Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
drvoke

Women's rights under attack in Arkansas, Utah, and Ohio

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, DemoMan said:

 

Who claims that?

Do you have a cite?

There are some religious sites.

But common sense should tell people to be skeptical when a company produces "research" showing that their product should be purchased.

 

Look at all the lawsuits about products that were "miracles" just a few years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Bluenami said:

 

Because you said reason X is not a reason to compel the taxpayers to pay the tax that the majority of them want to pay.  So it boils down to your objection to majority rule, right?

 

We're making good progress now.  Why does majority not make right?

That wasn't meant to be taken seriously, and is directly linked to the BS argument. Focus only on that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, duck33 said:

That wasn't meant to be taken seriously, and is directly linked to the BS argument. Focus only on that

 

But the soundness of their reasoning doesn't matter... it's what they want.

 

If 2 of us wants pizza and 1 wants hotdogs, but the 2 who want pizza want it for a stupid reason, should we have hotdogs?  So what if the reason is stupid.  We should seek to make the most people happy and the least people inconvenienced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bluenami said:

 

But the soundness of their reasoning doesn't matter... it's what they want.

 

If 2 of us wants pizza and 1 wants hotdogs, but the 2 who want pizza want it for a stupid reason, should we have hotdogs?  So what if the reason is stupid.  We should seek to make the most people happy and the least people inconvenienced.

That's something called "tyranny of the majority". America is not a pure democracy, or even a democracy at all. What the majority wants doesnt matter if anyone's rights are infringed. 

 

And of course the reasoning matters. Ideas that are poorly supported by idiotic reasoning dont spread as well. 

 

But again, this is all irrelevant. My comment was only saying the reasoning behind the argument is severely flawed so it should not be used. Use something more constructive with sound reasoning. That's the only point of my comment.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2019 at 6:45 PM, drvoke said:

 

Image result for "roe v wade"

 

 

 

It is an all-out assault on women's rights by the cross-toting GOP.  We must fight to keep Roe v. Wade the law of the land. If it is kicked back to the states, the attacks will be more focused and may ultimately succeed. This must not happen.

 

 

 

Arkansas, Utah lawmakers pass 18-week abortion bans

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/arkansas-utah-lawmakers-pass-18-week-abortion-bans

(Full article at above link)

 

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — Lawmakers in Arkansas and Utah sent their governors legislation Wednesday banning most abortions 18 weeks into a woman’s pregnancy, moving the states closer to enacting bans that could be among the strictest in the country.

 

 

Ohio state Senate passes fetal 'heartbeat' abortion bill

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/433955-ohio-state-senate-passes-fetal-heartbeat-abortion-bill

(Full article at above link)

 

The bill, which has been taken up in multiple state legislatures this year, would become one of the strictest policies regarding abortions in the United States. If passed, women would not be permitted to get an abortion once a fetus has a detectable heartbeat, which can generally happen within six weeks of a pregnancy.

Critics of the bill have contended that many women do not know they are pregnant by that point. 

 

 

 

Image result for religious pro life

 

 

Notice how cons cherry-pick their crocodile tears compassion for life.

 

 

 

 They lost in Kentucky today. The same will happen in those states too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, duck33 said:

That's something called "tyranny of the majority". America is not a pure democracy, or even a democracy at all. What the majority wants doesnt matter if anyone's rights are infringed. 

 

And of course the reasoning matters. Ideas that are poorly supported by idiotic reasoning dont spread as well. 

 

But again, this is all irrelevant. My comment was only saying the reasoning behind the argument is severely flawed so it should not be used. Use something more constructive with sound reasoning. That's the only point of my comment.

 

 

I'd like to explore the rationale behind the tyranny of the majority if you don't mind.  (I don't care one way or the other about the abortion argument)

 

Joe wants pizza

Bob wants pizza

Jack wants pizza

Jill wants pizza

Sarah wants pizza

Michelle wants pizza

John wants hotdogs

Mike wants hotdogs

 

If the group only has time to stop at one restaurant, which should they choose and why?

 

Should we ask each their reasons for wanting what they do?  If so, who is the judge of the validity of the reasoning?  Do we put that to a popular vote too?

 

I mean, if the people who want pizza aren't really hungry, but the ones wanting hotdogs are starving, shouldn't the hungry ones have more say?  But who determines whether or not the hungry ones should have more say?  Do we put it to a vote?

 

Joe says hungry people should not have more say

Bob says hungry people should not have more say

Jack says hungry people should not have more say

Jill says hungry people should not have more say

Sarah says hungry people should not have more say

Michelle says hungry people should not have more say

John says hungry people should have more say

Mike says hungry people should have more say

 

Ok now what?  Everyone votes in their own interests.

 

Who is the ultimate authority decreeing what is right?

 

So you'll say "I am".  Ok, then how do you enforce your decision against the group of people who disagree with you?  Do you try to reason with them or use force?  What force would you use?  What rationale would you use?  Why should you be the arbiter of what is right?  Do we put that to a popular vote too?  It never ends.

 

In fact, how did the tyranny of the majority thing get into the constitution?  Ironically, popular vote!  lol  The only way to get enough votes to ratify the constitution was to guarantee opulent minority would be protected from the majority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bluenami said:

 

I'd like to explore the rationale behind the tyranny of the majority if you don't mind.  (I don't care one way or the other about the abortion argument)

 

Joe wants pizza

Bob wants pizza

Jack wants pizza

Jill wants pizza

Sarah wants pizza

Michelle wants pizza

John wants hotdogs

Mike wants hotdogs

 

If the group only has time to stop at one restaurant, which should they choose and why?

 

Should we ask each their reasons for wanting what they do?  If so, who is the judge of the validity of the reasoning?  Do we put that to a popular vote too?

 

I mean, if the people who want pizza aren't really hungry, but the ones wanting hotdogs are starving, shouldn't the hungry ones have more say?  But who determines whether or not the hungry ones should have more say?  Do we put it to a vote?

 

Joe says hungry people should not have more say

Bob says hungry people should not have more say

Jack says hungry people should not have more say

Jill says hungry people should not have more say

Sarah says hungry people should not have more say

Michelle says hungry people should not have more say

John says hungry people should have more say

Mike says hungry people should have more say

 

Ok now what?  Everyone votes in their own interests.

 

Who is the ultimate authority decreeing what is right?

 

So you'll say "I am".  Ok, then how do you enforce your decision against the group of people who disagree with you?  Do you try to reason with them or use force?  What force would you use?  What rationale would you use?  Why should you be the arbiter of what is right?  Do we put that to a popular vote too?  It never ends.

 

In fact, how did the tyranny of the majority thing get into the constitution?  Ironically, popular vote!  lol  The only way to get enough votes to ratify the constitution was to guarantee opulent minority would be protected from the majority.

Were not talking about food. That's a hell of a lot different than free speech, or any other right in the constitution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, skews13 said:

 They lost in Kentucky today. The same will happen in those states too.

 

One was blocked not too long ago in Iowa as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bluenami said:

 

I'd like to explore the rationale behind the tyranny of the majority if you don't mind.  (I don't care one way or the other about the abortion argument)

 

Joe wants pizza

Bob wants pizza

Jack wants pizza

Jill wants pizza

Sarah wants pizza

Michelle wants pizza

John wants hotdogs

Mike wants hotdogs

 

If the group only has time to stop at one restaurant, which should they choose and why?

 

Should we ask each their reasons for wanting what they do?  If so, who is the judge of the validity of the reasoning?  Do we put that to a popular vote too?

 

I mean, if the people who want pizza aren't really hungry, but the ones wanting hotdogs are starving, shouldn't the hungry ones have more say?  But who determines whether or not the hungry ones should have more say?  Do we put it to a vote?

 

Joe says hungry people should not have more say

Bob says hungry people should not have more say

Jack says hungry people should not have more say

Jill says hungry people should not have more say

Sarah says hungry people should not have more say

Michelle says hungry people should not have more say

John says hungry people should have more say

Mike says hungry people should have more say

 

Ok now what?  Everyone votes in their own interests.

 

Who is the ultimate authority decreeing what is right?

 

So you'll say "I am".  Ok, then how do you enforce your decision against the group of people who disagree with you?  Do you try to reason with them or use force?  What force would you use?  What rationale would you use?  Why should you be the arbiter of what is right?  Do we put that to a popular vote too?  It never ends.

 

In fact, how did the tyranny of the majority thing get into the constitution?  Ironically, popular vote!  lol  The only way to get enough votes to ratify the constitution was to guarantee opulent minority would be protected from the majority.

 

Add some protected rights to your scenario to make it accurate.
Say that people with allergies to tomatoes have a right to avoid pizza shops, no matter what the majority says.

And say that in order to override that right requires a 3/4 majority.
And then let's say that two of the pizza lovers also respect the right of the allergic ones to live, so the vote to override is 4 to 4.

 

Now what are you going to do?

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, duck33 said:

Were not talking about food. That's a hell of a lot different than free speech, or any other right in the constitution.

 

Article 5 says the constitution can be changed, so if you support the constitution, you support it being changed.  The constitution is not god.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Chuck! said:

 

Add some protected rights to your scenario to make it accurate.
Say that people with allergies to tomatoes have a right to avoid pizza shops, no matter what the majority says.

And say that in order to override that right requires a 3/4 majority.
And then let's say that two of the pizza lovers also respect the right of the allergic ones to live, so the vote to override is 4 to 4.

 

Now what are you going to do?

 

 

But how do those rules come into effect?  Popular vote?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2019 at 7:06 PM, RollingRock said:

The only one who should have any choice about abortion is the woman who is pregnant.  Abortion is a private choice between a woman and her doctor(s).  A woman's uterus is not the property of the courts.  

   The baby that is about to be ripped to pieces should have something to say about THAT!!!              :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Bluenami said:

 

But how do those rules come into effect?  Popular vote?

 

 

It's called a constitution, and it is unanimous. 

 

 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bgr39 said:

   The baby that is about to be ripped to pieces should have something to say about THAT!!!              :) 

There is no "baby" at the point in gestation when women have their abortions.  At that stage it's a "fetus" and it have no legal to inhabit the body of another against their will.  Find a different place for the fetus to gestate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bluenami said:

 

Article 5 says the constitution can be changed, so if you support the constitution, you support it being changed.  The constitution is not god.

How's that relevant either? It's not the discussion here. It doesnt make sense either. Just because it says how it can be changed, I must support any desired changes from anyone? Huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chuck! said:

It's called a constitution, and it is unanimous. 

 

That's an argument for popular vote right?

 

And Article 5 says the constitution can be changed, so if you support the constitution, you support it being changed.  The constitution is not god.

 

And how is the constitution changed?  Popular vote.  Not minority vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, duck33 said:

How's that relevant either? It's not the discussion here. It doesnt make sense either. Just because it says how it can be changed, I must support any desired changes from anyone? Huh?

 

No, only the popular voted changes LOL

 

Care to try again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×