Things I Learned from the GOP Debates...

[Cancel7]

I agree. I said it would be problematic, but it wouldn't instantly make abortion illegal as so many think it would.

No, it wouldn't do that. And it would never even lead to it being illegal in many states. In NY our new Democratic Governer is already strenghtening our own abortion laws in case of a federal challenge. He is not even leaving a loophole on our books, lest is should be exploited.

But I have to think of women in the more oppressed states.

 

[Damocles]

You don't get it Damo. Telling americans not to worry about overturning Roe, because they can simply get in a car and drive to a more enlightened state, is not going to cut it.

the point is, a constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT would be removed. No matter where you lived, you would live under the constant possiblity that white men in a state legislature could codify their opinion about a woman's uterus into law.

I didn't say that. I said it wouldn't make it immediately illegal, nor do I believe it would even limit very many of them because there are ways to get it done even with such a ruling overturned.

I also said it would likely make many people "pissed" or did you ignore that post? Seriously, you people really do assume I believe something that I do not just because you love to give your standard pat answers based on such an assumption rather than actually "listening" to what I state.

 

[Damocles]

So it is logical to further increase the cost ?

Logical felatio ?

Duh... No. My only point was that they would still be available, probably to all who wished to obtain them, because of these reasons. Not that I thought that it would be a great thing.

As I stated, I personally believe that regardless of what I believe on this issue, future advances in actual birth control will result in those in the future looking back and calling us barbarians on this issue.

 

[Cancel7]

Those women that can't afford even a bus ticket could never afford the abortion in the first place. They rely on the charity of strangers for their abortions to begin with.

This is a logical fallacy.

It's not just a bus ticket Damo. Many of them, the ride is so far, and then they are having a surgical procedure, they need to stay overnight. It can make something that was only just financially in reach, out of reach. And they are not necessarily depending on any strangers. Many of them have some of the money and get the rest from the guy. But for the poor, a hotel stay and a round trip, long distance bus ticket, can be the difference.

 

[Damocles]

You don't get it Damo. Telling americans not to worry about overturning Roe, because they can simply get in a car and drive to a more enlightened state, is not going to cut it.

the point is, a constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT would be removed. No matter where you lived, you would live under the constant possiblity that white men in a state legislature could codify their opinion about a woman's uterus into law.

And this is not an enumerated right, it is a "interpreted" right. Others may interpret the constitution differently on this subject than those SCOTUS justices did.

 

[Lao Tse]

It's not just a bus ticket Damo. Many of them, the ride is so far, and then they are having a surgical procedure, they need to stay overnight. It can make something that was only just financially in reach, out of reach. And they are not necessarily depending on any strangers. Many of them have some of the money and get the rest from the guy. But for the poor, a hotel stay and a round trip, long distance bus ticket, can be the difference.

Well you can put together an nice New York Abortion Tour Package for them.

 

[Damocles]

It's not just a bus ticket Damo. Many of them, the ride is so far, and then they are having a surgical procedure, they need to stay overnight. It can make something that was only just financially in reach, out of reach. And they are not necessarily depending on any strangers. Many of them have some of the money and get the rest from the guy. But for the poor, a hotel stay and a round trip, long distance bus ticket, can be the difference.

And once again, that same charity that would pay for some could help in this case. I do not believe that it would limit very many abortions at all.

 

[Cypress]

I didn't say that. I said it wouldn't make it immediately illegal, nor do I believe it would even limit very many of them because there are ways to get it done even with such a ruling overturned.

I also said it would likely make many people "pissed" or did you ignore that post? Seriously, you people really do assume I believe something that I do not just because you love to give your standard pat answers based on such an assumption rather than actually "listening" to what I state.

Yes, I think most of us are aware that the removal of a federally guaranted right, would then defer those decisions to the states.

But, as an american, I think I have to speak up for everyone's constituionally guaranteed individual rights.

I'm quite sure that if the federall guaranteed right to free speech was removed, I could make the same argument as you: That free speech wouldn't neccessarily be made illegal. Many state constitutions guarantee free speech too. And I would get laughed out of the room, for making that argument. Certain individual rights belong to ALL americans.

 

[Cancel7]

Well you can put together an nice New York Abortion Tour Package for them.

Cypress, did you tell him about my new business plan?

You're the only one who knew about it. You stinker! Now, the idea can be stolen before I get to turn a tidy little profit on it.

"An abortion, Bloomies, and a Mojito" all for the low, low price of, 1879.00"

For 500 more, you go to the top of the Empire State building, while still high on the pain pills.

I am telling you, I'm f'ing bombarded with inquires on this.

 

[Damocles]

Yes, I think most of us are aware that the removal of a federally guaranted right, would then defer those decisions to the states.

But, as an american, I think I have to speak up for everyone's constituionally guaranteed individual rights.

I'm quite sure that if the federall guaranteed right to free speech was removed, I could make the same argument as you: That free speech wouldn't neccessarily be made illegal. Many state constitutions guarantee free speech too. And I would get laughed out of the room, for making that argument. Certain individual rights belong to ALL americans.

There is a large difference between an enumerated right and an interpreted right, as well as what it would take to remove such rights. We argue this because you and I both know that if justices are put in that interpret it differently it would have the same power that the "gaurantee" you are speaking of has... It is not one of the directly enumerated rights that would have only an option of an Amendment to remove.

I think this one is called reductio ad absurdam....

 

[uscitizen]

Duh... No. My only point was that they would still be available, probably to all who wished to obtain them, because of these reasons. Not that I thought that it would be a great thing.

As I stated, I personally believe that regardless of what I believe on this issue, future advances in actual birth control will result in those in the future looking back and calling us barbarians on this issue.

For those whose religions allow them to use birth control....

I wonder who the barbarians are, those who create or resolve the situation ?

 

[Cypress]

Cypress, did you tell him about my new business plan?

You're the only one who knew about it. You stinker! Now, the idea can be stolen before I get to turn a tidy little profit on it.

"An abortion, Bloomies, and a Mojito" all for the low, low price of, 1879.00"

For 500 more, you go to the top of the Empire State building, while still high on the pain pills.

I am telling you, I'm f'ing bombarded with inquires on this.

lol - great idea!


I'm thinking about investing in coat hanger factories in the deep south, if Roe is overturned.


(sorry - tasteless humour. My excuse? being pissed off at TheoCon repubulicans)

 

[uscitizen]

Cypress, did you tell him about my new business plan?

You're the only one who knew about it. You stinker! Now, the idea can be stolen before I get to turn a tidy little profit on it.

"An abortion, Bloomies, and a Mojito" all for the low, low price of, 1879.00"

For 500 more, you go to the top of the Empire State building, while still high on the pain pills.

I am telling you, I'm f'ing bombarded with inquires on this.

Throw in a guest spot on Maury and you will make a fortune Darla.

 

[Damocles]

For those whose religions allow them to use birth control....

I wonder who the barbarians are, those who create or resolve the situation ?

I'll believe that will be judged by the future.

We already look back and consider many things our ancestors did "barbaric".

 

[Cypress]

There is a large difference between an enumerated right and an interpreted right, as well as what it would take to remove such rights. We argue this because you and I both know that if justices are put in that interpret it differently it would have the same power that the "gaurantee" you are speaking of has... It is not one of the directly enumerated rights that would have only an option of an Amendment to remove.

I think this one is called reductio ad absurdam....

It's a constitutionally guaranteed right, as of right now. And has been for nearly half a century. There's no way to spin your way out of that fact.

So, you just have to live with the fact that it's a constitutionally guaranteed right, until you can overturn it.

 

[Damocles]

It's a constitutionally guaranteed right, as of right now. And has been for nearly half a century. There's no way to spin your way out of that fact.

So, you just have to live with the fact that it's a constitutionally guaranteed right, until you can overturn it.

I'm not working to overturn it.

However, I do know that it is much easier to overturn an interpreted right, see Dred Scott, than it is to create an Amendment to deny a right.

As I said, you and I are speaking of this because we know that it could become a reality if certain conditions are met, the other not so much.

 

[Cancel7]

There is a large difference between an enumerated right and an interpreted right, as well as what it would take to remove such rights. We argue this because you and I both know that if justices are put in that interpret it differently it would have the same power that the "gaurantee" you are speaking of has... It is not one of the directly enumerated rights that would have only an option of an Amendment to remove.

I think this one is called reductio ad absurdam....

Damo, isn't it true that some of the founders - the more prominent ones in fact - resisted the Bill of Rights precisely because they did not want to "enumerate rights"? And that they didn't want to do that because they worried that some future fool would use that as a way to argue that only the rights they listed, were guaranteed rights?

 

[Damocles]

Damo, isn't it true that some of the founders - the more prominent ones in fact - resisted the Bill of Rights precisely because they did not want to "enumerate rights"? And that they didn't want to do that because they worried that some future fool would use that as a way to argue that only the rights they listed, were guaranteed rights?

Yes. I have once again only stated the difference between an interpreted right and an enumerated one and how they would differ in their removal.

As in such cases as the Dred Scott decision, later rulings can overturn an interpreted right, but an enumerated one will need an Amendment.

 

[Cypress]

I'm not working to overturn it.

However, I do know that it is much easier to overturn an interpreted right, see Dred Scott, than it is to create an Amendment to deny a right.

As I said, you and I are speaking of this because we know that it could become a reality if certain conditions are met, the other not so much.

But, Roe is on a much stronger foundation. The implied right to personal privacy is found throughout the bill of rights. The right to privacy in your home, your papers, and your belongings. In addition, the 9th amendment states that americans indidual right are NOT just limited to those specifically addressed in the amendments. It is entirely reasonable to conclude that the right to privacy in your home, your papers, and your belongings logically extends to your body.

 

[Damocles]

But, Roe is on a much stronger foundation. The implied right to personal privacy is found throughout the bill of rights. The right to privacy in your home, your papers, and your belongings. In addition, the 9th amendment states that americans indidual right are NOT just limited to those specifically addressed in the amendments. It is entirely reasonable to conclude that the right to privacy in your home, your papers, and your belongings logically extends to your body.

Which doesn't change the fact that it is an interpreted right, that it wouldn't take an Amendment to change it, that it is far more of a possibility than the other you presented is the very reason that we discuss it so consistently.