IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags abortion

Reply
Old 30th June 2022, 12:16 PM   #281
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 9,939
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Now the SC has gutted the EPA
Hey, c'mon, it's now paradise! No clean air to breathe, no right to privacy, no right to marry who you choose, and best of all, way more ******* guns in public!
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 12:19 PM   #282
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 33,049
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Hey, c'mon, it's now paradise! No clean air to breathe, no right to privacy, no right to marry who you choose, and best of all, way more ******* guns in public!
No bodily autonomy. (You don’t need two healthy lungs, do you?)
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 12:59 PM   #283
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,938
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
I keep on telling you people, there is no peaceful solution to this.
You will have to choose between your freedom and your pacifism.
Sure there is. Win elections. Get the laws you want passed. Amend the constitution if it's sufficiently important.

What you really mean is that you can't achieve your policy goals through ordinary democratic methods because they aren't actually sufficiently popular.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 01:14 PM   #284
Garrison
Philosopher
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 5,833
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Sure there is. Win elections. Get the laws you want passed. Amend the constitution if it's sufficiently important.

What you really mean is that you can't achieve your policy goals through ordinary democratic methods because they aren't actually sufficiently popular.
I assume you are referring to the current Republican strategy?
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 01:17 PM   #285
cosmicaug
Graduate Poster
 
cosmicaug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,864
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
What you really mean is that you can't achieve your policy goals through ordinary democratic methods because they aren't actually sufficiently popular.
Yes, because the GOP now is the party which stands for "ordinary democratic methods".

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
__________________
--
August Pamplona
cosmicaug is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 01:18 PM   #286
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,938
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
It's not widespread, but it's starting to happen.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/...ption-85963071
No, it's not starting to happen. Even the headline should have clued you in.
St. Luke’s Health Kansas City said in a statement Wednesday that it would resume offering the medication known as the morning after pill, a day after it told The Kansas City Star that its Missouri hospitals would halt emergency contraception.

It did so after the state's attorney general issued a statement stating unequivicolly that emergency contraception is not illegal under an abortion ban that was enacted minutes after Friday's U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade. The Missouri law bans all abortions except in cases of medical emergency.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 01:22 PM   #287
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9,479
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Sure there is. Win elections. Get the laws you want passed. Amend the constitution if it's sufficiently important.

What you really mean is that you can't achieve your policy goals through ordinary democratic methods because they aren't actually sufficiently popular.
I don't know. There doesn't look like any possibility of anybody having the support to resolve this by changing the constitution. There seems to be an increasing push to not accept the legitimacy of laws from the other side. There seems to be an increasing trend to accuse the other side of cheating to win the election. It'll all work itself out somehow, but "how" is going to be interesting.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 01:22 PM   #288
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,938
Originally Posted by cosmicaug View Post
Yes, because the GOP now is the party which stands for "ordinary democratic methods".

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
This isn't about parties. It's about you. Do YOU believe in democracy? dudalb apparently doesn't. If you only believe in democracy when you're winning elections, then you don't really believe in democracy.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 01:25 PM   #289
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,938
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
I don't know. There doesn't look like any possibility of anybody having the support to resolve this by changing the constitution.
Well, yes. Because no side is sufficiently popular right now.

Which is precisely why this issue is better handled by the legislature than by the courts.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 01:41 PM   #290
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9,479
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Well, yes. Because no side is sufficiently popular right now.

Which is precisely why this issue is better handled by the legislature than by the courts.
I don't think that that is going to do much to relieve the pressure overall. The whole game since the 60s, maybe even the 30s has been to push social change federally. That has built up a heck of a lot of expectation and power. If we are looking at it in isolation of the forces and pressures involved, I agree with you. I am not altogether sure that that is going to be an acceptable answer.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:02 PM   #291
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 33,049
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Depends on who you count as an individual. If a fetus is an individual worthy of consideration, then Dobbs has significantly protected their rights and freedoms.
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Of course, the obvious consequence is the question of whether someone without functioning kidneys has a right to a functioning kidney from someone who has two good kidneys.
Too out there for a response? How about forced blood donation?

Sorry, at that point, it wouldn't be a "donation".

How about forced blood harvesting to save people having surgery or suffering from some form of traumatic blood loss? Since Dobbs strikes down unenumerated rights based on Due Process, American citizens no longer have a right to bodily autonomy. If you can save one or more lives by forcing another individual through a procedure they'll probably live through, where is the legal or constitutional boundary?
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:08 PM   #292
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9,479
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Too out there for a response? How about forced blood donation?

Sorry, at that point, it wouldn't be a "donation".

How about forced blood harvesting to save people having surgery or suffering from some form of traumatic blood loss? Since Dobbs strikes down unenumerated rights based on Due Process, American citizens no longer have a right to bodily autonomy. If you can save one or more lives by forcing another individual through a procedure they'll probably live through, where is the legal or constitutional boundary?
Didn't we go through this with Covid vaccines? The federal government seemed to be relatively able to put people under a lot of pressure to accept medical procedures that violated their bodily autonomy in the service of the greater good.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:19 PM   #293
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 33,049
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
Didn't we go through this with Covid vaccines? The federal government seemed to be relatively able to put people under a lot of pressure to accept medical procedures that violated their bodily autonomy in the service of the greater good.
Sure, and there is an argument to be made that, under emergency conditions, rights can be temporarily suspended so the country can deal with the crisis. Even then, no one was forced to take a vaccine. They could opt to not take one, but were then limited on where they could go and what they could participated in.

This isn't that. This is the permanent removal of the right to bodily autonomy. If one's state makes a law that abortion is illegal and that it is illegal to go across state lines to have an abortion, a pregnant person has no legal option.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:23 PM   #294
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 55,922
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
This isn't about parties. It's about you. Do YOU believe in democracy? dudalb apparently doesn't. If you only believe in democracy when you're winning elections, then you don't really believe in democracy.


Well, the GOP has pretty much abandoned Democrcy anyway...
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:45 PM   #295
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9,479
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Sure, and there is an argument to be made that, under emergency conditions, rights can be temporarily suspended so the country can deal with the crisis. Even then, no one was forced to take a vaccine. They could opt to not take one, but were then limited on where they could go and what they could participated in.

This isn't that. This is the permanent removal of the right to bodily autonomy. If one's state makes a law that abortion is illegal and that it is illegal to go across state lines to have an abortion, a pregnant person has no legal option.
The US has been in a state of emergency since 1979. That is business as usual. You think, if they what ever their reason for wanting to do something like this wouldn't also be an emergency, continually extended like covid was? Implementing it through government would be the hard way though.

People were losing their jobs over the vaccine. We are living in a world now where government and global corporations work hand in glove. There is little need for the government to force you to do things, when they can just say how nice it would be if your employer threatened to fire you, or maybe close you bank account, if you don't do what they want.

I'm not sure that a state could make a law saying you couldn't cross state lines to do something that was legal in another state.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:50 PM   #296
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 32,776
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Sure, and there is an argument to be made that, under emergency conditions, rights can be temporarily suspended so the country can deal with the crisis. Even then, no one was forced to take a vaccine. They could opt to not take one, but were then limited on where they could go and what they could participated in.

This isn't that. This is the permanent removal of the right to bodily autonomy. If one's state makes a law that abortion is illegal and that it is illegal to go across state lines to have an abortion, a pregnant person has no legal option.
In the latter case it is potentially worse, if officials look to prevention. It is, after all, unknown what a person's reason for travel is, unless it is monitored and controllled. A pregnant person or even a potentially pregnant person could be denied what we have cmplacently considered common freedom, which is not explicit.

We have always assumed that the Constitution guarantees the right to travel between states without search, seizure and intrusion, but like many such issues it is not explicit. The fourteenth amendment seems to suggest it, but a raging originalist might find it not really there., and though the abolition of slavery ended the need for Black people to show papers, the mechanism is not explicitly abolished.

Ha ha ha, couldn't happen here....!
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

"There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:51 PM   #297
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 33,049
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
People were losing their jobs over the vaccine.
People were losing their lives fighting over the vaccine, but you're missing the point: There is no longer any Constitutional barrier to blood or organ harvesting. The right that protected us from actions like that was the foundation of Roe and it is now gone. If the state decides it needs one of your kidneys or your body after you die, nothing prevents them from codifying it into law and making it happen.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:58 PM   #298
cosmicaug
Graduate Poster
 
cosmicaug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,864
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
[/b]
Well, the GOP has pretty much abandoned Democrcy anyway...
He gets the point. He's only pretending not to (partly because he's perfectly fine with it).
__________________
--
August Pamplona
cosmicaug is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 03:06 PM   #299
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9,479
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
People were losing their lives fighting over the vaccine, but you're missing the point: There is no longer any Constitutional barrier to blood or organ harvesting. The right that protected us from actions like that was the foundation of Roe and it is now gone. If the state decides it needs one of your kidneys or your body after you die, nothing prevents them from codifying it into law and making it happen.
Maybe. Do all protections have to be federal and tied to constitutional rights? If it's a big issue, it might well be much easier for the states where it is an issue to ban it.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 03:12 PM   #300
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 55,922
My predictions of massive violence amounting to a second civil War are not so crazy now, are they?
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 03:14 PM   #301
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 55,922
I never thought I would say this, but I would support BIden saying, vis a vis the EPA decision:

"Mr Roberts has made his decision. Let him enforce it".
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 05:03 PM   #302
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 33,049
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
Maybe. Do all protections have to be federal and tied to constitutional rights? If it's a big issue, it might well be much easier for the states where it is an issue to ban it.
What predictions? States with anti-abortion laws are already forcing people to use their bodies to save “individuals”, as Zig puts it, who aren’t even legally people.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 05:14 PM   #303
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 18,913
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Sure there is. Win elections.
Great... all the democrats have to do is overcome the gerrymandering and voter suppression taking place in various red states, limit the influence of "big money" campaign donors, deal with an electoral college that seems to give more preference to cows than people, and magically keep countries like Russia from interfering in future elections.

I'm sure the supreme court would be more than willing to help with some of those. Oh, wait, they already had their say, and their response was "go ahead and suppress all those minority votes and gerrymander away. We don't care."
Quote:
This isn't about parties. It's about you. Do YOU believe in democracy? dudalb apparently doesn't. If you only believe in democracy when you're winning elections, then you don't really believe in democracy.
At the risk of speaking for dudalb, I rather suspect he DOES believe in democracy. He just seems to have problems with elements of the American system that are currently being exhibited, which is no longer characterized as a 'full democracy' and is rapidly going down the toilet.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 05:22 PM   #304
slyjoe
Illuminator
 
slyjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ
Posts: 3,240
In related news, the SC didn't take up NY vaccine mandate order.

Clarence Thomas, on an abortion-related roll, diseented:

Quote:
In a sharply worded dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas expressed support Thursday for a debunked claim that all Covid vaccines are made with cells from “aborted children.”
I seriously think Thomas has jumped the shark.

ETA: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/sup...abor-rcna36156
__________________
"You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade

Last edited by slyjoe; 30th June 2022 at 05:25 PM.
slyjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 05:24 PM   #305
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 18,913
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No, it's not starting to happen. Even the headline should have clued you in.
St. Luke’s Health Kansas City said in a statement Wednesday that it would resume offering the medication known as the morning after pill, a day after it told The Kansas City Star that its Missouri hospitals would halt emergency contraception.

It did so after the state's attorney general issued a statement stating unequivicolly that emergency contraception is not illegal under an abortion ban that was enacted minutes after Friday's U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade. The Missouri law bans all abortions except in cases of medical emergency.
First of all, the fact that the a hospital (an organization that probably has decent legal experts on staff) was concerned about dispensing the morning after pill should make a rational person a bit nervous, since it indicates a law that is vague.

Secondly... why should anyone trust the Attorney general? He's a Republican... a member of the party that has decided that women cannot control their own bodies. It certainly would not be out of character for them to change their opinion in the near future if the members of Y'all Quaeda raise a big-enough fuss.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 05:40 PM   #306
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9,479
Originally Posted by slyjoe View Post
In related news, the SC didn't take up NY vaccine mandate order.

Clarence Thomas, on an abortion-related roll, diseented:



I seriously think Thomas has jumped the shark.

ETA: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/sup...abor-rcna36156
Could you explain how he is wrong? The only quote they have from him in the article is "because they were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children". The article goes on to explain "The fetal tissue used in these processes came from elective abortions that happened decades ago. But the cells have since replicated many times, so none of the original tissue is involved in the making of modern vaccines.".

They add in a claim that the cells that are currently being used are from foetal tissue and debunk his statement based on that. Their quote from him doesn't make that claim though. They also equivocate from his statement of "developed using" to "manufactured from".

This is pretty typical of the way fact checkers operate where they debunk a claim that is more specific, or otherwise altered, from the statement that they are ostensibly debunking.

Does he actually make the claim they debunk anywhere?
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 05:42 PM   #307
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 92,445
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
This isn't about parties. It's about you. Do YOU believe in democracy? dudalb apparently doesn't. If you only believe in democracy when you're winning elections, then you don't really believe in democracy.
WTF are you talking about?

Have you been living under a rock for the last 25 years? The GOP is the better marketers and horrible legislators. The Democrats are terrible marketers and they can't get much passed the party of 'blocking every ******* thing whether it was originally their idea or not and whether it is good for the country or not'.

Mitch McConnell has been as bad for the country as Drumpf.

Perhaps you could describe this magical democracy you believe is possible when the minority is running the country.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 05:45 PM   #308
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 92,445
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Well, yes. Because no side is sufficiently popular right now.

Which is precisely why this issue is better handled by the legislature than by the courts.
Yeah..no. Do you mean the majority just doesn't have a big enough super-majority to get past the minority?
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 06:00 PM   #309
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 92,445
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
I never thought I would say this, but I would support BIden saying, vis a vis the EPA decision:

"Mr Roberts has made his decision. Let him enforce it".
That's good for the EPA crap but I believe it may be working for the Alito in charge of abortions too.

There is at least one prosecutor in TX balking at enforcing the abortion ban. Remember the sheriffs that wouldn't enforce mask mandates? Instead of a civil war what we might end up with are police departments selectively enforcing laws. With a disrespected SCOTUS we are closer to that kind of breakup of the country.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 06:06 PM   #310
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 92,445
Originally Posted by slyjoe View Post
In related news, the SC didn't take up NY vaccine mandate order.

Clarence Thomas, on an abortion-related roll, diseented:

I seriously think Thomas has jumped the shark.

ETA: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/sup...abor-rcna36156
Think about it, his wife has come out publicly professing CTs. I'm not the least bit surprised to hear that he believes any number of ignorant things.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 06:08 PM   #311
slyjoe
Illuminator
 
slyjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ
Posts: 3,240
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
Could you explain how he is wrong? The only quote they have from him in the article is "because they were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children". The article goes on to explain "The fetal tissue used in these processes came from elective abortions that happened decades ago. But the cells have since replicated many times, so none of the original tissue is involved in the making of modern vaccines.".

They add in a claim that the cells that are currently being used are from foetal tissue and debunk his statement based on that. Their quote from him doesn't make that claim though. They also equivocate from his statement of "developed using" to "manufactured from".

This is pretty typical of the way fact checkers operate where they debunk a claim that is more specific, or otherwise altered, from the statement that they are ostensibly debunking.

Does he actually make the claim they debunk anywhere?
I see your point.

However, the plaintiffs were OK with vaccines developed in the same way; the cell lines were using in testing the mRNA vaccine, not in manufacturing it. So explain how this should qualify for a religious exemption?
__________________
"You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade
slyjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 06:09 PM   #312
cmikes
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 623
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
I never thought I would say this, but I would support BIden saying, vis a vis the EPA decision:

"Mr Roberts has made his decision. Let him enforce it".

Spoken like a true Stalinist. "How many battalions does the Pope have?"
cmikes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 06:10 PM   #313
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 25,936
Florida judge rules state's 15 week abortion ban violates the "privacy" clause of FL's constitution. He'll issue statewide injunction. DeSantis' office says it will appeal to state's conservative SC to reverse existing precedent regarding FL' right to privacy.

Looks like reversing he right to privacy has become the GOP's baby.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 06:55 PM   #314
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,938
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Secondly... why should anyone trust the Attorney general?
Because he's the attorney general. And by making this public statement, he has committed his office to that position. He cannot prosecute people for doing what he said was OK.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 09:30 PM   #315
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,277
Originally Posted by slyjoe View Post
I see your point.



However, the plaintiffs were OK with vaccines developed in the same way; the cell lines were using in testing the mRNA vaccine, not in manufacturing it. So explain how this should qualify for a religious exemption?
Because their "sincerely held religious belief something something."

Judgement in favor of the plaintiff.

Case dismissed.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 10:00 PM   #316
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 18,306
many religious groups, Jews among them, have the sincerely held religious belief that they should be able to get an abortion if it's the best for the pregnant person.

The SC doesn't give a **** about any religion but their own.
__________________
"When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me."

- Emo Philips
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 10:17 PM   #317
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 15,621
Originally Posted by cmikes View Post
Spoken like a true Stalinist. "How many battalions does the Pope have?"
The reference is to a remark attributed to Andrew Jackson.
https://quotes.yourdictionary.com/author/quote/567967
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 11:02 PM   #318
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 92,445
Jon Stewart's podcast was very informative today. His guests are three female law professors and they know a lot about the history, this court, the religious right, and more. It's close to 45min long. I found every bit of it interesting.
Quote:
Roe v. Wade has been overturned. So now what the hell are we supposed to do? The hosts of the Strict Scrutiny podcast — law professors Leah Litman, Melissa Murray, and Kate Shaw — are back to help Jon process the shocking decision. Writers Kris Acimovic and Tocarra Mallard also weigh in on why the Democrats answer to this crisis seems to be giving them $15.
The link in case you want to watch it outside of the forum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twb_v78C1q4

If you want to watch it here or just sample it, here you go:
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2022, 06:28 AM   #319
Suddenly
No Punting
 
Suddenly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not In Follansbee
Posts: 4,964
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
I never thought I would say this, but I would support BIden saying, vis a vis the EPA decision:

"Mr Roberts has made his decision. Let him enforce it".
As soon as RBG turned out to not be a highlander this is where it was heading. Packing the court was the best option, but that time has far passed in part because we listened to people who are way too emotionally invested in the sanctity of the Supreme Court and who failed to comprehend that it's now gone fully rogue and back and forth packing and repacking making the court way less coherent is still a win.

The only thing that requires the other branches to listen to the court are the same sort of norms the GOP has been using as toilet paper to their ends. Which is why they need to do this. They probably half-assed do this as to abortion in that abortion meds are FDA approved and there is some issue with state statutes that make FDA approved medicines illegal. They will be similarly cute with regulations somehow. Supremacy clause, etc.

This will eventually come to naught because we are effectively Iran; a political structure operating under the approval of a council of religious extremists mostly concerned with maintaining their group's hegemony over their people. It's just developing slowly but will speed up as dark money pacs ramp up and go full speed at manufacturing cases to get issues in front of the court.

This was always the danger of framing Supreme Court justices as priests handing down received wisdom as to the meaning of the constitution.
Suddenly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2022, 09:14 AM   #320
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 19,067
Originally Posted by slyjoe View Post
In related news, the SC didn't take up NY vaccine mandate order.

Clarence Thomas, on an abortion-related roll, diseented:



I seriously think Thomas has jumped the shark.

ETA: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/sup...abor-rcna36156
It's the lying media as usual. Thomas was quoting the petitioners:

Quote:
Petitioners are 16 healthcare workers who served New York communities throughout the COVID–19 pandemic. They object on religious grounds to all available COVID–19 vaccines because they were developed using cell lines de-
rived from aborted children.
And that particular claim isn't exactly incorrect, even according to NBC News:

Quote:
Pfizer and Moderna used fetal cell lines early in their Covid vaccine development to test the efficacy of their formulas, as other vaccines have in the past. The fetal tissue used in these processes came from elective abortions that happened decades ago. But the cells have since replicated many times, so none of the original tissue is involved in the making of modern vaccines.
So they were derived from abortions, just many years ago and they've since been replicated, so it doesn't really count?
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:23 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.