So- promoting the release of criminals and increasing crime and other such things aren't examples. To the left, of course not. Everything that they don't agree with is hate or racism or insurrection or treason or something beside a condition they have no capacity to understand. If they had some concept of responsibility and reality that wasn't mostly nonsense, they could actually have a discussion and learn something.
The right has the same standards for hate, racism, insurrection and treason. If you don't toe the ideological line, you're one of the aforementioned. Now we have fundie, right wing Christian Taliban celebrating over a pending ideological victory that will make women criminals. Always with the punishment, criminalization, ideological , and negatives. Cons and Republicans are not good people. In fact, they are exactly what they accuse their opponents of being: authoritarian. They claim to know what is "right" for people, just like what they accuse their opponents of being.
That's not true, and every liberal/democrat knows it - but for the sake of making up arguments, they invent. Invent far more garbage than fact. We've been watching that for quit a few years now, it hardly a secret. They have however fooled themselves into believing a lot of their own nonsense, just repeating it over and over. While it is no doubt shocking to many on the left, there are such things as right and wrong and individual rights. You don't get to make decisions for others, and you do have the duty to make decisions for yourself- instead of blaming your malcontent feelings on the right. Start running your own life instead of trying to make others fix yours for you, and good things start happening. They don't know that on the left, but it's true. It is true that there are radicals in all interests- but in some, they are the small minority. For the left, they are the majority- and threaten any who disagrees. Not a good policy, but they favor it. The lefties are the dictators- and what they bring to the table is perfectly clear, because they have the table for now and they are piling today's crap on top of yesterday's crap- and strutting around it with pride. That IS the crime and things you blame on others.... promoted by the screwballs who de-fund the police and give thugs the revolving doors. Conservatives didn't endorse or do that, the left did, and you know it. It's really pathetic. If you ever find any people on that side that are still rational, send them over. The doors open, so are the minds- so long as nonsense and denials aren't the limits of their language.
If you swap “right” for “left” in your post , it is just as applicable. Swap Liberal/Democrat for Conservative /Republican too. Try it. Do a word replace in an editor. A mirror can be a scary thing.
That a bit much on the hyperbole. The lower Courts issued an injunction on the MS law that allows abortion through 15 weeks. They did this on the basis of Casey and Roe. All the Court has to do issue a "brief per curiam opinion stating that Roe and Casey are overruled, and that abortion restrictions should be reviewed with rational basis scrutiny." Then the lower Court can review the law according to "the normal standard of review that courts apply when considering constitutional questions, including due process or equal protection questions under the Fifth Amendment or Fourteenth Amendment. Courts applying rational basis review seek to determine whether a law is "rationally related" to a "legitimate" government interest. Under rational basis review only the most egregious enactments that are not rationally related to a legitimate government interest, are overturned." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_basis_review https://reason.com/volokh/
NOW you believe in Democracy? Funny how you didn't when it came to Florida's Parent's Rights Bill. You completely ignored that the majority of people in Florida supported it, including the majority of Democrats.
Then let us define a right properly. Something can only be a right if it does not cause anyone else to pay or lose something. In those cases the something is not a right. It is a privilege. Nobody has to give up anything for you to own a gun or speak your mind or attend a church of your choosing. In the case of abortion someone has to lose a life. It cannot be a right. It is privilege and an indulgence on the part of government. Do not confuse rights with privileges. There is no right to abortion only a legal indulgence. To include it in a list of rights is plain wrong.
Perhaps the Constitutional argument is correct and the issue is not something the Federal level should address. Perhaps it should be decided in the states. In any case, it should be decided by women. Probably, most states will rapidly adopt measures with little or no restrictions on choice for women. The professional critics of abortion will have a tougher time, but they will never stop; it's their cause, their rice bowl. "Cause" leaders cause in order to have something to lead.
You mean like gay marriage being illegal? You know… the precedent y’all COMPLETELY ignored? Now it’s our turn
It's what you are trying to do right now... totally familiar with the tactic of dodging, mirroring. But I'm totally independent- able to identify both the right and wrong of the politics I most favor, and still make my own choices based on the values I find most honorable and equal for all people. Have yet to meet a lefty that can do that. Instead we hear the "Did not, you did" arguments we find typical at the day-care level of society. They fight to try and make that acceptable as a level of discussion too. The thread is regarding changes that overturning Roe V Wade would create. No law is perfect- and the arguments for most positions are flawed in some ways and usually filled with points lacking solid foundations. That however does not mean the overall issue lacks a basis. The issue here is that the people on the anti-abortion side want a return to the days when they could rage in the street, block clinics, harass the patients trying to enter- and shoot the doctors providing abortions. Those are the extensions of anger and obsession- the obsession of one person dictating their moral prerogatives on another. Roe V Wade basically stated abortion was a constitutionally legal choice, and no state could ban it. Prior to that, some had- and the anti-abortionists, thinking they had both god and law behind them, deemed themselves the anointed vigilantes enforcing their beliefs on others. I have this thing about any person imposing their morality or whatever they think it is on others, when they have no part in the situation and bear no consequence. I find that highly offensive, and socially dangerous- so I oppose it. The impression I get from yor message is that you want to destroy anyone who disagrees with your position- which means you have no comment on the thread, it's all about punishing those you dislike. I oppose that attitude too- for the same reasons.
Make no mistake. Lawrence vrs Texas, and Griswold vrs Connecticut is next on the chopping block. They will overturn these as well. Alito said as much in his brief. This is the agenda of the extreme right wing, and they are going to win. Trump and McConnells packing of the courts assures this.
If medical procedures are beyond the appropriate role of FEDERAL government, why would it be appropriate for STATE government? Why should medical procedures be appropriately determined by ANY government?
No. You "dumb them down" so you DON'T understand them. As written they strike a chord. And right wingers will have none of that. They need them in binary form so they can at least try to come up with a strawman. Impossible for them to debate them as they ARE.
Oh! You mean like Trump releasing PROVEN criminals like Steve Bannon, Levandowski, Manafort, Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, Joe Arpaio, ... and many many others he put out on the street because they helped his campaign. You're right! It's a great example of corruption! So you must be outraged about the Government FORCING women to carry a pregnancy against their will.
What the hell does not allowing children to be taught that having two moms or two dads is perfectly normal have to do with Democracy? Answer: it doesn't! It's pure fascism. But I do understand why you are desperately trying to change the topic of this thread. Just like you tried to change the topic of debates about the "Don't Say Gay" fascist law. Clearly your tactic is, if you don't have a worthwhile (and you rarely do) response, just change the subject.
I am hopeful that the fascist phase this country is starting to see will be short lived. But it will be very painful for many while we are in it. Right-wingers have no idea what they are getting us into. Most will come up with the typical excuse of those who supported fascism: "we didn't know..." But the damage to many people will be irreparable.
One change the shift to a higher Latino population has brought is a weakening of support for abortion. The law is more about “on demand at any age”vs “15 weeks”. ** The justices feel the law is a SCOTUS national construct based on a Texas law and it is the job of congress to write a better national law: The original “Holding” from the 1973 SCOTUS: So I get that a debate site without caterwauling about irrelevant arguments is the mother’s milk of the left, the facts aren't fitting the noise.
Alito conveniently ignores the 9th A in claiming Roe "must be" overturned because the right to an abortion is not explicitly given to women. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. The Meaning The Ninth Amendment is a constitutional safety net intended to make clear that individuals have other fundamental rights, in addition to those listed in the First through Eighth Amendments. Some of the framers had raised concerns that because it was impossible to list every fundamental right, it would be dangerous to list just some of them (for example, the right to free speech, the right to bear arms, and so forth), for fear of suggesting that the list was complete. This group of framers opposed a bill of rights entirely and favored a more general declaration of fundamental rights. But others, including many state representatives, had refused to ratify the Constitution without a more specific list of protections, so the First Congress added the Ninth Amendment as a compromise. Because the rights protected by the Ninth Amendment are not specified, they are referred to as “unenumerated.” The Supreme Court has found that unenumerated rights include such important rights as the right to travel, the right to vote, the right to keep personal matters private and to make important decisions about one’s health care or body. https://www.annenbergclassroom.org/ninth-amendment/#:~:text=Because the rights protected by,to make important decisions about
As usual, you have kind of soiled yourself. You ignore the total crud that the left has done that inflicts direct harm on the people- and rant about political conflicts... but never mention things like Biden violating federal immigration law daily. If you can't see the mistakes of those you support, you can't see anything, and your opinion is worthless.. And I don't support anyone dictating a personal decision on others. My position has and will always be that the person most involved and subject to the consequences of any personal decision is the one who gets to make it. Most conservative people recognize that others have the same rights we do- but none have the right to impose their moral prerogatives (or political prerogatives) on others they disagree with. There are exceptions to everything, on every position because people vary. While some may call any abortion a murder, some on the other side regard releasing murderers to kill again is responsible justice. I don't agree with either. I realize that probably doesn't fit with your view of things- but that's your problem.
You can try pounding that square term into the round definition as long and hard as you want. It will never fit and only serves as an example of why there is no room for this frivolous subject. I would support more effort in building a students vocabulary so they don't grow up using words they don't understand just to appear more photosynthesis. Can you honestly say that you didn't know what gay was when you were in first grade?
