Author Topic: Sweet Home Alabama?  (Read 156 times)

Observer, Calypso Jones and 11 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Pepsi

  • Administrator
  • Hero NewsRaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 16494
  • Liked: 1662
  • Karma: +115/-180
    • View Profile
Sweet Home Alabama?
« on: May 16, 2019, 04:56:33 PM »
absolutely nothing will be found.

there is nothing to be found.

Offline RealityHasALiberalBias

  • Hero NewsRaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 9361
  • Liked: 893
  • Karma: +39/-51
  • NewsRaker
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2019, 06:06:58 PM »
The people who go on and on about Sharia law are imposing Sharia law. Other observations I have seen: who knew that Alabamans were so desperate to be father/uncles? Of course what we really need are more inbred morons.

Alabama is pretty much at the bottom in terms of anything good, and at the top when it comes to things that are bad. This is the rural Merika that Caroline says is so superior to our cities. Chicago isn't at all like this. Yes we have a really bad neighborhood but I have never heard of an incest problem.

Good grief. Tell me again why you talk to these people.

Offline RealityHasALiberalBias

  • Hero NewsRaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 9361
  • Liked: 893
  • Karma: +39/-51
  • NewsRaker
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2019, 07:02:01 PM »



Online Calypso Jones

  • Hero NewsRaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 4948
  • Liked: 1793
  • Karma: +51/-35
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2019, 09:17:20 PM »
bull shit.  y'all

this is leftist propaganda bullshit.

There are no charges or jail time for the pregnant woman. It's only for the abortionist. 

What a load.  And  you're falling for it.

Offline hurricanehook

  • Hero NewsRaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 7176
  • Liked: 1870
  • Karma: +84/-60
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2019, 10:45:17 PM »
Roe struck down 50 state laws and has made it all but impossible to regulate abortion, except in the narrowest circumstances. More to the point, the argument that its particular set of policy preferences is mandated by the Constitution is flatly preposterous.

Over the years, the decision’s laughable constitutional inadequacy has been widely recognized. Shortly after it came down, Harvard Law School professor John Hart Ely, a supporter of legalized abortion, wrote that “Roe is bad because it is bad constitutional law, or rather because it is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be.”

“Justice Blackmun’s opinion provides essentially no reasoning in support of its holding,” a former Blackmun clerk, Edward Lazarus, has written. “And in the almost 30 years since Roe’s announcement, no one has produced a convincing defense of Roe on its own terms.”

That’s because none is possible. The court in Roe purported to find the constitutional right to abortion in the 14th Amendment, which says that no state can “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

This passage has no obvious or even subtle connection to legalized abortion (in fact, abortion laws were being tightened in the 19th century when the amendment passed). No matter. According to Blackmun, abortion is so central to liberty that no restriction on it can stand constitutional scrutiny.

He is at pains to deny that unborn children are “persons in the whole sense.” As evidence, he points to clauses in the Constitution about persons that don’t have “prenatal application,” e.g., the requirement that persons must be 35 or older to run for president.

This is too stupid for words. Just because clauses like this refer to adults doesn’t mean that minors, or unborn children, don’t have rights.

The best case that can be made for Roe is that it is a mistaken decision on the books for nearly 50 years now, so it has to be honored as a precedent. But the court is not, and shouldn’t be, in the practice of standing by fundamentally flawed decisions. Brown v. Board of Education overturned Plessy v. Ferguson, which upheld segregated education, almost 60 years later. Just last week, the court overturned a labor decision from 1977.

Roe is bad law and bad democracy. It has no sound constitutional basis, and deserves to go the way of the court’s other embarrassments and misfires.

https://nypost.com/2018/07/06/why-roe-v-wade-is-a-travesty-of-constitutional-law/
 
The quality of life is more important
than life itself"......Alexis Carrel.

Offline hurricanehook

  • Hero NewsRaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 7176
  • Liked: 1870
  • Karma: +84/-60
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2019, 05:00:41 AM »
In Alabama ultimately gets its way, if a woman terminates the pregnancy caused by a rapist, she can serve significantly more time in prison than the man who raped her.

— Kurt Eichenwald (@kurteichenwald) May 16, 2019

Another lie pepsi.
Not true. At all.

The Alabama measure, though, goes further. In addition to the potential 99-year sentence for performing abortions, doctors face the threat of a 10-year term for attempting to perform one. Women who receive abortions would not be prosecuted.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/us/abortion-law-alabama.html]https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/us/abortion-law-alabama.html
 
The quality of life is more important
than life itself"......Alexis Carrel.

Offline RealityHasALiberalBias

  • Hero NewsRaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 9361
  • Liked: 893
  • Karma: +39/-51
  • NewsRaker
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2019, 10:25:33 PM »
We discovered a second "conservative" value:

Incest.

Offline NotDougR¡ch

  • Full NewsRaker
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
  • Liked: 9
  • Karma: +0/-7
  • NewsRaker
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #7 on: Yesterday at 10:21:09 AM »
Roe is bad law and bad democracy. It has no sound constitutional basis, and deserves to go the way of the court’s other embarrassments and misfires.

https://nypost.com/2018/07/06/why-roe-v-wade-is-a-travesty-of-constitutional-law/
 

What are the legal credentials of the author of this statement?
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage - to move in the opposite direction."  - E.F. Schumacher

Online Observer

  • Hero NewsRaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 24402
  • Liked: 1489
  • Karma: +263/-255
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #8 on: Yesterday at 12:25:18 PM »
What are the legal credentials of the author of this statement?

Do you need to be a lawyer to read the Constitution?
"If Trump wins, I will quit this forum forever on Nov. 9th." - Flyboy the liar.

Offline NotDougR¡ch

  • Full NewsRaker
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
  • Liked: 9
  • Karma: +0/-7
  • NewsRaker
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #9 on: Yesterday at 01:02:59 PM »
To read the constitution, of course not.  But we're not talking about just reading the constitution.  Interpreting and understanding the law properly is a different matter and requires to a proper background, i.e. a law degree at the very least. 

In a similar vein, I believe that a president of this country should have considerable experience in goverment before assuming that office. Likewise, putting family members ahead of more qualified individuals with the proper background in charge of postions that will affect millions of Americans should be prohibited.  It's just common sense.
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage - to move in the opposite direction."  - E.F. Schumacher

Online Calypso Jones

  • Hero NewsRaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 4948
  • Liked: 1793
  • Karma: +51/-35
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #10 on: Yesterday at 01:44:35 PM »
there's no right to kill the unborn in the constitution no matter how you distort it.   LIFE.....get it. LIFE. 


Offline NotDougR¡ch

  • Full NewsRaker
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
  • Liked: 9
  • Karma: +0/-7
  • NewsRaker
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #11 on: Yesterday at 05:48:21 PM »
there's no right to kill the unborn in the constitution no matter how you distort it.   LIFE.....get it. LIFE.

That's your opinion and nothing more. You are not qualified to interpret constituional law.  The constitution does not promise a right to life. Justice Lewis Powell included a woman's right to choose in the implied intent of the 4th amendment against excessive government intrusion into our personal lives, i.e. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons..."  Those who espouse limited government should be pro-choice.   
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage - to move in the opposite direction."  - E.F. Schumacher

Online Observer

  • Hero NewsRaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 24402
  • Liked: 1489
  • Karma: +263/-255
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #12 on: Yesterday at 05:53:39 PM »
To read the constitution, of course not.  But we're not talking about just reading the constitution.  Interpreting and understanding the law properly is a different matter and requires to a proper background, i.e. a law degree at the very least.

The language used in the Constitution is plain and with very few exceptions, not even a little ambiguous or in need of interpretation. Anyone with a competent command of the English language and a working knowledge of Framers of the Constitution and the debates that led to its final form is as qualified to read, understand and interpret the Constitution as any lawyer or judge in the country... probably more than most.

The best advice I can give you if you really want to learn about the Constitution and what it means is "Don't consult a lawyer. Consult an historian." The reality is most lawyers don't know a damned thing about the Constitution.
 

"If Trump wins, I will quit this forum forever on Nov. 9th." - Flyboy the liar.

Online Hollybaere

  • Hero NewsRaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 14081
  • Liked: 1000
  • Karma: +146/-144
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #13 on: Yesterday at 06:55:06 PM »
That's your opinion and nothing more. You are not qualified to interpret constituional law.  The constitution does not promise a right to life. Justice Lewis Powell included a woman's right to choose in the implied intent of the 4th amendment against excessive government intrusion into our personal lives, i.e. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons..."  Those who espouse limited government should be pro-choice.

There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution that allows a woman to murder a baby and or viable fetus.

FYI: You should learn how to spell the word "Constitution" before you are stupid enough to try "instruct" others on how to interpret what is in it.

I will say one thing however, considering the hundreds of choices of methods of birth control, including abstinence, why not use one of them instead of resorting to murder as a way of correcting a dumb choice??
All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
� ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER (1788-1860)
Dagon is an idiot!!

Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security, Deserve Neither- Benjamin Franklin

Offline hurricanehook

  • Hero NewsRaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 7176
  • Liked: 1870
  • Karma: +84/-60
    • View Profile
Re: Sweet Home Alabama?
« Reply #14 on: Yesterday at 10:05:37 PM »
What are the legal credentials of the author of this statement?
Look it up. Many legal scholars believe Roe versus Wade
is terribly flawed.
The quality of life is more important
than life itself"......Alexis Carrel.