Supreme Court strikes down Louisiana law that would have limited state to one abortion clinic

#101
#101
Weezer said:
Not a comment on this case, though I'm sure it will be taken that way, but if we're going to go down this road, why not mandate condoms be worn by all non-married couples? Same argument of saving lives could easily be applied. How much are we willing to let the government dictate in the name of "saving lives"?
Click to expand...
Next thing you know, they’ll do something really crazy, like mandate seatbelts or say you can’t drink and drive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: titansvolsfaninga
#105
#105
Roustabout said:
What you are describing is wearing a mask to prevent being contaminated. What if you are using the mask to prevent spread from yourself if you are an undiagnosed asymptomatic? I wear a mask if I'm in places that are confined with no airflow because if I have it, I'm breathing into the air unknowingly. The mask should mitigate travel.

The idiots I keep seeing in their cars by themselves with the windows down, wearing a mask.
Click to expand...
Did you know that some people wear masks because of allergies too?
 
#107
#107
We could mandate a lot of things in the name of saving lives. Seems like some of you are perfectly okay with letting that happen, without question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#108
#108
Septic said:
My proposed scenario? No, friend - it's the scenario Tennessee is dealing with right now.

While I'm glad you see the flaw in the law - your pro life brethren do not. Until then, it's not remotely "fair" to tell a woman she must bear the child of a rapist. It's outrageous and until you can get your house in order, don't get too comfortable while pointing at other peoples arguments and calling them "terrible".
Click to expand...
So is it "my body my choice" or is it "rape is bad"?

Seems like your side is also not consistent in the base of their argument. Which again you are at best setting the argument for at most 15% of abortions being ok. But that's not what we hear.

And let's ask the baby about "fair". Not really sure that's an argument you want to stand on.

What's got you in a tizzy with TN evangelicals? I dont think the rape thing is a new part of the argument.
 
#113
#113
tvolsfan said:
And it sounds to me like some have turned their brains off because one guy is afraid wearing a mask during a pandemic may make him look “weak.”
Click to expand...
Why do you jump to the conclusion my feelings on masks have anything to do with Trump? I can assure you they do not. Not all of us are playing this Trump/anti-Trump game that seems to fuel opinions on this board. My opinion is more about government overreach.

And I've noticed people on both sides acting like they've had their brains turned off. It's not unique to die hard Trumpers. It's also prevalent in die hard anti-Trumpers. People need to find a better basis for argument than what Donald Trump thinks.
 
#114
#114
Weezer said:
Why do you jump to the conclusion my feelings on masks have anything to do with Trump? I can assure you they do not. Not all of us are playing this Trump/anti-Trump game that seems to fuel opinions on this board. My opinion is more about government overreach.

And I've noticed people on both sides acting like they've had their brains turned off. It's not unique to die hard Trumpers. It's also prevalent in die hard anti-Trumpers. People need to find a better basis for argument than what Donald Trump thinks.
Click to expand...
So again, how do you feel about laws banning drinking and driving? How about speed limits? Tyranny?
 
#116
#116
tvolsfan said:
So again, how do you feel about laws banning drinking and driving? How about speed limits? Tyranny?
Click to expand...
All for banning drinking and driving. I don't see that as overreach. Requiring masks when their effectiveness is highly questionable is a different issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#117
#117
AirVol said:
What are babbling about? Yeah, and Obama didn’t spy on Trump lol. Trust me, he isn’t as great as you think he is.
Click to expand...

I don't particularly care for him, but I do enjoy watching your Jimmy's get rustled every time he's mentioned. It must be grating that at his worst he was still as popular as Trump at his best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: titansvolsfaninga
#119
#119
LouderVol said:
So is it "my body my choice" or is it "rape is bad"?

Seems like your side is also not consistent in the base of their argument. Which again you are at best setting the argument for at most 15% of abortions being ok. But that's not what we hear.

And let's ask the baby about "fair". Not really sure that's an argument you want to stand on.

What's got you in a tizzy with TN evangelicals? I dont think the rape thing is a new part of the argument.
Click to expand...

Yes.
 
#120
#120
Thomas tears into Abortion Precedent, says Roe v. Wade should FALL in dissent on Louisiana case

Thomas called Roe v. Wade 'farcical,' the court's reasoning for calling abortion a right 'amorphous' and its abortion jurisprudence 'grievously wrong'

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas filed a blistering opinion dissenting from a Monday decision to strike down a Louisiana law that required abortion doctors to obtain admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, calling the court's record on abortion "grievously wrong."

The pitched dissent made clear that Thomas is ready to tear down the court's protections for abortion completely in his most explicit comments yet that precedents all the way back to Roe v. Wade should fall.

"The plurality and [Chief Justice John Roberts] ultimately cast aside this jurisdictional barrier to conclude that Louisiana’s law is unconstitutional under our precedents," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a dissent. "But those decisions created the right to abortion out of whole cloth, without a shred of support from the Constitution’s text. Our abortion precedents are grievously wrong and should be overruled."

Clarence-Thomas-REUTERS.jpg

He added, lower in the opinion: "The plurality and [Roberts] claim that the Court’s judgment is dictated by 'our precedents,' particularly Whole Woman’s Health... For the detailed reasons explained by [Alito], this is not true... But today’s decision is wrong for a far simpler reason: The Constitution does not constrain the States’ ability to regulate or even prohibit abortion. This Court created the right to abortion based on an amorphous, unwritten right to privacy, which it grounded in the 'legal fiction' of substantive due process."

Thomas further called Roe v. Wade "farcical," said the Supreme Court's "abortion jurisprudence remains in a state of utter entropy," and said the court "can reconcile neither Roe nor its progeny with the text of our Constitution," so "those decisions should be overruled."

Thomas tears into abortion precedent, says Roe v. Wade should fall in dissent on Louisiana case
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top