What's new
By:

Roe v. Wade is going down

Interesting look at the core argument.

 
The Thriller said:
Is this really the type of society we want to live in?


View: https://twitter.com/jilldlawrence/status/1544463600366096388?s=21&t=pPsEMQviOFPUdBaUL_JGwQ
Click to expand...

Honest question: How is a ban on interstate travel for pregnant women any different from red flag laws that infringe on the right to keep and bear arms?

The right to travel and the right to bear arms are both enshrined in the constitution. Circumventing such restrictions can allow those who intend to kill innocents to carry out their plans. What is the difference?
 
Al-O-Meter said:
Honest question: How is a ban on interstate travel for pregnant women any different from red flag laws that infringe on the right to keep and bear arms?

The right to travel and the right to bear arms are both enshrined in the constitution. Circumventing such restrictions can allow those who intend to kill innocents to carry out their plans. What is the difference?
Click to expand...
Are pregnant women are just like mentally unstable people threatening violence, to you?
 
One Brow said:
Are pregnant women are just like mentally unstable people threatening violence, to you?
Click to expand...
If your question is "do they both pose a threat to human life" then the answer is yes but my feelings are irrelevant to the question being asked. Both are clear infringements to constitutional rights. Why is one infringement acceptable when the other is not?
 
Al-O-Meter said:
If your question is "do they both pose a threat to human life" then the answer is yes
Click to expand...
Pregnant women are a threat to human life?

Al-O-Meter said:
Why is one infringement acceptable when the other is not?
Click to expand...
If you are in a state where marijuana is illegal, you are permitted to travel to a state where it's legal. No laws will have been broken. The same is true of women planning an abortion (which you likely intended to imply, but did not say). By contrast, I'm not aware of any state where it's legal to shoot people.

After all, you're a big believer in the law. This is a republic, right? You can't stop a person traveling to perform an act that is legal in the location to which that person travels.
 
One Brow said:
After all, you're a big believer in the law. This is a republic, right? You can't stop a person traveling to perform an act that is legal in the location to which that person travels.
Click to expand...
I'm against any such travel restrictions but I also am highly suspicious of red flag laws that infringe on a constitutional right without first there being some sort of hearing where one is allowed to defend themselves. I even believe such a hearing would be a natural point for getting mental health help to some disturbed people. I hold the libertarian position on both issues but I'm asking those who favor one while at the same time opposing the other.
 
Al-O-Meter said:
I'm against any such travel restrictions but I also am highly suspicious of red flag laws that infringe on a constitutional right without first there being some sort of hearing where one is allowed to defend themselves. I even believe such a hearing would be a natural point for getting mental health help to some disturbed people. I hold the libertarian position on both issues but I'm asking those who favor one while at the same time opposing the other.
Click to expand...
You also have a right to go to any public space, but someone can get a restraining order on you (via a judge) to keep from the front of their house without you being present. You then have the opportunity to challenge that order. If red flag laws work the same way (and I would be surprised if they do not), I don't have a problem with that. Are there any red flag laws that don't involve using judges? I have not researched them.
 
One Brow said:
You also have a right to go to any public space, but someone can get a restraining order on you (via a judge) to keep from the front of their house without you being present. You then have the opportunity to challenge that order. If red flag laws work the same way (and I would be surprised if they do not), I don't have a problem with that. Are there any red flag laws that don't involve using judges? I have not researched them.
Click to expand...
The downside to a red flag law (especially for mental health issues) is it could discourage people with mental health issues that own or desire to own firearms to seek help.

Some states already require this, but it isn't a perfect approach. At the same time, when the Supreme Court is essentially whittling away the federal right to privacy, one can't reasonably go and argue out the other side of your mouth that your social media accounts, mental health, etc., is subject to a right of privacy that may not exist federally.

A few of the states red flags can be denied by a sheriff, but there is legal recourse, but it can be timely and expensive, and the process varies if it was denied at the state level (mental health or local domestic violence, etc.) or at the NICS/FBI level.
 
There is another way to detect people who, likely because of some sort of mental health issue, are the most likely to use a gun too cause harm.

Remove gun rights from anyone who is convicted of cruelty to animals and any violent crime of any sort. Any domestic violence or abuse. Any sort of assault and battery. Anything at all that is an expression of a tendency to commit criminal violence.

Allow people to petition to have their gun rights restored but make it strict. Part of the process for having gun rights restored is a mental health evaluation as well as an extensive background check. Automatic removal of gun rights if any new criminal violence is even charged.

This would have stopped the vast majority of not just school/mass shooters from obtaining guns legally but would prevent the vast majority of people who commit all types of gun crimes from legal access to guns.

Red Flag laws are laughably ineffective.
 
So, this is a disturbing story. A ten year old girl was raped in Ohio and got pregnant. Because Ohio doesn't include an exemption for rape in their anti abortion law, a doctor recommended the girl travel to another state for the abortion.

Predictably the right wing media latched onto this story casting doubt into its legitimacy, claiming it was made up because of course their policies could never result in any negative consequences.

Today a man was charged in the girls rape, and again predictably the narrative changed because he is an illegal immigrant and this became a "border control" issue in these right wing circles.

But as if that is not enough, now the republican AG in indiana wants to "look into" the doctor who provided the abortion even though it is legal in that state!
 
Last edited:
Pro life!


View: https://twitter.com/patriottakes/status/1548294384663220229?s=21&t=We60HWq7majzSfiP0nEVnQ



View: https://twitter.com/acyn/status/1547367841539756038?s=21&t=We60HWq7majzSfiP0nEVnQ



View: https://twitter.com/angryblacklady/status/1547371987768451073?s=21&t=We60HWq7majzSfiP0nEVnQ


I love this one. They had 50 years to figure out how to support “life” and now that Roe is gone, why start now? It’s almost like… Life had nothing to do with their concerns. It’s almost like… it was always about control. They just couldn’t let their political enemies have “one” on them.

View: https://twitter.com/arthurdelaneyhp/status/1547226942516101120?s=21&t=We60HWq7majzSfiP0nEVnQ
 
They’re saying the quiet part out loud… gay marriage is soon going to follow the path of abortion. Red states will outlaw it and criminalize certain sexual acts (many are still on the books) while blue states will look to become sanctions of the LGBT community. But the quiet part is being spoken out loud because these folks know they have an activist court writing laws they couldn’t otherwise pass through the legislative branch


View: https://twitter.com/reallyamerican1/status/1548364481587060737?s=21&t=We60HWq7majzSfiP0nEVnQ
 
Zombie said:
So, this is a disturbing story. A ten year old girl was raped in Ohio and got pregnant. Because Ohio doesn't include an exemption for rape in their anti abortion law, a doctor recommended the girl travel to another state for the abortion.

Predictably the right wing media latched onto this story casting doubt into its legitimacy, claiming it was made up because of course their policies could never result in any negative consequences.

Today a man was charged in the girls rape, and again predictably the narrative changed because he is an illegal immigrant and this became a "border control" issue in these right wing circles.

But as if that is not enough, now the republican AG in indiana wants to "look into" the doctor who provided the abortion even though it is legal in that state!
Click to expand...
Pro life!

And as soon as they get power, they’re going to institute an abortion ban on all states.

This is what’s at stake in 2022. A vote for a Republican Congress is a vote for a Republican president in 2024 no matter what the actual election results are. Which will mean an abortion ban come 2025 if/when Republicans control the 3 branches of government.

Is this really the society we want?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Thriller said:
Is this really the society we want to live in? Talk about small conservative government…
Click to expand...
The #1 requester of geofence Google user data is California. Florida and Texas combined do not match California despite Florida and Texas combined having 25% more people living there. Six of the top Eight geofense Google requesters are abortion legal states that voted for Biden in the 2020 election. If this sort of police state big brother stuff worries you then vote the opposite of how California would vote.

geofence.gif
 
Al-O-Meter said:
The #1 requester of geofence Google user data is California. Florida and Texas combined do not match California despite Florida and Texas combined having 25% more people living there. Six of the top Eight geofense Google requesters are abortion legal states that voted for Biden in the 2020 election. If this sort of police state big brother stuff worries you then vote the opposite of how California would vote.

geofence.gif
Click to expand...
@The Thriller with more scare tactics and misinformation. Just waiting for one brow to come rushing to his defense.

From the article:
“Google doesn’t specify what alleged crimes these warrants concerned, and no known cases have come to light yet of geofence warrants being used to prosecute abortions.”
 
Bucknutz said:
@The Thriller with more scare tactics and misinformation. Just waiting for one brow to come rushing to his defense.

From the article:
“Google doesn’t specify what alleged crimes these warrants concerned, and no known cases have come to light yet of geofence warrants being used to prosecute abortions.”
Click to expand...

Funny thing is that of all the things thriller posted, this one concerned me the least. Not much of a scare tactic for me as i have never cared if my location is tracked.

Now, wanting the death penalty for someone who gets an abortion, that seems like a big deal to me.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app
 
fishonjazz said:
Funny thing is that of all the things thriller posted, this one concerned me the least. Not much of a scare tactic for me as i have never cared if my location is tracked.

Now, wanting the death penalty for someone who gets an abortion, that seems like a big deal to me.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

A 18 month old bill that went absolutely nowhere. Some left wing twitter nut posted online trying to scare people. Nothing has been done on this for a year, only being withdrawn from the committee.

You can make a case that Mark Brody and Larry Pitman should be voted out for writing a bill that has some terrible views on abortion.

House Bill 158 (2021-2022 Session) - North Carolina General Assembly

www.ncleg.gov www.ncleg.gov

I bet most people don’t do any research and just drop twitter post trying to scare people.
 
Bucknutz said:
A 18 month old bill that went absolutely nowhere. Some left wing twitter nut posted online trying to scare people. Nothing has been done on this for a year, only being withdrawn from the committee.

You can make a case that Mark Brody and Larry Pitman should be voted out for writing a bill that has some terrible views on abortion.

House Bill 158 (2021-2022 Session) - North Carolina General Assembly

www.ncleg.gov www.ncleg.gov

I bet most people don’t do any research and just drop twitter post trying to scare people.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately it is very common to just post for the headline as that's about as far as most people go into the story when cruising facebook or whatever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top