Most Americans (71%) Oppose Transgender Agenda

Communication can be a challenging thing. But I think you both are making a good attempt at it.

 

The constitutional basis of roe was that we have an implied right to privacy in the constitution. If Americans have no rights to privacy, then you guys should be much more respectful about vaccine mandates and being required to wear masks. I also don’t think your purchases of guns in bullets should be private for that matter, if you have no constitutional right to privacy.

 

Could it simply be the case that Barrett (and the others) just decided the SC Justices when Roe was decided was not the proper ruling of that SC; that it should be left up to the individual States? If it was a moral matter for them, then why didn't they (Barrett specifically) rule to outlaw abortion altogether?

 

Gun purchases aren't private.

 

You would describe it as an orthodox norm?

Unfortunate you didn't read the rest of my post. I think you would find you might agree with some of it.

ITMT: reviewing this...

 

lol no. You can look at somebody like Barrett’s personal life decisions, and tell her that this is her belief system. This is not a simple matter of American caselaw. I’ve grown up around people like her and Gorsuch, and you’re really attempting to rewrite the rhetoric and things I’ve heard people say about abortion since roe. Antiabortion activists weren’t arguing about it because it was a bad ruling. lol. Sorry but that’s a joke.

They were offended by it, because they think that it’s a killing a human being. You know this but for some reason you won’t confront that. We all know this is. It’s anti abortion laws don’t make exceptions for victims of rape or incest. These laws are not about medical safety or concern for women. It’s about protecting “the life of an unborn child.”

Their decision to overturn Roe was a bad ****ing decision. Dobbs is a bad. Making a 10-year-old girl leave her state after being raped and impregnated isn’t a good law. Sorry I don’t support this bullshit. I have seen polling. I’m pretty sure most Americans agree with me.

 

Barely

 

Read the Thomas opinion.

Your "community" idea is just plain false. Communities are not allowed to have their own approach to abortion or OB/GYN healthcare.

The majority of Americans believe that abortion should be available in all or most circumstances. You need to refer to America, NOT CA.

As seen over and over, this move by the USSC sponsors an assault on women's healthcare, personal autonomy and privacy wherever they go, throughout the USA.

Besides, I don't believe your argument is even slightly serious. There are many cases where you demand that those living in significantly different states must follow the same laws. Allowing some states to hammer women's healthcare is NOT an expression of "liberty" or "freedom" or any of the other ridiculous arguments that the right tries to use.

 

Great example of your argument style!

 

They want a federal abortion ban. My local politicians talk about it. A lot of them do nationally too. Saying Roe was just bad law, is just farcical. They are just getting started.

 

We will have to agree to disagree. The SC didn't outlaw abortion (which if it was decided on morality at least those who voiced their opinions outside of the Court would have done), they simply pushed the matter back to the individual States. Thus far, those States that one would expect to outlaw all abortions, haven't crossed that line. They have just put limits on it (even the original ruling by the SC placed limits on it when they considered "viability" when States could intervene).

 

How many people telling me “Roe was bad law and needed to be overturned,” are pushing their local reps to help the Biden Admin codify Roe, or something better, into law? What a joke.

Everybody saying that was opposed to Roe for reasons we all know very well. Stop trying hide. So disingenuous.

 

The idea of removing equal treatment and acceptance of persons who don't share the same sexuality is something that must be strongly opposed.

That kind of criteria has NO PLACE anywhere in our legal system or in our society.

It makes no more sense than defining norms to justify discriminating on the basis of skin color, religion, or any other human factor that is innate.

Your direction makes no more sense than white nationalism. All those darker skinned Americans just aren't the "norm" - so we shouldn't accept them as part of our society.

 

Why? What point are you going for?

Then explain to me why there isn't uniformity among all States.

Strawman argument.

False. States, like California and New York, will never outlaw abortion.

I should have read this first before I chose to respond to you. Enjoy the rest of your day.

 

If the Supreme Court was concerned about victims of rape and incest and fetal abnormalities, or what red state laws are predictably doing to women and girls, they should have had the conscious to address that.

I wasn’t born yesterday. Most anti abortion activists don’t want victims of rape, incest, domestic violence, or women with fetal abnormalities to get abortion “because it’s a life.” Making a 10 year old raped girl leave her state for abortion care wasnt an accident. They are trying to stop human beings from being killed.

 

Why are you opposed to communities deciding their standards?

 

You're going to have to be a bit more specific here. The SC is not obligated to consider people's feelings. They are only obligated to interpret what the Constitution (laws) say.

 

DeSantis's authoritarian discrimination is calculated to pander to bigots. The forces of ignorance and intolerance are easy to control.

Intrusive politicians dictating to medical professionals in medical matters is insipid.

"The AMA opposes any discrimination based on an individual’s sex, sexual orientation or gender identity,
opposes the denial of health insurance on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, and supports
public and private health insurance coverage for treatment of gender dysphoria as recommended
by the patient’s physician."​

The Florida taxpayer will foot the bill for his unconstitutional persecutions.

...“Nothing could have motivated this remarkable intrusion into parental prerogatives other than opposition to transgender status itself."...

[U.S. District Judge Robert ] Hinkle also added that “the statute and the rules were an exercise in politics, not good medicine. This is a politically fraught area. There has long been, and still is, substantial bigotry directed at transgender individuals. Common experience confirms this, as does a Florida legislator’s remarkable reference to transgender witnesses at a committee hearing as ‘mutants’ and ‘demons.’ And even when not based on bigotry, there are those who incorrectly but sincerely believe that gender identity is not real but instead just a choice.”

[https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/06/florida-gender-affirming-care-ruling-00100387]
​

 

I’m not arguing about my feelings. I am saying that making a 10 year old girl leave the state for abortion care falls in line with their VALUES. This isn’t simply about bad law.

 

And here I thought you were retired.

Any way the search gives you the links I used.

 

You keep saying it’s “bad law” but don’t give legal explanations as to why? I can only conclude that it’s bad law because you feel it is.

 

One can make a huge distinctions between immutable factors, such as what demographic group a person is vs things such as life styles, clothes fashions, food preferences and other things associated behaviors and choices.

If you prefer to drink coke, but work for Pepsi distributing their product, I'd think the law should be able to protect an employer that insists his employee not wear coke paraphernalia on the job and fire that distributor if not compliant.

I'd think if you were a gay man a grade school should not be able to discriminate against you (hire someone less qualified than you to avoid hiring you or firing you due to being gay) but how a person presents and conducts themselves at school can and should be controlled.

That Canadian shop teacher that dressed like a woman with gigantic fake breasts just to piss people off? That guy should have been fired not for his sexuality but his choices.

 

Not gonna cut the mustard. You made the claim. Support it with a specific source.

 

The exact definition of word conversation is being ignored in favor of the debate definition. Why?
If, we were having an actual face to face informal conversation.
The mistake of using the words “they” and “them” to describe me in a post to another poster that I just happened to read.
Would not have happened during a face to face conversation. I’m a Woman.
I did address that mistake in one of my many posts to you trying correct that mistake. Perhaps, it was missed since no response was posted.
A quick look to the left shows a female symbol plus the word genderat the bottom) followed by the word female.
I as a Woman married a man at the age of 21. We wanted children. Did not use birth control. Our daughter was born when I was 27 years old.
For years we thought we would never have children. Age 30 our son was born. Age 34 our son was born. All were c-sections.
When someone doesn’t know the gender of the person the pronouns they and them can be used? Correct?

 

CA is one of the few states that keeps a record of gun and ammo purchases. In CA that info may be referenced by courts and law enforcement.

Are you claiming that this is true across the US?