Dem senator warns Supreme Court of 'revolution' if Roe v. Wade is overturned

Let's do.

 

How is that "superceding" the Constitution?

 

Didn't say if fell under any clauses .. is this your argument ? .. There is no clause in the constitution directly referring to abortion .. and so it is out of the legitimate purview of the Feds.

 

Oh, OK, I made a mistake, sorry.

 

How? How does diversity breed divisiveness and how does divisiveness destroy democracy?[/QUOTE]

Diversity => diverse interests and values => diverse priorities and methods => conflict => failure to attain majority agreement => failure of democracy.

Stick your head out the window and you can observe this in real time.
t

 

Diversity => diverse interests and values => diverse priorities and methods => conflict => failure to attain majority agreement => failure of democracy.

Stick your head out the window and you can observe this in real time.
t[/QUOTE]
Diversity that needs two national anthems isn't diversity, it's division.

 

It's a court decision, not the law. Laws need to be passed through a legislative body.

 

My argument is that it isn't an enumerated power. It was a state issue since the founding. If you feel that something changed since the founding to turn it into a federal issue please let us know what it is.

 

So nothing that is not an enumerated power - as mentioned in previous post -- if its not written specifically in the constitution .. its a state issue..

Thats it thats all...

 

Conservatives constantly try to do this

Diversity => diverse interests and values => diverse priorities and methods => conflict => failure to attain majority agreement => failure of democracy.

Stick your head out the window and you can observe this in real time.
t[/QUOTE]

Maybe you should pull your head from someplace else.

Do you know why tradesmen are licensed today as "journeymen"? In the time of the medieval guilds you learned the trade by working for another. After spending your requisite time with him and acquiring a more than basic familiarity you were supposed to travel and to work with several practitioners to learn diverse methods. You became a "Journeyman", and only in that way could you eventually become a master

Diverse interests, values, priorities and methods often do conflict, but they can just as well enhance, particularly when variety is valued and sought after instead of rejected out of prejudice and bigotry. This may be why humans generally seek variety in their lives and eschew sameness as dull and nonproductive. This is America's unique feature and the reason we produce at generally the master level

Or at least we used to. As we have become successful we have become arrogant and bigoted. And so we have to use tariffs to "compete" on world markets by penalizing the still efficient workers among us to support those whose main skill is how to suck up to the government.

 

Maybe you should pull your head from someplace else.

Do you know why tradesmen are licensed today as "journeymen"? In the time of the medieval guilds you learned the trade by working for another. After spending your requisite time with him and acquiring a more than basic familiarity you were supposed to travel and to work with several practitioners to learn diverse methods. You became a "Journeyman", and only in that way could you eventually become a master

Diverse interests, values, priorities and methods often do conflict, but they can just as well enhance, particularly when variety is valued and sought after instead of rejected out of prejudice and bigotry. This may be why humans generally seek variety in their lives and eschew sameness as dull and nonproductive. This is America's unique feature and the reason we produce at generally the master level

Or at least we used to. As we have become successful we have become arrogant and bigoted. And so we have to use tariffs to "compete" on world markets by penalizing the still efficient workers among us to support those whose main skill is how to suck up to the government.[/QUOTE]

1) Yes .. but Notice how the poster was gobsmacked -- has no response -- to his own definition .. merely repeated back. This is what happens when someone uses a word - that they do not know what means .. "Socialism" is a great example.. everyone makes up thieir own definition .. so you just clarify.. "Is this what you mean" - Part two .. in the case of this constitutional issue . is knowing where to go if they do respond in the affirmative "Yes this is my definition" .. which is usually easy once person has defined what on earth they are talking about.

2) Diversity - like so many things - is double edged. Many benefits there are to diversity -- Genetic diversity being top of the list --- mixing the gene pool creates beauty. -- but as you point out -- and in addition to what you pointed out .. there are many bad things.

As is the case with most extreme movements / ideology -- you tend to throw the baby out with the bath water. This is the case with respect to "Social Engineering" -which like the word "Propaganda" became associated with Adolf .. and Eugenics .. Social Darwinism.

but, Social Engineering is not all bad .. nor is Social Darwinism all irrational .. and in fact it is that many of the tenets of both do make sense .. a whole lot of sense .. which makes them attractive ... SD going down a dark path though ..with false logic at the end of the day.

Social Engineering is somethign we engage in whether we like it or not .. to blind ourselves to study of this ... and being part of the conversation .. is killing our democratic process .. as there is no such thing as a functional democratic process without an electorate who is informed in certain things. .. which brings us back to "Utilitarianism" the anathema to a Constitutional Republic .. "The Devil" if you wish .

 

Arguments would be made for the 1st, 4th and 10th. The rights concerning ownership of property would certainly be challenged. Of course that is a basic tenant of Americanism.

 

Maybe you should pull your head from someplace else.

Do you know why tradesmen are licensed today as "journeymen"? In the time of the medieval guilds you learned the trade by working for another. After spending your requisite time with him and acquiring a more than basic familiarity you were supposed to travel and to work with several practitioners to learn diverse methods. You became a "Journeyman", and only in that way could you eventually become a master

Diverse interests, values, priorities and methods often do conflict, but they can just as well enhance, particularly when variety is valued and sought after instead of rejected out of prejudice and bigotry. This may be why humans generally seek variety in their lives and eschew sameness as dull and nonproductive. This is America's unique feature and the reason we produce at generally the master level

Or at least we used to. As we have become successful we have become arrogant and bigoted. And so we have to use tariffs to "compete" on world markets by penalizing the still efficient workers among us to support those whose main skill is how to suck up to the government.[/QUOTE]

Even Congress passing a law would not make it constitutional and it still could be challenged and overturned. What is needed is a specific amendment dealing directly with abortion.

 

Here's some reading for all those who favor Communism.....https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/communism-computing-china/intelproperty.html

 

Federal purview extends to beyond the list given in the constitution .. but yes .. an ammendment would be the best way.

 

I don't see how any these apply excepting maybe for the 4th, and even then it just shows a misunderstanding of communism.

 

I see humans seeking to be with their own kind. Neighborhoods are segregated. Heck cafeteria tables in universities are segregated. I see diversity as generating burning cities and increasing lawlessness. I do not see any enhancements. Instead I see the master level attributes decried as "whiteness."

The breakdown in civil order will lead to an authoritarian regime to restore order.

 

It's enough.

Amendment X
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.

 

Strange, but I notice that the people in favor of abortion have been born.

 

You could theoretically have communism and still have a bill of individual rights, but somehow commies always manage to allow a despot to take over and shoot anyone who "peaceably assemble(s) to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The right to bear arms? Shirley, you jest:

The injustices of communism were not limited to mass murder alone. Even those fortunate enough to survive still were subjected to severe repression, including violations of freedom, of speech, freedom of religion, loss of property rights, and the criminalization of ordinary economic activity. No previous tyranny sought such complete control over nearly every aspect of people’s lives.
Although the communists promised a utopian society in which the working class would enjoy unprecedented prosperity, in reality they engendered massive poverty. Wherever communist and noncommunist states existed in close proximity, it was the communists who used walls and the threat of death to keep their people from fleeing to societies with greater opportunity.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...17/11/07/lessons-from-a-century-of-communism/

And yet you still have people, at least one in this very thread, longing wistfully for communism.

 

The breakdown in civil order has already begun in San Fran, Chicago, NYC, and L.A.

But ... any flash mob or serial rapist that starts this nonsense in at least 10 cities I can name offhand is going to be crushed.

And there are lots (over 57 million) armed citizens in rural areas, most of them conservative. They won't hesitate to shoot on sight.

I suddenly wonder if the corollary of this is that people living in urban areas are either sympathetic to criminals or too afraid to stand up for themselves.

 

Amendment X
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.

 

And the people sometimes have to pass Federal laws to protect their most fundamental rights from rapacious State legislatures hijacked by malignant factions like religious fanatics

 

Or the people could vote out the malignant factions like religious fanatics.

 

What powers ? The Power to legalize Slavery ?