Into the Night
Verified User
Assumption of victory fallacy. Fallacy fallacy. He committed no fallacy. Discard of logic. You can't win an argument that way, Sock.
Texas has declared war on the United States. Other Governors are joining
- Thread starter Concart
- Start date
Assumption of victory fallacy. Fallacy fallacy. He committed no fallacy. Discard of logic. You can't win an argument that way, Sock.
Into the Night
Verified User
Mantra 1d, Sock.
Here is the problem with your position. It does not accept that there HAS to be an arbiter who makes a decision regarding whether a law is constitutional. Your understanding and mine are not the same. I believe abortion IS a constitutional right. So someone needs to decide. Who? Who decides that? You keep saying the courts have no right. Who does? Name the body. Otherwise your argument is moot.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
Per the US Constitution, there is no federal power or authority attached to abortion, therefore the federal government has no power or authority to act on it or against it. Abortion rights then fall to the states, or the people, via the 10th Amendment. Californians may find that there is a right to an abortion in their state, while Texas does not. That's how federalism works.
What diesel want's is a sole political body that he feels can be controlled via party politics to decide what he wants to be constitutional, whether it's in the Constitution or not. That destroys any semblance of a Constitutional republic and reduces the US to a Oligarchy.
Per the Us constitution states cannot pass a law that violates the Constitution. Who decides? You haven’t provided an answer to that. Until you do, your argument becomes moot. So who decides whether a law is constitutional?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
there are very few situations where a state law would violate the US Constitution. That reason is because the US Constitution MOSTLY deals with prescribing a limited set of restrictive powers to the federal government. So, in those few instances, where a state might try to usurp a federal power, the feds can ignore it, OR, if a citizen is harmed by that state law, they can sue the state in federal court where the court decides in favor of the citizen and the state loses. If it's determined that the federal government has no power in a specific case, they deny standing and the citizen is left to deal with the state court. In the end, though, it really comes down to the people. There is a reason that we the people have a right to nullification in all cases of law and that is because it's OUR Constitution, OUR state, OUR nation.
Ultimately, it has to be recognized that the people are the final arbiter of the Constitution, not the government. The main reason that most people prefer to rely on the courts is that they either don't care enough about knowing the Constitution, or don't trust their fellow Americans enough to hold to the Constitution.
Indeed.
Biden folded. Even he could see the bad imagery of the feds cutting the barb wire that is preventing illegals from crossing.
Texas-1
Biden-0
Biden has finally had to admit that the border is/was never closed since he took office.
He lied for three years.
Last edited:
Into the Night
Verified User
If a law does not conform with the Constitution, it is unconstitutional. No arbiter needed.
Obviously.
Nope. The word 'abortion' does not even appear in the Constitution.
An amendment.
The States.
No court has the authority to interpret or change any constitution.
The States.
I have answered these questions numerous times for you. So have others. You keep mindlessly asking them over and over and over and over and over. RQAA.
ExpressLane
Verified User
Into the Night
Verified User
Quote right. It falls to the States. Each State has the right to define whether they want to enforce abortion as murder (which is what it is).
The 'federal' government is already an oligarchy. It no longer recognizes the Constitution of the United States nor the constitution of any State.
Examples:
* Gun control laws enforced by the ATF and FBI, in violation of the 2nd amendment.
* Censorship of social media platforms and printed media, in violation of the 1st amendment.
* Attempting to force the publication of personal information, collecting personal information for those purchasing weapons and other materials, and creating agencies to search the general public at various checkpoints, such as TSA, in violation of the 4th amendment.
* The seizure of personal property without authorization (as the TSA does), compelling a witness to testify against himself (as they try to do with Trump), in violation of the 5th amendment.
* Compelling the use of fiat currency with no commodity backing, in violation of Article I.
* Usurping authorities and powers, in violation of Articles I, II, and III, and V.
* Attempting to use 'blind' witnesses in a court of law, and attempting conviction without trial, violating the 6th amendment.
* Denying a jury in a lawsuit, in violation of the 7th amendment.
* Attempting to restrict rights to those provided by government, in violation of the 9th amendment.
* Usurping the authority of the States, in violation of the 10th amendment.
* Attempting to use a court to extend a ruling of a lawsuit brought by citizens of a State against their State government across all other States, in violation of the 11th amendment.
* Attempting to choose the electors of a State, in violation of Article II and the 12th amendment.
* Applying the law unequally, depending on political affiliation, in violation of the 14th amendment.
* Attempting to use the 14th amendment to cancel the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th amendments, in violation of all of these amendments and Article I.
* Federal laws based on racism (as the so-called 'civil rights act' of 1964, which instituted affirmative action programs, in violation of the 14th amendment.
* Income tax laws with multiple tiers, and attempts to 'tax the rich', in violation of the 16th amendment.
* Abridging the right to vote for failure to pay the Covid tax, in violation of the 24th amendment.
* Enforcing the legalization of abortion, in violation of Articles I, III, and V, and the 9th and 10th amendments.
The 'federal' government has not been a federal government for some time. Lately, it has almost no semblance of a government that conforms to the Constitution of the United States, nor even recognizes States as entities.
Into the Night
Verified User
RQAA. Stop repeating your question mindlessly, Sock. It's already been answered.
If a law or court ruling does not conform to the Constitution of the United States, it is unconstitutional...PERIOD. There is no 'who' required.
Into the Night
Verified User
So, a women should have the choice over her own body and make her own decisions. That works for me.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
A woman DOES have the choice over her own body, in so far as consenting to sex that she KNOWS could result in pregnancy. NOW, depending upon the state, she may have further choices of using abortion as birth control or accepting the consequences of her decision to consent to sex. so don't try translating my statements in to something else.
ExpressLane
Verified User
If your mom has the power to kill you why should we remove that power after birth?
BTE : This thread is about the border not about the right to murder your kid so stat another thread if that is what you want to talk about.
That's not what Abbott or the Republicans are doing.
It's not what they want to do because instead of bussing them all over the country, assisting in this "invasion" you're saying they're doing, they could just bus them across the border to Mexico.
Why isn't Abbott doing that? Why is he assisting an "invasion" by transporting the "invaders" all over the country?
Because it's not an invasion and they're not invaders. They're disparate refugees fleeing failed Conservative policy in Latin America.
The court in Roe v. Wade disagreed with you on this point, and the current court agrees with you. That said, YOU haven't got any authority or say so over what the Constitution says or does not say. We, THE PEOPLE, through our elective representatives, have decided that the courts are the arbiters of the Constitution. Don't like it? Get the fuck out.
You're side keep crying that we are racist and inhumane. You want them, you take them. Your side caused this mess, you should deal with it. Sadly. it's us taxpayers who are getting screwed.