header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: In other news ...

 (Read 1013051 times)

utee94

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 17718
  • Liked:
Re: In other news ...
« Reply #18298 on: July 26, 2022, 05:48:49 PM »
Yeah but you're old.
Not as old as you, ya filthy geezer.

Now get off my lawn.


Gigem

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2144
  • Liked:
Re: In other news ...
« Reply #18300 on: July 26, 2022, 07:13:37 PM »
I wish the politicians and the whole bunch would have left Roe v Wade alone. I realize many people felt the SC overreached in the decision but Jesus it’s nonstop ever since about how the SC took peoples rights away. 

IMO Congress cowered behind RvW for 50 years. They had plenty of time to pass some sort of law and many congressional majorities during that time. 

I have no idea if they had the votes at any time but afaik they never even got it to the floor. 

The SC simply kicked it to the states to decide, they didn’t take away anybodies rights. 

longhorn320

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 9345
  • Liked:
Re: In other news ...
« Reply #18301 on: July 26, 2022, 07:56:02 PM »
I wish the politicians and the whole bunch would have left Roe v Wade alone. I realize many people felt the SC overreached in the decision but Jesus it’s nonstop ever since about how the SC took peoples rights away.

IMO Congress cowered behind RvW for 50 years. They had plenty of time to pass some sort of law and many congressional majorities during that time.

I have no idea if they had the votes at any time but afaik they never even got it to the floor.

The SC simply kicked it to the states to decide, they didn’t take away anybodies rights.
You started out weak but finished strong

The thing is there is no right to have an abortion in the Constitution and thus it is by design a state matter

No matter how loud or long the media yells about this the fact remains that the people have just as much right to be for abortion as they do to be against abortion

They won't let me give blood anymore. The burnt orange color scares the hell out of the doctors.

bayareabadger

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 7868
  • Liked:
Re: In other news ...
« Reply #18302 on: July 26, 2022, 08:28:26 PM »
I wish the politicians and the whole bunch would have left Roe v Wade alone. I realize many people felt the SC overreached in the decision but Jesus it’s nonstop ever since about how the SC took peoples rights away.

IMO Congress cowered behind RvW for 50 years. They had plenty of time to pass some sort of law and many congressional majorities during that time.

I have no idea if they had the votes at any time but afaik they never even got it to the floor.

The SC simply kicked it to the states to decide, they didn’t take away anybodies rights.
I saw this floating around a bunch, and it left me with the question: How often is congress rolling through and codifying things that the Supreme Court decided? Is this a common thing? I feel like we would've heard about it.

It seems like a strangely symbolic way to use political capital on the national level. And it doesn't seem like it would be all that effective. If they'd done it, one of the other majorities could've just undone it. 

The phrasing "they didn’t take away anybodies rights" is interesting too. Because it reads well at the start, but then gets weird if you deconstruct it. Like, if we all got together and voted to repeal the first amendment, that wouldn't directly rob us of a right, the new laws and actions in the court system would. In this case, it opens things up to rearrange rights. In essence it rolls back protections on certain "rights." And that colloquially is described as taking rights, though perhaps inaccurately. 

bayareabadger

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 7868
  • Liked:
Re: In other news ...
« Reply #18303 on: July 26, 2022, 08:29:53 PM »

No matter how loud or long the media yells about this the fact remains that the people have just as much right to be for abortion as they do to be against abortion


I ... don't think that's ever been in dispute. 

The top amendment literally protects the right to be for or against just about anything.

longhorn320

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 9345
  • Liked:
Re: In other news ...
« Reply #18304 on: July 26, 2022, 08:57:42 PM »
I ... don't think that's ever been in dispute.

The top amendment literally protects the right to be for or against just about anything.
which is why its never considered by SCOTUS
They won't let me give blood anymore. The burnt orange color scares the hell out of the doctors.

longhorn320

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 9345
  • Liked:
Re: In other news ...
« Reply #18305 on: July 26, 2022, 09:00:01 PM »
I saw this floating around a bunch, and it left me with the question: How often is congress rolling through and codifying things that the Supreme Court decided? Is this a common thing? I feel like we would've heard about it.

It seems like a strangely symbolic way to use political capital on the national level. And it doesn't seem like it would be all that effective. If they'd done it, one of the other majorities could've just undone it.

The phrasing "they didn’t take away anybodies rights" is interesting too. Because it reads well at the start, but then gets weird if you deconstruct it. Like, if we all got together and voted to repeal the first amendment, that wouldn't directly rob us of a right, the new laws and actions in the court system would. In this case, it opens things up to rearrange rights. In essence it rolls back protections on certain "rights." And that colloquially is described as taking rights, though perhaps inaccurately.
I think what the poster meant was that anyone who wants an abortion can get one granted there might be some travel but hey when you kill a person you should have to go to some effort
They won't let me give blood anymore. The burnt orange color scares the hell out of the doctors.

Gigem

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2144
  • Liked:
Re: In other news ...
« Reply #18306 on: July 26, 2022, 09:05:08 PM »
I saw this floating around a bunch, and it left me with the question: How often is congress rolling through and codifying things that the Supreme Court decided? Is this a common thing? I feel like we would've heard about it.

It seems like a strangely symbolic way to use political capital on the national level. And it doesn't seem like it would be all that effective. If they'd done it, one of the other majorities could've just undone it.

The phrasing "they didn’t take away anybodies rights" is interesting too. Because it reads well at the start, but then gets weird if you deconstruct it. Like, if we all got together and voted to repeal the first amendment, that wouldn't directly rob us of a right, the new laws and actions in the court system would. In this case, it opens things up to rearrange rights. In essence it rolls back protections on certain "rights." And that colloquially is described as taking rights, though perhaps inaccurately.
I guess I don’t know. What I do know is that RvW has been considered a stretch for a long time by many. Not saying I agree with them, but as others have stated there is no expressed right in the constitution the way there is for arms, freedom of speech, etc. 

Gigem

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2144
  • Liked:
Re: In other news ...
« Reply #18307 on: July 26, 2022, 09:09:59 PM »
And at least half the voting population is women. Maybe more. 

bayareabadger

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 7868
  • Liked:
Re: In other news ...
« Reply #18308 on: July 26, 2022, 09:14:19 PM »
I guess I don’t know. What I do know is that RvW has been considered a stretch for a long time by many. Not saying I agree with them, but as others have stated there is no expressed right in the constitution the way there is for arms, freedom of speech, etc.
That's true. And even for things like arms and speech, or due process or a litany of other things, there are so many angles and extensions of rights and gray areas, things are often fuzzy. 

It is true that that particular thing is not in there. It's also unfortunate that the culture political structure went such a way that a majority-supported compromise is likely impossible, and that so much chicanery and grandstanding surrounds it. 

longhorn320

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 9345
  • Liked:
Re: In other news ...
« Reply #18309 on: July 26, 2022, 09:32:24 PM »
That's true. And even for things like arms and speech, or due process or a litany of other things, there are so many angles and extensions of rights and gray areas, things are often fuzzy.

It is true that that particular thing is not in there. It's also unfortunate that the culture political structure went such a way that a majority-supported compromise is likely impossible, and that so much chicanery and grandstanding surrounds it.
but we will have a majority supported compromise

people vote and decide what they want

if the majority is against then its voted down and if the majority vote prochoice then it passes

either way the majority decides and that is the compromise
They won't let me give blood anymore. The burnt orange color scares the hell out of the doctors.

Honestbuckeye

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 5807
  • Liked:
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
-Mark Twain

Gigem

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2144
  • Liked:
Re: In other news ...
« Reply #18311 on: July 26, 2022, 09:36:31 PM »
Yeah, no matter what you or I think about each issue or the political process it’s worked for us to a degree for over 200 years. Just because one person doesn’t like the outcome doesn’t mean that it didn’t work the way it’s intended. 

Lots and lots of women are pro-life. 

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.