Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7190
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 29 Jun 2022, 6:02 am

Aug 14 to Sep 4 in Sturbridge MA
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4946
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 30 Jun 2022, 5:50 am

bbauska wrote:Aug 14 to Sep 4 in Sturbridge MA


For some reason I cannot private message you. I would enjoy coming out for a visit; I'm just about 70 minutes away. Steve also lives in the area and he can join us too.

Let me know. My email is montej29 AT comcast.net.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11282
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 04 Jul 2022, 11:21 am

bbauska
You want loaded language? The responsibility results in a baby. It should not be killed. even if it is a "Fetus".


There apparently is a 10 year old girl in North Dakota who is pregnant.

The State of North Dakota, under their current abortion ban, will force her to give birth.
Bbauska Do you agree with the State of North Dakota?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 14839.html
he 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.
What I find interesting about the SCOTUS on roe v wade is that the 10th amendment says

" 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."

Scotus clearly chose the States had a right to make a law about an individuals body. Their health. Their autonomy.
They could have chosen to have the right be reserved for the people. In which case it would clearly be the prerogative of women to choose what they do medically.
But no... Scotus saw that the State governments should be able to control women's bodies...

Land of the free?
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7190
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 04 Jul 2022, 1:59 pm

First off...

I want the child molester put in prison and chemically neutered. I don't care if it is family.

Secondly...
It is still legal in ND to get an abortion, as it is under legal review.

Thirdly...
Why would anyone travel to Indiana to get an abortion when Minnesota is closer and MUCH more liberal.

My opinion concerning ND is that ANY State can make the rules regarding abortion. I think if you do not want to be under those rules, then move. When it comes to rape/molestation and life of the mother issues, I am divided. I am willing to allow the termination of the fetus/baby/clump of human tissue/cells if a police report was filed within 7 days. If the physical life of the mother is determined to be in grave danger from a REAL medical doctor then it should be allowed. This seems to be a "gotcha" moment against Noem. Is there any information as to the father/rapist is? Is there a reason they did not travel a closer distance?

Perhaps Canada would open it's border for such a national emergency. I hear medical is "free" there...
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 04 Jul 2022, 3:06 pm

You need really clear lines with these things.. What constitutes a threat to the life of the mother? The definition should be clear. Doctors need to be immunized from civil/criminal liability if they ok an abortion.

There should be firm limits to the State investigating to verify if a woman's life is in danger. If a doctor say it's ok that's it. If a doctor is not acting on good faith then take disciplinary action against his license. Not any action against the mother.. Otherwise, give doctors power to make immediate decisions without fear of negative consequences.

Otherwise, women will needlessly die due to delays in treatment. It's already happened.

Of course, I strongly disagree with the State trampling on a woman's autonomy to make reproductive decisions but at least let's not make it worse.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7190
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 04 Jul 2022, 6:07 pm

That is the great thing of the repeal of Roe v Wade. The states can make their own decisions on what is allowed, and what is not. The medical profession (which is state regulated) would have the regulations setting it forth from the state for requirements.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11282
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 05 Jul 2022, 7:36 am

bbauska
That is the great thing of the repeal of Roe v Wade


Women in states now have unequal rights. Not just unequal access to abortion but in some states they no longer have bodily autonomy.

How did that work regarding the institution of slavery?
Fact is, that we are about to have a repeat of the slave catcher laws, where states will seek to punish women who go out of state to seek an abortion.
I

bbauska
The states can make their own decisions on what is allowed


And these states have decided that they can control women's bodies. Women are no longer free to make their own medical decisions according to these State governments.

Your solution is to that women who become pregnant unwillingly, then have to become refugees to seek treatment?

This is indeed a "gotcha moment" for Noem. Her answer was that the 10 year old would have to give birth in North Dakota.

If it doesn't strike one as horrific that a 10 year old rape victim should be further victimized by a legal system that forces her to endure a pregnancy and child birth before she is 11.....


bbauska
First off...
I want the child molester put in prison and chemically neutered. I don't care if it is family


The very definition of non-sequitur. Lets talk about something other than the effect of the law on the victim.
Just to be clear, once the child is pregnant - its the law in North Dakota forcing her to give birth. Nothing else. Women always complain that rape laws and their prosecution further victimize the woman. Same with banning abortiion.


bbauska
I hear medical is "free" there.


You're hearing wrong.
On the other hand women are free to make their own decisions... So maybe that's where you heard the word free.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7190
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 05 Jul 2022, 10:11 am

RickyP,

Men are under the same abortion laws as women. After all, Men and Women are the same. At least that is what I have heard from you. Men are no more allowed to get different treatment than women. Please show me a state that a man can get an abortion where a woman is not allowed. That would be proof of your argument.

Women can make decision as to their medical choices. Just go to a state (or country) that allows it for both men and women.

As to the non-sequiter... I was asked what I thought. It is just that. I want predators removed from society, and neutered.

When I wrote about Canadian Health Care... Your computer might not show the quotes around the word free. It's sarcasm. Now for the questions that I had that was not answered by you:

Who molested the 10 year old?
Why did the 10 year old travel to Ohio/Indiana when Minnesota is much closer?
ND still allows abortion, yes?

Care to answer those and admit that you just want the states to be subject to the Federal government. Since you brought up the slave laws, shouldn't the states have followed the laws concerning slavery in the 1780-1863 timeframe since that was the Federal stance? Why were Northern States allowed to instill laws prohibiting slavery if the Federal law stated otherwise?

Both Abortion and Slavery are similar in that they both were fought by states before being Federally outlawed.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11282
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 05 Jul 2022, 11:46 am

bbauska
Men are under the same abortion laws as women.


You are being deliberately obtuse. You know that I'm comparing the rights of a woman in North Dakota with one in say, Massachusetts.

bbauska
Women can make decision as to their medical choices. Just go to a state (or country) that allows it for both men and women


Sure. So being an American citizen means your basic rights will vary depending on where you reside.

When they said "The Confederacy will rise again", I guess they were right.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7190
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 05 Jul 2022, 3:34 pm

You just will not answer a question, will you?

As Jesus said in Matthew 21:27 when the Pharisees would not answer His questions:
And Jesus responded, “Then I won’t tell you by what authority I do these things.

Now I am certainly not saying I am Jesus. I am saying that having a one-sided discussion with someone who will not answer questions is unequal and unfair.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7190
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 05 Jul 2022, 3:36 pm

Please quote the amendment where abortion is allowed.

Add that to the questions, if you will.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11282
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 06 Jul 2022, 12:41 pm

Roe V Wade hinged on the notion that there is an implied right to privacy in the 14th amendment. And that the 10th amendment ensured that people had this right.

Below is from a fellow named Stephen haddock

The Tenth
“The powers not delegated to the United States [i.e. the federal government] by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


In this case, as they did prior to the U.S. Civil War, the court ruled in favour of states and against both the federal government and people.

Going back to what’s now the second worst decision in the court’s history, Dred Scott, there was a federal law that prohibited slavery in territories north of the northern border of Missouri. Southern states didn’t like this law, but agreed to it because you couldn’t grow cotton in much of the territory north of that latitude in any case. Texas actually ceded territory to the federal government when it became a state to prevent it from being free territory (it’s now the Oklahoma panhandle).

So, when Dred Scott sued for freedom by claiming that he was in free territory for years, the court essentially did the same thing it did in Dobbs - ignored the rights of human beings in favour of authoritarian laws.

And let’s face it - these new abortion laws can’t work unless there’s cooperation from the Federal government and the states where abortion is still legal. When the issue was slavery, cooperation from states which outlawed slavery was weak or outright hostile. One slave recaptured in Chicago found that both law enforcement and the city and a good chunk of the population were dead set against sending him back into slavery.


He's right. What SCOTUS has done is ignore the right to privacy and said that States Rights were more important than personal rights.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7190
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 06 Jul 2022, 2:15 pm

Noted your lack of answers on the other issues.

Constitutionally, your opinion that the Supreme Court took in Roe v Wade was based upon the implied right to privacy in the 14th Amendment.

Also note, that just like Dred Scott, this faulty law was rescinded.

Good start.. Let me know when you have an answer to the other 3...
Who molested the 10 year old?
Why did the 10 year old travel to Ohio/Indiana when Minnesota is much closer?
ND still allows abortion, yes?
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7190
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 06 Jul 2022, 2:52 pm

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1544426366837342208.html
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11282
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 08 Jul 2022, 7:02 am

Who molested the 10 year old?

A relative. Does that make any difference? The application of the law as written in North Dakota will still force a 10 year old to give birth.
And then the baby will be taken away, because she is too young to raise it.. (If she survives, the mother that is...)


Why did the 10 year old travel to Ohio/Indiana when Minnesota is much closer?

Why does this matter?
Why should a 10 year old have to leave her home to travel in order to avoid having to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term?
What happens if socalled prolife (antichoice) people get their way in all 50 States.


ND still allows abortion, yes?

The ND law bans abortion after 6 weeks. (Most women don't even know they are pregnant at 6 weeks).
The 10 year old was past the 6 weeks...

bbauska
Also note, that just like Dred Scott, this faulty law was rescinded


And yet the current Scotus uses the same faulty line of reasoning to justify their decision on Roe v Wade... States rights (and the laws written by States) trumped personal rights not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.