Alito confirmed!

[Imran Siddiqui]

OH NOES! Alito is a Souter!

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by PLATO


Interesting points for sure. The trick is to have a conservative court and a liberal Congress when Roe is overturned. Then the law can be correctly implemented.

But that'll never happen. Any federal law either legalizing or banning abortion would be filibustered. If Roe's overturned, abortion is definitely going to be state by state.

As for State's Rights...why would you be against a population of people getting what they want? ... Why is it important for me to adopt the same value as someone who lives 2000 miles away from me? Equally, why should that person live in fear of the growing power of my area?

I'm not against this being decided at a state level. But I do fear growing power in an area whose values I do not share, especially when those areas, through the federal government, can exercise power over me. The same reason the US is troubled by a United Nations dominated by 3rd World countries is the reason I would be troubled by a US dominated by 3rd World -- that is, Red -- states.

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
OH NOES! Alito is a Souter!

Well, I guess Bush II really is a chip off the old block.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


But that'll never happen. Any federal law either legalizing or banning abortion would be filibustered. If Roe's overturned, abortion is definitely going to be state by state.

As it should be if the Congress cannot reach a consensus. If Congress cannot act, then it is obviously a power reserved to the States.

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly

I'm not against this being decided at a state level. But I do fear growing power in an area whose values I do not share, especially when those areas, through the federal government, can exercise power over me. The same reason the US is troubled by a United Nations dominated by 3rd World countries is the reason I would be troubled by a US dominated by 3rd World -- that is, Red -- states.

I agree. The local values of any area should not be imposed on the whole. This is, IMO, why we have States in the first place. The federal government certainly has a role to play, but it has usurped the power reserved to the States in many areas. I dare say, that abortion will be legal in enough places to prevent the re-emergence of back room "clinics". I would even imagine that some "Red States" would suprise a few people in this regard.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Elok
Roe was doomed the moment it was issued. It got too many people too angry. If Alito doesn't help kill it, the Republicans WILL keep trying until someone else does. It's only a matter of time. You might as well get used to it; in fact, the second Roe is overturned the right loses one of its most potent recruiting tools, so you really should look forward to it.

Your lack of faith in conspiracy theories is lacking.

[Elok]

Huh? Oh, there's no "conspiracy." Roe was like a present for the GOP. It got massive numbers of people up in arms. They've been quite vocally opposing it for the past several decades, in case you didn't notice. The longer you try to squash debate, the angrier they get.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Elok
Huh? Oh, there's no "conspiracy." Roe was like a present for the GOP. It got massive numbers of people up in arms. They've been quite vocally opposing it for the past several decades, in case you didn't notice. The longer you try to squash debate, the angrier they get.

The conspiracy theory is that GOP doesn't want to overturn Roe v Wade, because once it's gone, on of the big reasons for the Religious Right to support them would be gone. Supposedly, they've got the Court consies sufficiently in reign to make sure it will never be overturned.

[Ben Kenobi]

Alito is a Souter!

In opposing the dp?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by StarLightDeath
Just out of curiosity, can someone quote to me where in the constitution it states a right to privacy? TIA

That is among one of the stupidiest arguments I've ever heard. I notice that the Constitution contains nothing about judicial review, or privacy, or a million other things which the political right likes to talk about such as the so called "right to marry". Does that mean they don't exist? Of course not because the Constitution isn't about what people can do (though later on the congress felt some personal rights were so important they needed extra protection in the form of the first ten amendments) and instead it is about what the government can and can't do. The Constitution was created to spell out the limited rights or powers given to the federal government. And it was clearly understood that the government had no powers that weren't authorized in the Constitution.

The ninth and tenth amendments were included to make absolutely sure there was no misunderstanding about the limited powers the Constitution grants to the federal government.

Amendment IX:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Now, where's the right to privacy?

It is clearly in those two amendments.

The government has no power to tell people what to do except in areas specifically authorized in the Constitution.

That means it has no right to tell people whether or not they can engage in homosexual acts; no right to invade our privacy; no right to manage our health-care system; no right to tell us what a marriage is; no right to run our lives; no right to do anything that wasn't specifically authorized in the Constitution.

(Notice also that nowhere in the Constitution does it say that government may violate the Bill of Rights if the target of its wrath is a non-citizen. Government isn't authorized to jail non-citizens indefinitely or deny them due process of law. There's a good reason for that, but that's another subject.)

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Winston


Of course it is. Which U.S. President of the 1980's do you think said it.

I can't find it cited on Google.

Its a good quote though, if you can track it down I'd be appreciative.

[Ben Kenobi]

But I do fear growing power in an area whose values I do not share, especially when those areas, through the federal government, can exercise power over me. The same reason the US is troubled by a United Nations dominated by 3rd World countries is the reason I would be troubled by a US dominated by 3rd World -- that is, Red -- states.

So let me get this straight, you favour states rights when it applies to blue states, and are against states rights when it applies to red states?

The whole point of taking this to the states is that each part of the country decides for themselves. Instead the argument we here from the other side is that all the counties in the US ought to have clinics in them, regardless of factors such as population density, etc.

As for me, I see this as a right to life issue, and therefore within the purview of the federal government. Sending it to the states is no different then the Missouri Compromise.

[Winston]

I'll see what I can do, Ozzy.

[Ben Kenobi]

That means it has no right to tell people whether or not they can engage in homosexual acts; no right to invade our privacy; no right to manage our health-care system; no right to tell us what a marriage is; no right to run our lives; no right to do anything that wasn't specifically authorized in the Constitution.

So the government has no right to issue marriage licenses?

[Winston]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
I can't find it cited on Google.

Its a good quote though, if you can track it down I'd be appreciative.

Ok, it was recited from memory, which has been known to be a little off at times. I may have picked it up from one of the numerous books on Ronald Reagan that I have, or I may have made the connection to Communism myself without realising it.

I did find a quote from Reagan along the same lines on BrainyQuote.com: "Abortion is advocated only by persons who have themselves been born." (#3 from the top)

I'll have a browse of a couple of books for the "original", but I wouldn't hold my breath for it. Maybe it's just a case of how the great man has influenced my tiny mind.

[OzzyKP]

Points for you, I'll cite the great Winston for the quote then.