2022 SCOTUS rulings

[BDKJMU]

BTW, on the issue of a right to abortion not being enumerated in the Constitution. The 9th Amendment does say:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

So the fact that a right is not specifically enumerated does not necessarily mean it's not a right. Rights are not limited to those specifically described.

But, to me, the argument that something is not a right because it is not specifically enumerated in the Constitution is a non-starter. Not a good argument.

Not only is it not enumerated, it isn’t a federally delegated power. 10th amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Friday was a victory for the Constitution, for life, and for states’ rights.

[BDKJMU]

Democrats gonna democrat..

[kalm]

So we don’t get our constitutional rights from our founders?

Wrong.

So we do get our constitutional rights from the founders?

[BDKJMU]

Wrong.

So we do get our constitutional rights from the founders?

Sorry, if you’re going to play dumb I can’t help you..

[UNI88]

The donks are showing how they are also the party of violence. Ever since the leaked draft there had been daily vandalism of pro life pregnancy centers around the country. Since Friday that has turned into a torrent, with numerous centers around the country vandalized with grafitti, smashed windows, and arson by donk extremists.

FYP

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

A man was charged with attempted murder after he was accused of shooting a makeshift flamethrower at an LAPD officer, who suffered burns in the attack. You can see it being shot from behind an umbrella in these videos. The “violent extremists” also threw fireworks at the police.

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/06 ... er-n584469

[kalm]

So we do get our constitutional rights from the founders?

Sorry, if you’re going to play dumb I can’t help you..

You said: Our rights come from our framers.

I think it’s fairly obvious that rights pre-exist the framers and the constitution itself.

[houndawg]

There never was a fundamental right to murder. Roe was all about the Left's penchant for legislating from the bench. For all their whining about "democracy," when those crazies don't get their way, they throw a hissy fit and legislate from the bench. They were called out on it, and now they're freaking out.

You know who was almost murdered in this fashion? Steph Curry. His mom recently shared her story about being raped and knocked up at age 11, and scheduling an appointment at that murder factory called Planned Parenthood (where it's been documented that they don't do any real planning, and they kick you out if you're not there for an abortion), and changing her mind. The sports world would be a whole lot different, right? Murder isn't a right, and it warps the mind. There are documented cases of women who have to go to counseling over the guilt of murdering their babies. It doesn't have to be that way. They whine and cry about rape, incest, and ectopic pregnancies, but then immediately morph that into a "right" to use whenever they want for any reason, and they irrationally claim the right to speak for all women in that regard. Their narrative is that the only people objecting to this murder are men, but not only is that not true, there are men trying to force it in, like that idiot Gavin Newsom. I'm sick of it.

https://www.liveaction.org/news/nba-ste ... orted-him/

How many unwanted kids have you fostered?

[JohnStOnge]

BTW, on the issue of a right to abortion not being enumerated in the Constitution. The 9th Amendment does say:



So the fact that a right is not specifically enumerated does not necessarily mean it's not a right. Rights are not limited to those specifically described.

But, to me, the argument that something is not a right because it is not specifically enumerated in the Constitution is a non-starter. Not a good argument.

Not only is it not enumerated, it isn’t a federally delegated power. 10th amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Friday was a victory for the Constitution, for life, and for states’ rights.

I think it's fine to say that, due to a right, government does not have a power. For instance: Suppose a State government made a law saying that everyone had to have their IQ tested and those that tested below 100 would be sterilized so they can't reproduce. i don't think there is anything in the Constitution that explicitly says a State government can't do that. I think it would be fine to say that people have a right to be free of that kind of incursion upon their personal lives and beings even thought THAT also is not explicitly stated in the Constitution. So the State does not have the power to do it because it would violate a fundamental human right.

I think the idea of saying that a woman has a right to control her own body is valid. For instance say she wants to have her sex organs removed so she can't have children. Her right to do that is not explicitly stated in the Constitution but I think it is consistent with the Constitution to say that. Having said that, it would be fine to say, based on the 14th Amendment, that no State can deny a woman that right. No State has that power in spite of the language you quoted from the 10th Amendment.

The problem with abortion is that there is more than one individual involved. There is the woman who has a right to do as she wishes with her own body and there is the unborn individual who has a right to continue their life.

[JohnStOnge]

Here's a good article on public opinion on abortion and the nuances: https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/73018353 ... strictions

The article notes that there is a great deal of complexity. But, still, there is no question that the distribution of opinion on this issue does not favor the Republicans and does not suggest that the public favors what just happened.

Look at the first graphic, for instance. Yes, there are nuances. But if you add it up, 51% of respondents said that they either favored the Roe vs. Wade status quo or they favored even more expansive abortion rights. Another 26% favored Roe vs. Wade with some modifications to restrict abortion to some extent.

Only 13% favored what just happened. And the Republicans are linked to what just happened.

The best news in the poll for Republicans is that Democrats did not put the abortion issue as high on the priority list as Republicans did. The question is whether that will change to some extent now that a "right" that has been taken for granted for nearly 50 years has been taken away.

[BDKJMU]

Not only is it not enumerated, it isn’t a federally delegated power. 10th amendment:


Friday was a victory for the Constitution, for life, and for states’ rights.

I think it's fine to say that, due to a right, government does not have a power. For instance: Suppose a State government made a law saying that everyone had to have their IQ tested and those that tested below 100 would be sterilized so they can't reproduce. i don't think there is anything in the Constitution that explicitly says a State government can't do that. I think it would be fine to say that people have a right to be free of that kind of incursion upon their personal lives and beings even thought THAT also is not explicitly stated in the Constitution. So the State does not have the power to do it because it would violate a fundamental human right.

I think the idea of saying that a woman has a right to control her own body is valid. For instance say she wants to have her sex organs removed so she can't have children. Her right to do that is not explicitly stated in the Constitution but I think it is consistent with the Constitution to say that. Having said that, it would be fine to say, based on the 14th Amendment, that no State can deny a woman that right. No State has that power in spite of the language you quoted from the 10th Amendment.

The problem with abortion is that there is more than one individual involved. There is the woman who has a right to do as she wishes with her own body and there is the unborn individual who has a right to continue their life.

Boy I bet you would like that one..

[BDKJMU]

Here's a good article on public opinion on abortion and the nuances: https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/73018353 ... strictions

The article notes that there is a great deal of complexity. But, still, there is no question that the distribution of opinion on this issue does not favor the Republicans and does not suggest that the public favors what just happened.

Look at the first graphic, for instance. Yes, there are nuances. But if you add it up, 51% of respondents said that they either favored the Roe vs. Wade status quo or they favored even more expansive abortion rights. Another 26% favored Roe vs. Wade with some modifications to restrict abortion to some extent.

Only 13% favored what just happened. And the Republicans are linked to what just happened.

The best news in the poll for Republicans is that Democrats did not put the abortion issue as high on the priority list as Republicans did. The question is whether that will change to some extent now that a "right" that has been taken for granted for nearly 50 years has been taken away.

You’re still going to be twitching on late on Nov 8, because this decison isn’t going to stop the red tsunami..

[kalm]

Here's a good article on public opinion on abortion and the nuances: https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/73018353 ... strictions

The article notes that there is a great deal of complexity. But, still, there is no question that the distribution of opinion on this issue does not favor the Republicans and does not suggest that the public favors what just happened.

Look at the first graphic, for instance. Yes, there are nuances. But if you add it up, 51% of respondents said that they either favored the Roe vs. Wade status quo or they favored even more expansive abortion rights. Another 26% favored Roe vs. Wade with some modifications to restrict abortion to some extent.

Only 13% favored what just happened. And the Republicans are linked to what just happened.

The best news in the poll for Republicans is that Democrats did not put the abortion issue as high on the priority list as Republicans did. The question is whether that will change to some extent now that a "right" that has been taken for granted for nearly 50 years has been taken away.

Something tells me this mid-term May buck the trend due to several other issues like this one, starting with the chaotic nature of rapid change crisis periods.

What’s hard to pin down is whether the Republican brand drives voters and which way.

[JohnStOnge]

Here's a good article on public opinion on abortion and the nuances: https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/73018353 ... strictions

The article notes that there is a great deal of complexity. But, still, there is no question that the distribution of opinion on this issue does not favor the Republicans and does not suggest that the public favors what just happened.

Look at the first graphic, for instance. Yes, there are nuances. But if you add it up, 51% of respondents said that they either favored the Roe vs. Wade status quo or they favored even more expansive abortion rights. Another 26% favored Roe vs. Wade with some modifications to restrict abortion to some extent.

Only 13% favored what just happened. And the Republicans are linked to what just happened.

The best news in the poll for Republicans is that Democrats did not put the abortion issue as high on the priority list as Republicans did. The question is whether that will change to some extent now that a "right" that has been taken for granted for nearly 50 years has been taken away.

You’re still going to be twitching on late on Nov 8, because this decison isn’t going to stop the red tsunami..

I am not optimistic about 2022 but I remain optimistic about the long term. It is clear that the culture is evolving in a way that is hostile to the Republican Party as it is currently manifested. Republicans can delay things with laws to repress voting, try to control election counting, etc. But at some point the dam will break. In the end the Republican Party will either change the basic nature it has now or it will be consigned to irrelevancy.

[JohnStOnge]

Here's a good article on public opinion on abortion and the nuances: https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/73018353 ... strictions

The article notes that there is a great deal of complexity. But, still, there is no question that the distribution of opinion on this issue does not favor the Republicans and does not suggest that the public favors what just happened.

Look at the first graphic, for instance. Yes, there are nuances. But if you add it up, 51% of respondents said that they either favored the Roe vs. Wade status quo or they favored even more expansive abortion rights. Another 26% favored Roe vs. Wade with some modifications to restrict abortion to some extent.

Only 13% favored what just happened. And the Republicans are linked to what just happened.

The best news in the poll for Republicans is that Democrats did not put the abortion issue as high on the priority list as Republicans did. The question is whether that will change to some extent now that a "right" that has been taken for granted for nearly 50 years has been taken away.

Something tells me this mid-term May buck the trend due to several other issues like this one, starting with the chaotic nature of rapid change crisis periods.

What’s hard to pin down is whether the Republican brand drives voters and which way.

The big problem is that we have inflation in general and high gasoline prices in particular. This is not due to Biden and the Democrats. But most of the public thinks that it is. That's the way it works. And that's what makes 2022 so difficult.

It's unfortunate because this country really needs to get rid of the Republican Party as a significant factor as soon as possible in order to make progress. But it is what it is.

[JohnStOnge]

I think it's fine to say that, due to a right, government does not have a power. For instance: Suppose a State government made a law saying that everyone had to have their IQ tested and those that tested below 100 would be sterilized so they can't reproduce. i don't think there is anything in the Constitution that explicitly says a State government can't do that. I think it would be fine to say that people have a right to be free of that kind of incursion upon their personal lives and beings even thought THAT also is not explicitly stated in the Constitution. So the State does not have the power to do it because it would violate a fundamental human right.

I think the idea of saying that a woman has a right to control her own body is valid. For instance say she wants to have her sex organs removed so she can't have children. Her right to do that is not explicitly stated in the Constitution but I think it is consistent with the Constitution to say that. Having said that, it would be fine to say, based on the 14th Amendment, that no State can deny a woman that right. No State has that power in spite of the language you quoted from the 10th Amendment.

The problem with abortion is that there is more than one individual involved. There is the woman who has a right to do as she wishes with her own body and there is the unborn individual who has a right to continue their life.

Boy I bet you would like that one..

I will admit that I would be extremely tempted to say that people would have to take an IQ test in order to vote and could only vote if they scored at least 1 standard deviation above the mean. I think if we did that the Republican Party as it is now would become pretty much irrelevant. The country really needs for that to happen so I would be REALLY tempted.

But, no, I wouldn't do it in spite of the fact that it would be really good for the country as a practical matter. The end would not justify the means.

[93henfan]

I would be OK with IQ testing if we could also make people with TDS (or whose wives with TDS murdered them and assumed their social media accounts) ineligible to vote as well.

[Baldy]

I have never liked Roe vs.Wade so that's good. I am hoping we get a real bonus from this in that it hurts the Republican Party politically. I think that we've gone along for many years where the "pro choice" majority just kind of assumed it didn't have to worry while the "pro life" minority was very energized. Now there has been a significant change that will hopefully energize anti-Republican sentiment.

Here is a discussion of the distribution of opinion from Pew Research: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... t-cases-2/

Today, a 61% majority of U.S. adults say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 37% think abortion should be illegal in all or most cases.

What's really great is that there are suggestions of State by State problems for Republicans with this issue. See https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/re ... /by/state/. Not all the differences are "significant" but, point estimate wise, there are 32 States where the percent of people saying they abortion should be legal in all or most cases is greater than the percent saying abortion should be illegal in all or most cases vs. 17 States where more respondents said abortion should be illegal in most or all cases.

Florida is a big one. 56% of Florida respondents said abortion should be legal in most or all cases while only 39% said it should be illegal in most or all cases. That is a statistically significant difference. Obviously, Florida is a close State. It flips back and forth. Even a small effect of that distribution of public opinion could really help the Democrats.

Other notable States where more respondents said they favor abortion being legal in most or all cases are Ohio, North Carolina, Iowa, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. In New Hampshire, the "legal in most or all cases" side has a 66% to 29% edge.

While I can't see them going Democrat in the foreseeable future, the "legal in most or all cases" side even has the edge in Alaska, Montana, Nebraska, and Oklahoma.

This issue has now moved into the direct political realm and it is just not a good issue for Republicans. I'd be surprised if it makes a determinative difference in the 2022 mid terms with all the other stuff going on. But I don't think it is going to go away. I think it's reasonable to hope that this is a "dog catches car" moment for the Republicans.

Lol...you might be right. They turned out by the tens to protest in Georgia.

[AZGrizFan]

Boy I bet you would like that one..

I will admit that I would be extremely tempted to say that people would have to take an IQ test in order to vote and could only vote if they scored at least 1 standard deviation above the mean. I think if we did that the Republican Party as it is now would become pretty much irrelevant. The country really needs for that to happen so I would be REALLY tempted.

But, no, I wouldn't do it in spite of the fact that it would be really good for the country as a practical matter. The end would not justify the means.

Yes. The party of voters who think men can menstruate, men can get pregnant, thinks children as young as 3 can “choose” their sexual identity and that we should be providing puberty blockers to aid them in their “transition, the party of voters that thinks COVID is a death sentence and masks work, thinks the civil war was fought in the 1960’s, thinks black people don’t have cell phones or internet, THOSE folks are going to fucking ACE an IQ test, I’m just positive of it.

[Baldy]

I will admit that I would be extremely tempted to say that people would have to take an IQ test in order to vote and could only vote if they scored at least 1 standard deviation above the mean. I think if we did that the Republican Party as it is now would become pretty much irrelevant. The country really needs for that to happen so I would be REALLY tempted.

But, no, I wouldn't do it in spite of the fact that it would be really good for the country as a practical matter. The end would not justify the means.

Yes. The party of voters who think men can menstruate, men can get pregnant, thinks children as young as 3 can “choose” their sexual identity and that we should be providing puberty blockers to aid them in their “transition, the party of voters that thinks COVID is a death sentence and masks work, thinks the civil war was fought in the 1960’s, thinks black people don’t have cell phones or internet, THOSE folks are going to fucking ACE an IQ test, I’m just positive of it.

[SDHornet]

Go fuck yourself you cheese eating surrender monkey.

Fun fact, France has stricter abortion laws than the strictest state proposed "abortion bans" so far.

[SDHornet]

And by a black and female Judges to boot.

[SDHornet]

I have never liked Roe vs.Wade so that's good. I am hoping we get a real bonus from this in that it hurts the Republican Party politically. I think that we've gone along for many years where the "pro choice" majority just kind of assumed it didn't have to worry while the "pro life" minority was very energized. Now there has been a significant change that will hopefully energize anti-Republican sentiment.

Here is a discussion of the distribution of opinion from Pew Research: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... t-cases-2/

Today, a 61% majority of U.S. adults say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 37% think abortion should be illegal in all or most cases.

What's really great is that there are suggestions of State by State problems for Republicans with this issue. See https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/re ... /by/state/. Not all the differences are "significant" but, point estimate wise, there are 32 States where the percent of people saying they abortion should be legal in all or most cases is greater than the percent saying abortion should be illegal in all or most cases vs. 17 States where more respondents said abortion should be illegal in most or all cases.

Florida is a big one. 56% of Florida respondents said abortion should be legal in most or all cases while only 39% said it should be illegal in most or all cases. That is a statistically significant difference. Obviously, Florida is a close State. It flips back and forth. Even a small effect of that distribution of public opinion could really help the Democrats.

Other notable States where more respondents said they favor abortion being legal in most or all cases are Ohio, North Carolina, Iowa, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. In New Hampshire, the "legal in most or all cases" side has a 66% to 29% edge.

While I can't see them going Democrat in the foreseeable future, the "legal in most or all cases" side even has the edge in Alaska, Montana, Nebraska, and Oklahoma.

This issue has now moved into the direct political realm and it is just not a good issue for Republicans. I'd be surprised if it makes a determinative difference in the 2022 mid terms with all the other stuff going on. But I don't think it is going to go away. I think it's reasonable to hope that this is a "dog catches car" moment for the Republicans.

Nope. Thanks to science (mainly ultrasounds) the general populace has shifted away from the "abortion on demand" mentality. Polling shows this, so you of all people should know better than to post this drivel.

[SDHornet]

Here is a discussion of the distribution of opinion from Pew Research: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... t-cases-2/



What's really great is that there are suggestions of State by State problems for Republicans with this issue. See https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/re ... /by/state/. Not all the differences are "significant" but, point estimate wise, there are 32 States where the percent of people saying they abortion should be legal in all or most cases is greater than the percent saying abortion should be illegal in all or most cases vs. 17 States where more respondents said abortion should be illegal in most or all cases.

Florida is a big one. 56% of Florida respondents said abortion should be legal in most or all cases while only 39% said it should be illegal in most or all cases. That is a statistically significant difference. Obviously, Florida is a close State. It flips back and forth. Even a small effect of that distribution of public opinion could really help the Democrats.

Other notable States where more respondents said they favor abortion being legal in most or all cases are Ohio, North Carolina, Iowa, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. In New Hampshire, the "legal in most or all cases" side has a 66% to 29% edge.

While I can't see them going Democrat in the foreseeable future, the "legal in most or all cases" side even has the edge in Alaska, Montana, Nebraska, and Oklahoma.

This issue has now moved into the direct political realm and it is just not a good issue for Republicans. I'd be surprised if it makes a determinative difference in the 2022 mid terms with all the other stuff going on. But I don't think it is going to go away. I think it's reasonable to hope that this is a "dog catches car" moment for the Republicans.

This polling data is meaningless because it asks a far too generic question. Notably, there is no time reference within these questions -- which distorts the results.

It is true that a majority of Americans believe that abortion should be legal in most cases. But a majority of Americans (57%) favors laws barring abortions after 15 weeks. And the support for abortions after viability, unless to save the life of the mother, polls at under 20 percent.

When you put the polling data all together, a majority of Americans believe that abortions after 15 weeks should be illegal in almost all cases, but legal before that point.

This is not a good issue for Democrats, because they favor extreme abortion laws disfavored by Americans. Moreover, it is a disastrous issue for them nationwide, as a clear majority of states would limit abortions at least after 15 weeks. The Democratic position makes it nearly impossible for the party ever to form a significant enough majority in the Senate.

It gets even juicier when you look at abortion by race. The majority of team black is not a fan...which makes sense when you look at the original folks pushing abortion back in the day.

[SDHornet]

There never was a fundamental right to murder. Roe was all about the Left's penchant for legislating from the bench. For all their whining about "democracy," when those crazies don't get their way, they throw a hissy fit and legislate from the bench. They were called out on it, and now they're freaking out.

You know who was almost murdered in this fashion? Steph Curry. His mom recently shared her story about being raped and knocked up at age 11, and scheduling an appointment at that murder factory called Planned Parenthood (where it's been documented that they don't do any real planning, and they kick you out if you're not there for an abortion), and changing her mind. The sports world would be a whole lot different, right? Murder isn't a right, and it warps the mind. There are documented cases of women who have to go to counseling over the guilt of murdering their babies. It doesn't have to be that way. They whine and cry about rape, incest, and ectopic pregnancies, but then immediately morph that into a "right" to use whenever they want for any reason, and they irrationally claim the right to speak for all women in that regard. Their narrative is that the only people objecting to this murder are men, but not only is that not true, there are men trying to force it in, like that idiot Gavin Newsom. I'm sick of it.

https://www.liveaction.org/news/nba-ste ... orted-him/

How many unwanted kids have you fostered?

Cry more, shitlib.