American Taliban | Page 6 | GTAMotorcycle.com

American Taliban

jc100 said:
lol. Ok. You know what I mean Mike. This particular decision can’t be taken as an isolated academic legal case. Whatever happens next the US is in for some very uncomfortable moments.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

To answer your original question, Scotus normslly hears only cases that have been heard and ruled on previously. They do revisit their own cases, they have done so 232 times since 1810.

A short list of overturned Supreme Court landmark decisions - National Constitution Center

With the Supreme Court overruling Roe v. Wade, a look back at overturned landmark cases shows the rarity of such actions.
constitutioncenter.org constitutioncenter.org
 
jc100 said:
If we looked at the second amendment using the lens of the day then things would look a bit different. This isn’t just a cold legal decision taken in a vacuum, this has been a long patient plan of a severe faction mainly comprised of one party. The US should have codified this years ago though.

Here’s what the silver linings are. This is 50 years on. The voter base is turning and the old guard are dying off. It’s left wing slanted from here on out if there’s no gerrymandering or voter suppression. That’s a big if though. Young voters are connected and media savvy. The religious fundamentalists can cling onto this as today’s victory but it’s pyrrhic. I think this is what galvanizes voter bases to tell the McConnells of the world to go get ******.
Click to expand...
2nd is about guns, are we changing lanes?

On the US voter base, there are always old conservatives growing old and dying. While it is more likely a bible thumper well be a conservative, it's equally likely a a teacher will be a liberal - so much for stereotypes.

Thing is there are a lot of liberals that move right to conservatives as they age, it's that probably won't change much.

I wouldn't bet on attrition to swing the pendulum.
 
Last edited:
Mad Mike said:
2nd is about guns, are we changing lanes?

On the US voter base, there are always old conservatives growing old and dying. While it is more likely a bible thumper well be a conservative, it's equally likely a a teacher will be a liberal - so much for stereotypes.

Thing is there are a lot of liberals that move right to conservatives as they age, it's that probably won't change much.

I wouldn't bet on attrition to swing the pendulum.
Click to expand...

You were talking about looking at things with modern lenses. The second amendment is an amendment..it can be reamended, the US cherry picks what it wants to look at.
 
jc100 said:
You were talking about looking at things with modern lenses. The second amendment is an amendment..it can be reamended, the US cherry picks what it wants to look at.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Since I moved to Canada I no longer have a dog in that fight.

If I did I'd be looking for the right to keep and bear arms to be redefined with reasonable limitations on weapon types and owners. I'd also like to see a federal law protecting rights to chose for a set period - 60 days? - after whic
h each state could kick in their own laws.
The right way to do that is another constutional amendment - not easy to do.
 
Baggsy said:
Dems had an opportunity to codify RvW but made a political statement instead. A pro abortion Republican was creating a bill to do so, but it might be too late.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...l-codify-roe-v-wade-radical-unconstitutional/
Click to expand...
Political theatre.

US congress can't pass laws that overrule the US constitution particularly when Scotus has already ruled on a matter.

Potus has a little more leeway using executive orders, but they rarely stand tge test of time.
 
Mad Mike said:
Did you pull those numbers out of your ass? Go read some to get credible numbers then continue to read and understand the federal and each state's role in this issue.

The above post reminds me of the rantings from that antivax RV rolling around toronto last year.
Click to expand...

OK, by your comment, I am guessing you are pro-life, not pro-choice. I could very well be wrong here, but that’s what you lead me to believe.
If you care to google, the *VAST* majority of Americans are pro-choice. Please look at the link below - this is one that is on the low side of the abortion-should-be-legal crowd.

www.pewresearch.org

U.S. Public Continues to Favor Legal Abortion, Oppose Overturning Roe v. Wade

As debates over abortion continue in states around the country, a majority of Americans (61%) continue to say that abortion should be legal in all (27%) or most (34%) cases.
www.pewresearch.org www.pewresearch.org

61% in favour of choice.… other sites go up to about 69% pro-choice.

So, knowing this, how is it possible that the minority is dictating to the majority without ridiculous political division?
 
BigEvilDoer said:
OK, by your comment, I am guessing you are pro-life, not pro-choice. I could very well be wrong here, but that’s what you lead me to believe.
If you care to google, the *VAST* majority of Americans are pro-choice. Please look at the link below - this is one that is on the low side of the abortion-should-be-legal crowd.

www.pewresearch.org

U.S. Public Continues to Favor Legal Abortion, Oppose Overturning Roe v. Wade

As debates over abortion continue in states around the country, a majority of Americans (61%) continue to say that abortion should be legal in all (27%) or most (34%) cases.
www.pewresearch.org www.pewresearch.org

61% in favour of choice.… other sites go up to about 69% pro-choice.

So, knowing this, how is it possible that the minority is dictating to the majority without ridiculous political division?
Click to expand...
SCOTUS doesn't care about polls and opinions. And the majority that elected their state govt gets what they want, wether it be liberal or conservative.
 
BigEvilDoer said:
OK, by your comment, I am guessing you are pro-life, not pro-choice. I could very well be wrong here, but that’s what you lead me to believe.
If you care to google, the *VAST* majority of Americans are pro-choice. Please look at the link below - this is one that is on the low side of the abortion-should-be-legal crowd.

www.pewresearch.org

U.S. Public Continues to Favor Legal Abortion, Oppose Overturning Roe v. Wade

As debates over abortion continue in states around the country, a majority of Americans (61%) continue to say that abortion should be legal in all (27%) or most (34%) cases.
www.pewresearch.org www.pewresearch.org

61% in favour of choice.… other sites go up to about 69% pro-choice.

So, knowing this, how is it possible that the minority is dictating to the majority without ridiculous political division?
Click to expand...
I found those numbers too, my initial response was related to the post stating 20% of americans were prolife. It's about double that, hopefully that explains the first point.

Next, I'm pro-choice. Not unconditionally, not radically, but I would never support an all out ban - I would be in the 61% noted in your post.

Finally, how does a minority get what they want? That's a little more complex. Scotus' decision was the 14th amendment did not guarantee a right of choice, that R v W decision erred interpreting due process and right to privacy. Scotus ruled it did not expressly confer a right to choose, which under US law makes it matter for each state to legislate by elected officials. Now it's complicated - each state now makes the rules - states full of conservatives go one way, liberals the other. I'm guessing within each state, the majority will prevail - which is exactly the way the US Constitution says it should work.
 
The majority also favours some limits on abortions. That didn't factor into the poll provided at all. My position is that abortions should be available, but we should figure out how to cut the numbers drastically, by providing better birth control information means and methods. It's not healthy for women to have abortions. There should also be a cutoff date. Aborting a full term baby as its being born should not be allowed. There should also be better support, although I'd be somewhat inclined to put that money into autism support instead.
 
Baggsy said:
The majority also favours some limits on abortions. That didn't factor into the poll provided at all. My position is that abortions should be available, but we should figure out how to cut the numbers drastically, by providing better birth control information means and methods. It's not healthy for women to have abortions. There should also be a cutoff date. Aborting a full term baby as its being born should not be allowed. There should also be better support, although I'd be somewhat inclined to put that money into autism support instead.
Click to expand...
I agree with all of that. There are several issues/questions that should to be addressed, considered and debated.

Gender based
Do men have rights? What happens when they request or deny termination?
Term limits
 
Mad Mike said:
I found those numbers too, my initial response was related to the post stating 20% of americans were prolife. It's about double that, hopefully that explains the first point.

Next, I'm pro-choice. Not unconditionally, not radically, but I would never support an all out ban - I would be in the 61% noted in your post.

Finally, how does a minority get what they want? That's a little more complex. Scotus' decision was the 14th amendment did not guarantee a right of choice, that R v W decision erred interpreting due process and right to privacy. Scotus ruled it did not expressly confer a right to choose, which under US law makes it matter for each state to legislate by elected officials. Now it's complicated - each state now makes the rules - states full of conservatives go one way, liberals the other. I'm guessing within each state, the majority will prevail - which is exactly the way the US Constitution says it should work.
Click to expand...
Well said.
Thanks so much for your clarifications.
 
Baggsy said:
The majority also favours some limits on abortions. That didn't factor into the poll provided at all. My position is that abortions should be available, but we should figure out how to cut the numbers drastically, by providing better birth control information means and methods. It's not healthy for women to have abortions. There should also be a cutoff date. Aborting a full term baby as its being born should not be allowed. There should also be better support, although I'd be somewhat inclined to put that money into autism support instead.
Click to expand...

A fraction of 1% of abortions are as you detailed. 93% are first trimester and 44% of those abortions are now chemical. The Supreme Court could have left things as they were. As it is, my feeling is that the availability of chemical abortions will now increase through whatever means is available (unmarked US post mail etc).
 
Mad Mike said:
I found those numbers too, my initial response was related to the post stating 20% of americans were prolife. It's about double that, hopefully that explains the first point.

Next, I'm pro-choice. Not unconditionally, not radically, but I would never support an all out ban - I would be in the 61% noted in your post.

Finally, how does a minority get what they want? That's a little more complex. Scotus' decision was the 14th amendment did not guarantee a right of choice, that R v W decision erred interpreting due process and right to privacy. Scotus ruled it did not expressly confer a right to choose, which under US law makes it matter for each state to legislate by elected officials. Now it's complicated - each state now makes the rules - states full of conservatives go one way, liberals the other. I'm guessing within each state, the majority will prevail - which is exactly the way the US Constitution says it should work.
Click to expand...

Not if it’s a human rights or health issue, which it should be. This ruling means that women’s health and women in general are treated differently in different states which is quite nuts. Some things just shouldn’t be handled at the State level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom