Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
Factually bereft, as usual.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
- Status
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
No, no, no, no.
Wait til you get home.
No, no, no, no.
Wait til you get home.
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
As usual, doesn't make sense.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyPFQKpRnd0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyPFQKpRnd0
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
As usual, not watching your videos.
St. Clown
Ideas Posted are Likely Not My Own
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
"Let's try that again." or "Let's run through that again."
No matter how many times that bit happens, and in no matter how many different contortions they used, it's still funny.
"Let's try that again." or "Let's run through that again."
No matter how many times that bit happens, and in no matter how many different contortions they used, it's still funny.
St. Clown
Ideas Posted are Likely Not My Own
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
You're dithhhhpiccable.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
There it is.
Thanks.
BTW, this week is the 75th anniversary of the first Tex Avery Bugs Bunny cartoon. "What's up, Doc" was a thing they used to say in Tex' high school, and he immortalized it. I think that it so cool.
There it is.
Thanks.
BTW, this week is the 75th anniversary of the first Tex Avery Bugs Bunny cartoon. "What's up, Doc" was a thing they used to say in Tex' high school, and he immortalized it. I think that it so cool.
Last edited:
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
As usual, you should.
As usual, you should.
St. Clown
Ideas Posted are Likely Not My Own
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
I saw that. It was something of surprise to learn that Superman is older than Bugs.
There it is.
Thanks.
BTW, this week is the 75th anniversary of the first Tex Avery Bugs Bunny cartoon. "What's up, Doc" was a thing they used to say in Tex' high school, and he immortalized it. I think that it so cool.
I saw that. It was something of surprise to learn that Superman is older than Bugs.
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
I find the idea that children, either pre- or post-birthday are "punishment" for parents, or "worthless parasites", or "just moving tissue that needs to be stomped out for your peace of mind and 401k balance", while popular with the shrill, self-righteous lefties, is completely bizarre. It's one of the currently trendy bandwagons that people will look back on and wonder, how could they ever...?
We're vilifying and dehumanizing little kids to the point of actual intentional killing.
I find the idea that children, either pre- or post-birthday are "punishment" for parents, or "worthless parasites", or "just moving tissue that needs to be stomped out for your peace of mind and 401k balance", while popular with the shrill, self-righteous lefties, is completely bizarre. It's one of the currently trendy bandwagons that people will look back on and wonder, how could they ever...?
We're vilifying and dehumanizing little kids to the point of actual intentional killing.
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
Language is very important. If you can spin things away from actually telling people what is happening, you're a long ways to winning the perception battle. When people are confronted with what's really being done, they get uncomfortable (like Hillary recently which actually as an encouraging moment she will probably recover from) but to extent people are able to define it away and keep the fleeting American attention span on anything else, they have succeeded. It's a great irony that they talk about harvesting organs, etc. from what is supposedly a blob of tissue that isn't a person.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
Again, the irony is incredible that the people who protest abortion the most push policies that result in... more abortions.
If you could separate pro-life rhetoric from anti-sex rhetoric, you would begin to be believable. Until you do, the former is merely a fig leaf guarding the latter. After all, if abortion really is murder, we should do anything to stop it, even allowing girls free and unstigmatized access to birth control. But since we can't do that, oh no, then the latter must be the overriding social interest.
We just cannot allow those sluts to have sex. Even murders are OK as long as we don't let that happen.
Again, the irony is incredible that the people who protest abortion the most push policies that result in... more abortions.
If you could separate pro-life rhetoric from anti-sex rhetoric, you would begin to be believable. Until you do, the former is merely a fig leaf guarding the latter. After all, if abortion really is murder, we should do anything to stop it, even allowing girls free and unstigmatized access to birth control. But since we can't do that, oh no, then the latter must be the overriding social interest.
We just cannot allow those sluts to have sex. Even murders are OK as long as we don't let that happen.
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
Thanks.
Note I did not say it would be "entirely free of controversy;" however I really do believe that a significant number of people (i.e., more than just me.....) would not find Roe v Wade anywhere near so objectionable if they started with a constitutional foundation first and then reasoned from it (in the writing of the opinion, I mean). You do not justify such a sweeping and fundamental change on phantasmical artificial constructions like "penumbras" and "emanations."
Ironically, I do believe that the Court arrived in the "right place" with the ruling, but by short-circuiting the political process, they also short-circuited the necessary dialog and give-and-take and ultimate compromise that would have left people feeling that the solution was arrived at through an acceptable methodology.
Frankly, as far as I'm concerned, use birth control properly in the first place! Abortion should not be a form of birth control (I do not consider the "morning after bill" abortion but an acceptable form of birth control). Human beings should certainly have 8th Amendment rights, and probably 14th Amendment rights too, even inside the womb, provided they are developed enough to be "human". Shockingly, iirc, even Kepler agreed with this general outline in an earlier thread. Killing a fully-formed, fully-functional human being is murder, whether it is inside the womb or outside of it.
The rest is probably tldr for y'all....
A far better line of reasoning would have been:
-- killing a child just after birth is murder.
-- killing a child a day before birth is murder.
-- killing a child that could survive on its own outside the womb unaided is very probably murder.
-- killing a child that could survive on its own outside the womb with artificial assistance might be murder, but we aren't completely sure and defer to the legislatures of the various states.
....
-- preventing an egg from being fertilized in the first place is just fine.
-- ejecting a fertilized egg from the body before it implants in the uterine wall is just fine.
-- inducing the body to eject a fertilized egg after it has implanted in the uterine wall before cell division has proceeded very far is very probably fine.
-- inducing the body to eject a nascent human being before it is recognizably human may very well be fine, but we aren't completely sure and defer to the legislatures of the various states, just in case, though we expect they will probably agree with us.
....
there is a real gray area for us when a nascent human being is recognizably human but it cannot yet survive on its own outside the womb. The legislatures of the various states have to settle this one.
At least the areas of disagreement would have been narrowed considerably, and while there would be a few people at either "extreme" who might be upset ("what's wrong with harvesting fetal tissue from an infant less than one month from birth as long as it is still inside the womb" would be struck down, as well as "life begins at conception" would be clarified to be "while 'life' might begin at conception, human life starts weeks if not months later than that, so no problem here either"); most people would not.
Thanks.
Note I did not say it would be "entirely free of controversy;" however I really do believe that a significant number of people (i.e., more than just me.....) would not find Roe v Wade anywhere near so objectionable if they started with a constitutional foundation first and then reasoned from it (in the writing of the opinion, I mean). You do not justify such a sweeping and fundamental change on phantasmical artificial constructions like "penumbras" and "emanations."
Ironically, I do believe that the Court arrived in the "right place" with the ruling, but by short-circuiting the political process, they also short-circuited the necessary dialog and give-and-take and ultimate compromise that would have left people feeling that the solution was arrived at through an acceptable methodology.
Frankly, as far as I'm concerned, use birth control properly in the first place! Abortion should not be a form of birth control (I do not consider the "morning after bill" abortion but an acceptable form of birth control). Human beings should certainly have 8th Amendment rights, and probably 14th Amendment rights too, even inside the womb, provided they are developed enough to be "human". Shockingly, iirc, even Kepler agreed with this general outline in an earlier thread. Killing a fully-formed, fully-functional human being is murder, whether it is inside the womb or outside of it.
The rest is probably tldr for y'all....
A far better line of reasoning would have been:
-- killing a child just after birth is murder.
-- killing a child a day before birth is murder.
-- killing a child that could survive on its own outside the womb unaided is very probably murder.
-- killing a child that could survive on its own outside the womb with artificial assistance might be murder, but we aren't completely sure and defer to the legislatures of the various states.
....
-- preventing an egg from being fertilized in the first place is just fine.
-- ejecting a fertilized egg from the body before it implants in the uterine wall is just fine.
-- inducing the body to eject a fertilized egg after it has implanted in the uterine wall before cell division has proceeded very far is very probably fine.
-- inducing the body to eject a nascent human being before it is recognizably human may very well be fine, but we aren't completely sure and defer to the legislatures of the various states, just in case, though we expect they will probably agree with us.
....
there is a real gray area for us when a nascent human being is recognizably human but it cannot yet survive on its own outside the womb. The legislatures of the various states have to settle this one.
At least the areas of disagreement would have been narrowed considerably, and while there would be a few people at either "extreme" who might be upset ("what's wrong with harvesting fetal tissue from an infant less than one month from birth as long as it is still inside the womb" would be struck down, as well as "life begins at conception" would be clarified to be "while 'life' might begin at conception, human life starts weeks if not months later than that, so no problem here either"); most people would not.
Last edited:
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
See, you start to sound a little reasonable and then, as always, you just can't resist making silly over the top exaggerations regarding those you disagree with. People who have perspectives different than you aren't all crazy monsters. Really!Again, the irony is incredible that the people who protest abortion the most push policies that result in... more abortions.
If you could separate pro-life rhetoric from anti-sex rhetoric, you would begin to be believable. Until you do, the former is merely a fig leaf guarding the latter. After all, if abortion really is murder, we should do anything to stop it, even allowing girls free and unstigmatized access to birth control. But since we can't do that, oh no, then the latter must be the overriding social interest.
We just cannot allow those sluts to have sex. Even murders are OK as long as we don't let that happen.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
Wow...I mean there is hypocrisy and then there is this. Bravo you have hit an all new level of pot calling the kettle black.
Must be time to change the nails on the cross since you gifted us with your holier than thou presence!
Wow...I mean there is hypocrisy and then there is this. Bravo you have hit an all new level of pot calling the kettle black.
Must be time to change the nails on the cross since you gifted us with your holier than thou presence!
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
I will grant that I get a little impatient with the mendacity of some in the "pro-life" industry. I would hope that those who make up the sane majority would be just as sick of those crazies and I wish they would take the public face of the movement back from the Tartuffes Burroughs termed "the mean pinched hate-filled faces of decent church-going women and men."
Presumably, there are very few monsters. It is a shame they are so prominent and influential, and have warped our public policy for so long, and hurt so many.
But no doubt you would say the same in retort.
I will grant that I get a little impatient with the mendacity of some in the "pro-life" industry. I would hope that those who make up the sane majority would be just as sick of those crazies and I wish they would take the public face of the movement back from the Tartuffes Burroughs termed "the mean pinched hate-filled faces of decent church-going women and men."
Presumably, there are very few monsters. It is a shame they are so prominent and influential, and have warped our public policy for so long, and hurt so many.
But no doubt you would say the same in retort.
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VII - The Bedrock of the Republic!
The word "whimper" comes to mind for some reason.
The word "whimper" comes to mind for some reason.
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Sirocco often comes to mind when Bob posts.
- Status