Recent abortion laws - Page 5 - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum
 
Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum  

Go Back   Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum > Miscellaneous > General Chit-Chat
Notices

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-01-2019, 01:46 PM   #101 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Member # 174037
Location: 'Cuse
Posts: 4,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMG View Post
Even better than reading the law, you can read the law then see the bill’s author clarify it on video in this very thread.


I'm going to make a video stating that you owe me 1 million dollars. Then by your logic I can take you to court for 1 million dollars.
will12785 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 02:25 PM   #102 (permalink)
Registered User
 
gregj50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Member # 151818
Location: Roy
Posts: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluetick View Post
It's all smoke and mirrors.



You notice it's state level democrats, when the federal democrats come back, it will force a show down at the federal level.



They would like to have a set of abortion laws in concrete before Trump can fill the SCOTUS with conservative members.


Exactly.....
Ruth.... MIA!!!!
Could get interesting!!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gregj50 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 02:39 PM   #103 (permalink)
Registered User
 
gregj50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Member # 151818
Location: Roy
Posts: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoCJ View Post
I have a solution, it's none of anyone's business except the doctor and the patient. All the other non-involved people (anti-choicers) can fuck off, it's none of your business, and it sure as fuck ain't the government's business.


Tax $$$....
Idiot!!!!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gregj50 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 03:51 PM   #104 (permalink)
Old School
 
Technohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Member # 130090
Location: Surrounded by socialists (Exeter, RI)
Posts: 1,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMG View Post
Even better than reading the law, you can read the law then see the bill’s author clarify it on video in this very thread.
Soooooo . . . . are you saying you don't understand how laws work? What the bill's author says is irrelevant. All that matters is what the law says and how the courts interpret the law. The supreme court has already ruled that the right to abortion exists up until fetal viability (generally accepted to be 23/24 weeks). State attempts to extend the right beyond this period will surely be rejected by the supreme court and could very well backfire into a decision that further restricts abortion rights.
__________________
-Eric
Redneck-at-Large
Technohead is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 03:53 PM   #105 (permalink)
Old School
 
Technohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Member # 130090
Location: Surrounded by socialists (Exeter, RI)
Posts: 1,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoCJ View Post
I have a solution, it's none of anyone's business except the doctor and the patient. All the other non-involved people (anti-choicers) can fuck off, it's none of your business, and it sure as fuck ain't the government's business.
Exactly. But I would add that the non-involved people should not be expected to pay for it either!
__________________
-Eric
Redneck-at-Large
Technohead is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 04:05 PM   #106 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Yota Up's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Member # 57128
Posts: 14,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoCJ View Post
I have a solution, it's none of anyone's business except the doctor and the patient. All the other non-involved people (anti-choicers) can fuck off, it's none of your business, and it sure as fuck ain't the government's business.
Until 5 minutes later when it's born, then it's everyone's business.
Right?
Yota Up is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 04:20 PM   #107 (permalink)
DMG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Member # 8145
Location: the Iron City
Posts: 14,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by will12785 View Post


I'm going to make a video stating that you owe me 1 million dollars. Then by your logic I can take you to court for 1 million dollars.
How is that similar to the author of the abortion bill answering questions about the bill? If you can’t answer this I am done with you.
DMG is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 04:23 PM   #108 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Member # 29527
Location: WA
Posts: 38,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technohead View Post
The supreme court has already ruled that the right to abortion exists up until fetal viability (generally accepted to be 23/24 weeks). State attempts to extend the right beyond this period will surely be rejected by the supreme court
Talk about not knowing how law works SCOTUS acts to curtail the power of government to limit rights. It does not work the other way around.
CrustyJeep is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 04:54 PM   #109 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Member # 174037
Location: 'Cuse
Posts: 4,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMG View Post
How is that similar to the author of the abortion bill answering questions about the bill? If you can’t answer this I am done with you.
You really cant be this dense. Nobody is going to be running around asking what did cathy tran say trying to see if they can abort their infant child. The written law is what people follow. He could have asked that exact same question about the old law and gotten the same answer.
will12785 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 05:30 PM   #110 (permalink)
DMG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Member # 8145
Location: the Iron City
Posts: 14,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by will12785 View Post
You really cant be this dense. Nobody is going to be running around asking what did cathy tran say trying to see if they can abort their infant child. The written law is what people follow. He could have asked that exact same question about the old law and gotten the same answer.
Can you phathom it? how did you get that past spellcheck?
DMG is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 05:40 PM   #111 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Member # 117207
Location: I walk with Crom
Posts: 12,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrustyJeep View Post
Talk about not knowing how law works SCOTUS acts to curtail the power of government to limit rights. It does not work the other way around.
Except for that one time when we had to pass the bill to find out what was inside it. Then, after finding that out, they changed it all to a tax. And, maybe that other time when they figured shotguns had never ever been used by the military before, but they could and should tax them too.
petro812 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 05:55 PM   #112 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Member # 117207
Location: I walk with Crom
Posts: 12,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by will12785 View Post
Maybe you are so mad about this law because it touches a nerve? You clearly should have been aborted.

You clearly dont understand anything about the medical field, nor do you know anything about child birth. Are you a father? Are you an OB/GYN? Are you in anyway whatsoever qualified to make decisions on a medical level?

I see you can read because you acknowledge that the law only changes the requirements from 3 doctors down to one doctor and changes the wording from must to shall on 18.2-74C.

In your tiny little brain you rationalize this to mean that they want women to be able to kill their child during birth because they feel like it. You interpret this law to mean that all a woman has to do is tell a doctor she doesn't think she is mentally fit to have the baby and boom the dr kills the baby.

Keep fighting the good fight buddy, I hope you get exactly the medical treatment you deserve.
Wow, if that isn't an endorsement of single payer and it's inherent death panels combined with the fascist left's need of total mind and body control, I don't know what is.
petro812 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 06:09 PM   #113 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Member # 700186
Posts: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by will12785 View Post

I see you can read because you acknowledge that the law only changes the requirements from 3 doctors down to one doctor and changes the wording from must to shall on 18.2-74C.
I'm going to ignore the rest of your post because its retarded. But the substance I will respond to.

You are a liar. Pure and simple you are a liar.

The part of the law that is reprehensible is not 3 to 1 doctors or must to shall. It is that it goes from physical threat to the mother to mental impairment of the mother. So that's anything at all. Its abortion for any reason.


So fuck you. Fuck you for ever thinking this is okay. This is a human that feels pain and fear. Its not even a back door to abortion at any time. Its front door. You are a piece of shit and I hope whatever is haunting your soul is defeated.
Buck Wild Racing is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 06:25 PM   #114 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Member # 117207
Location: I walk with Crom
Posts: 12,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Wild Racing View Post
...You are a piece of shit and I hope whatever is haunting your soul is defeated.
Stop that, his soul should be haunted by all those little babies until at least gregfag50 no longer logs on.
petro812 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 06:33 PM   #115 (permalink)
Old School
 
Technohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Member # 130090
Location: Surrounded by socialists (Exeter, RI)
Posts: 1,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrustyJeep View Post
Talk about not knowing how law works SCOTUS acts to curtail the power of government to limit rights. It does not work the other way around.
Would you care to reformulate this into a coherent point? The role of the SCOTUS is to ensure that the legislative and executive branches follow the Constitution. Interpretations change depending on the makeup of the court with the net effect being expansion and contraction of rights. Furthermore, the court sometime drifts into "bench legislation". Roe vs Wade is the poster child for such judicial activism; no real basis in the Constitution but the law of the land nevertheless. Oh, and I did not whether or not I agreed with the ruling.
__________________
-Eric
Redneck-at-Large
Technohead is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 07:36 PM   #116 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Member # 700186
Posts: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrustyJeep View Post
Talk about not knowing how law works SCOTUS acts to curtail the power of government to limit rights. It does not work the other way around.
This is funny. Sure, that's how it was supposed to work. But oddly, this is a perfect example of the court adding rights that never existed. Its called activism, and its alive today.
Buck Wild Racing is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 08:12 PM   #117 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Member # 174037
Location: 'Cuse
Posts: 4,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMG View Post
Can you phathom it? how did you get that past spellcheck?
feel better?

Quote:
Originally Posted by petro812 View Post
Wow, if that isn't an endorsement of single payer and it's inherent death panels combined with the fascist left's need of total mind and body control, I don't know what is.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Wild Racing View Post
I'm going to ignore the rest of your post because its retarded. But the substance I will respond to.

You are a liar. Pure and simple you are a liar.

The part of the law that is reprehensible is not 3 to 1 doctors or must to shall. It is that it goes from physical threat to the mother to mental impairment of the mother. So that's anything at all. Its abortion for any reason.


So fuck you. Fuck you for ever thinking this is okay. This is a human that feels pain and fear. Its not even a back door to abortion at any time. Its front door. You are a piece of shit and I hope whatever is haunting your soul is defeated.
I have some bad news for you. You might want to go to your safe space before you rear it. Mental impairment was still part of the original law.
will12785 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 11:20 PM   #118 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Member # 29527
Location: WA
Posts: 38,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technohead View Post
Would you care to reformulate this into a coherent point? The role of the SCOTUS is to ensure that the legislative and executive branches follow the Constitution
It would be good to mention what the role of COTUS is, which is to protect the rights of the people by limiting the power of government to limit those rights. It is the role of SCOTUS to interpret what COTUS means.

In no way shape or form is it the role of SCOTUS to protect the power of government, and certainly not to compel the government, to limit the rights of the people.

And just in case you're retarded, abortion is a right. Everything is a right. Rights simply exist. They can (and must) be limited, but they cannot be granted. Privileges are granted, not rights. The inherent right to abortion is (rightly, IMO) limited, but not completely removed. The government tried to remove it, and SCOTUS limited its power to do so.

You think that government grants rights, and that SCOTUS is somehow involved in ungranting those rights. You are fundamentally wrong.
CrustyJeep is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 11:23 PM   #119 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Member # 29527
Location: WA
Posts: 38,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by petro812 View Post
Except for that one time when we had to pass the bill to find out what was inside it. Then, after finding that out, they changed it all to a tax. And, maybe that other time when they figured shotguns had never ever been used by the military before, but they could and should tax them too.
These are anomalies. No system is perfect, certainly not when human beings are turning all the dials.
CrustyJeep is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-01-2019, 11:34 PM   #120 (permalink)
Registered User
 
gregj50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Member # 151818
Location: Roy
Posts: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by petro812 View Post
Stop that, his soul should be haunted by all those little babies until at least gregfag50 no longer logs on.


Amen!!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gregj50 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-02-2019, 12:43 AM   #121 (permalink)
Old School
 
Technohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Member # 130090
Location: Surrounded by socialists (Exeter, RI)
Posts: 1,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrustyJeep View Post
It would be good to mention what the role of COTUS is, which is to protect the rights of the people by limiting the power of government to limit those rights. It is the role of SCOTUS to interpret what COTUS means.

In no way shape or form is it the role of SCOTUS to protect the power of government, and certainly not to compel the government, to limit the rights of the people.

And just in case you're retarded, abortion is a right. Everything is a right. Rights simply exist. They can (and must) be limited, but they cannot be granted. Privileges are granted, not rights. The inherent right to abortion is (rightly, IMO) limited, but not completely removed. The government tried to remove it, and SCOTUS limited its power to do so.

You think that government grants rights, and that SCOTUS is somehow involved in ungranting those rights. You are fundamentally wrong.
Oh, the irony. It is normally me who is arguing from the perspective of natural rights with you chirping in about realities on the ground today. Blah, blah, blah. And yes, I am a strong believer that natural rights are inalienable. There is also the concept of "legal rights" which are, get this, granted by law!

Whether or not abortion is a natural right is fuzzy at best and reasonable people can disagree. The Constitution, which codifies select natural rights while also establishing a family of legal rights, is silent on the topic of abortion and thus the topic is delegated to the States. The correct ruling in Roe vs Wade should have been that abortion is a topic for the States to decide. The actual ruling strikes a reasonable (IMO) compromise but is without Constitutional basis. I am of the opinion that abortion is a private family matter and government has no business meddling in this private family decision. Likewise, people who chose to have the procedure should pay for it themselves.
__________________
-Eric
Redneck-at-Large
Technohead is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-02-2019, 06:37 AM   #122 (permalink)
Non-Lemming
 
SanDiegoCJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Member # 840
Location: Ramona, SoCal
Posts: 78,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technohead View Post
Oh, the irony. It is normally me who is arguing from the perspective of natural rights with you chirping in about realities on the ground today. Blah, blah, blah. And yes, I am a strong believer that natural rights are inalienable. There is also the concept of "legal rights" which are, get this, granted by law!

Whether or not abortion is a natural right is fuzzy at best and reasonable people can disagree. The Constitution, which codifies select natural rights while also establishing a family of legal rights, is silent on the topic of abortion and thus the topic is delegated to the States. The correct ruling in Roe vs Wade should have been that abortion is a topic for the States to decide. The actual ruling strikes a reasonable (IMO) compromise but is without Constitutional basis. I am of the opinion that abortion is a private family matter and government has no business meddling in this private family decision. Likewise, people who chose to have the procedure should pay for it themselves.
Wrong on delegated to the states. States do not have the legal power under COTUS to enact laws that deny/restrict people's rights. SCOTUS has ruled so almost since the beginning of this country. Roe v Wade is based on this...…………….. The Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion

That makes it a matter for SCOTUS and not the individual states as to whether to allow abortions.
__________________
One of the great achievements of science has been, if not to make it impossible for intelligent people to be religious, then at least to make it possible for them not to be religious. We should not retreat from this accomplishment.

Quote:
Salesmen and women. God sells to the ignorant.
SanDiegoCJ is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-02-2019, 08:40 AM   #123 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Member # 184924
Location: Downey, Id
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by will12785 View Post
feel better?







I have some bad news for you. You might want to go to your safe space before you rear it. Mental impairment was still part of the original law.
You might be the densest person I have ever seen. And that says something on a forum with guys like ev13wt. Virginias governor literally said he was ok with discussing abortion after birth. Also several people have pointed out straight up facts you looked right over and ignored. Ohh and the mental health bar was way lowered in this bill. But you keep drinking that coolaid phathom guy
__________________
69 SS/RS Camaro 396 450 hp, 2007 Ram 3500 4x4,
mikenike is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-02-2019, 08:45 AM   #124 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Member # 700186
Posts: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by will12785 View Post
I have some bad news for you. You might want to go to your safe space before you rear it. Mental impairment was still part of the original law.
With this in front of it: substantially and irremediably.

You see that word Irremediably? Know what it means?


See how we all know you are full of it?
Buck Wild Racing is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-02-2019, 11:39 AM   #125 (permalink)
Get Off My Lawn
 
Action Fab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Member # 77386
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 13,193
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elvis38 View Post
If i gotta pay for it, or i put it in there. Fuckin right i get a say.
Yes. The Father and the mother. Not all of society.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoCJ View Post
I have a solution, it's none of anyone's business except the doctor and the patient. All the other non-involved people (anti-choicers) can fuck off, it's none of your business, and it sure as fuck ain't the government's business.
Exactly

Quote:
Originally Posted by gregj50 View Post
Tax $$$....
Idiot!!!!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So then take the tax subsidies away. I have no problem with that and actually advocate it. But that's not what's being argued. Nobody is like "hey let's stop government funding to this cause, and keep protecting the rights of these individuals". Are they?
Action Fab is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

** A VERIFICATION EMAIL IS SENT TO THIS ADDRESS TO COMPLETE REGISTRATION!! **

Email Address:
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Marijuana laws, suppressor laws, and sanctuary cities apeters89 General Chit-Chat 34 05-17-2017 09:26 AM
Trump on Mexico City Policy TrailTamer XJ General Chit-Chat 26 01-26-2017 09:25 PM
While Protesting Guns Laws, Activist Breaks Gun Laws petro812 General Chit-Chat 10 08-06-2016 07:12 AM
McCain joins Obama in calling for review of 'Stand Your Ground' laws s14sh3r General Chit-Chat 42 07-23-2013 03:10 PM
Interesting SanDiegoCJ General Chit-Chat 3 07-22-2013 05:49 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.