariffs on the phones, that is the reality of it

if we do not have good jobs, we can't consume products, government goes broke as no income taxes, society collapses

the debt can not keep increasing forever so we can have cheap stuff, at some point the dollar loses value

 

Its not about banning, but rather simply not providing the abortion service. Government has control and oversight over the health system which is what would provide abortion services. Are you saying that the government has no legitimate authority to not provide abortion services?

Do you have an example in mind?

 

Law is giving Gov't the authority to punish people for violation of codes of conduct. This has everything to do with the authority of Gov't to ban abortion and zero to do with how the Gov't spends money collected from taxes - that is a different subject all together - unless that money is being used to violate or promote violation of individual liberty.

"The Fear Factor" - The founders were well aware of the age old tactic of using fear to get people to trade liberty for security and increase Gov't power.

The rallying cry "Give me Liberty or Give me Death" or Ben Franklin's famous quote "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security" both speak to this issue.

Stalin used this tactic to take away liberty "Security for the Motherland"
Hitler did the same "Fatherland Security"

Bush - lacking the creative ability to come up with a new name - "Homeland Security". He then introduced the "Patriot Act".

Obama changed the name to the equally Orwellian doublespeak "Freedom Act". In defense of the NSA head lying to congress (felony 1) about en mass spying on US citizens (felony 2) Obama said "If we want increased security - we have to give a little"

How far we have fallen - we now have people "begging" to give up their essential liberty over a risk of harm that is 400 times less than the risk of harm from "walking". It is now our "Patriotic Duty" to give up essential liberty.

Increased crime is used as justification to increase police power.
"reefer madness" as justification for Pot laws.. later on - equivocating Pot to Heroin - a stance that is still maintained by the DOJ clowns such as Sessions.

Arbitrary search and seizure and asset forfeiture ( a massive violation of the rule of law in addition to violating liberty) are justified by fear.

"Money Laundering" used to justify massive violation of privacy and restrictions on currency.

The list goes on and on.

 

How do people get abortions?

I'd never heard of this happening prior to someone being found guilty. When does this happen?

 

Civil forfeiture. This is common knowledge. Some states are fixing the problem, but it's still pretty widespread, country-wise. They take your property before you are convicted and don't give it back when you are found innocent.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/2018/05/09/conviction-forfeiture-civil-asset/34738273/

 

How does this relate to the fact that the Gov't has no legitimate authority to ban abortion ? Come out of that rabbit hole into which you have descended

It happens all the time - that was the whole point of the legislation allowing this to happen being restricted under Obama (due to public outcry) but, it has been reimposed under Trump (Sessions) as the war against pot is reinstated.

Why are you cherry picking and nitpicking rather than focusing on the message ?

 

Do people have a legitimate RIGHT to get an abortion?

 

How is this not a breach of the Due Process Clause of the 5th and 14th Amendments?

 

It is a complete violation of our constitutional rights, and yet it continues. We live in a banana republic.

 

"Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness" - obviously this includes a the right to autonomy over one's own body.