Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    12:10 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Federal Judge blocks Texas State law Back to Topics
mnrick041

Champion Author
Twin Cities

Posts:17,414
Points:1,921,740
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2013 6:36:34 PM

Federal Judge blocks part of State law.

Do you think the Judge is within his bounds or are the Feds sticking their nose into State business again?

REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,222
Points:3,149,335
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 19, 2013 12:19:45 AM

"Obligatory"

Cute video! The cast demonstrates the ridiculous implications of such an attitude. Of course, population pressures eventually lead to wars -- which do make a lot of money for some.
Profile Pic
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,239
Points:149,355
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 16, 2013 1:28:29 PM

Oh no what will Texans now do?
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,821
Points:2,930,320
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2013 9:24:28 AM

Obligatory.
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,222
Points:3,149,335
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2013 12:37:42 AM

" Does this mean you want to save the unfertilized materials and start using them too, because they're "life"?"

Of course human gametes are alive -- they're merely not capable of growing or reproducing without the critical contact with the complementary gamete. Mother Nature destroys countless numbers of these every day because the human body they're contained in hasn't used them yet. That's been happening since Adam and Eve.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,821
Points:2,930,320
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 1:46:56 PM

"Just another case of trying to make back-door laws to do what has already been ruled unconstitutional."

It's a constant onslaught from all sides--legislative, procedural, etc.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,103
Points:419,485
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 9:48:56 AM

Just another case of trying to make back-door laws to do what has already been ruled unconstitutional.

Very simliar to poll taxes and voter registration tests.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,821
Points:2,930,320
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 9:37:35 AM

"The fact that ovum or spermatozoon routinely get expelled does not mean they are not living."

Uh oh. Does this mean you want to save the unfertilized materials and start using them too, because they're "life"? That's just great.
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,222
Points:3,149,335
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 10, 2013 12:52:04 AM

"The fact that ovum or spermatozoon routinely get expelled does not mean they are not living."

Exactly -- yet Mother Nature routinely sends them to their demise without any help whatsoever from Planned Parenthood or any other born individual. That is simply Mother Nature's way.
Profile Pic
mweyant
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:7,801
Points:1,495,090
Joined:Feb 2010
Message Posted: Nov 9, 2013 6:14:45 AM

"I believe that life begins when a fetus has developed to the point where it is viable outside the womb without extraordinary measures. Until then, it is just part of the mother's body -- over which she has exclusive control. I see little difference before that point between a fetus and every ovum or spermatozoon which routinely gets expelled unused from the body."

Again, thank you for not injecting sarcastic comments, as so many do on this issue. The fact that ovum or spermatozoon routinely get expelled does not mean they are not living.

I believe that life begins at conception(well, it is pretty obvious that's what I believe :) ). Many times I have tried to think about just what would change my mind on this. I cannot come up with anything. Reading articles from the whole range of the political landscape does not change my mind, but I continue to do so, because I cannot find clarity on Roe vs. Wade. To me it was such a horrendous decision.

Thanks for your comments, KatmanDo.
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,222
Points:3,149,335
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 9, 2013 12:54:41 AM

"It is about the unborn but living child whose life is being terminated by another human's decision."

I believe that life begins when a fetus has developed to the point where it is viable outside the womb without extraordinary measures. Until then, it is just part of the mother's body -- over which she has exclusive control.

I see little difference before that point between a fetus and every ovum or spermatozoon which routinely gets expelled unused from the body.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,821
Points:2,930,320
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Nov 4, 2013 12:56:19 PM

"It is my opinion that this very important issue will always be around . . ."

And that's because, whether the state outlaws it or not, women will try to retain control over their own bodies.
Profile Pic
mweyant
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:7,801
Points:1,495,090
Joined:Feb 2010
Message Posted: Nov 4, 2013 1:23:26 AM

From my vantage point, it is all about the baby. It is all about not ending the life of the living. I have two older sisters whom I love dearly and who take a decidedly opposing view on this issue, and I believe I have heard most or all of the arguments stated in favor of abortion. I find fault with all of them because they don't consider the rights of the living baby in the womb. The arguments (tend to) center solely around the mother, and what is convenient, and this is what I find particularly distasteful and wrong. This issue is a very serious one--I appreciate seeing dialogue about it, for or against, that does not disintegrate into sarcasm or name-calling, because poorly-chosen remarks do not clarify anything for anyone.

KatmanDo -- I appreciated reading your comment(because you took some time to make a thoughtful comment), but there are plenty of women like me who feel the way I do. Here's the thing--it is not about me or what I think. It is not about you or what you think. It is about the unborn but living child whose life is being terminated by another human's decision. I can't get past it. I realize that my beliefs leave some people shaking their heads--this is the stuff hard issues are made of. It is my opinion that this very important issue will always be around . . .
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,222
Points:3,149,335
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 3, 2013 10:10:58 PM

"Women need to be protected from themselves? What?"

I spoke with a woman about a year or two ago who'd had an abortion years ago. When we spoke, she indicated that having the abortion was one of the biggest mistakes of her life and that she'd felt pressured into the procedure by the staff at the facility where she'd had the procedure done.

I suppose she would say today that people like her do need protection from themselves. It may be examples like hers which the predominantly male faces of the GOP's anti-abortion crowd uses as their justification for the GOP to take away a woman's constitutional freedom of choice.
Profile Pic
mweyant
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:7,801
Points:1,495,090
Joined:Feb 2010
Message Posted: Nov 3, 2013 3:37:50 PM

I have never understood the reason that society has allowed anyone to take a life, just because it is growing in someone's womb. How is that different from a life outside the womb? I was 21 when Roe vs. Wade was decided. I feel the same way now that I did then.

Death threats? Death threats come in every area of society, unfortunately, not just from crazies who happen to dislike abortion. I am just stating my opinion. I have yet to see any good reason from anyone to take anybody's life.
Profile Pic
theTower
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:15,180
Points:528,260
Joined:Jun 2007
Message Posted: Nov 3, 2013 10:17:39 AM

"the doctors who provide abortions who do it just for the money"

Has anyone ever interviewed an abortion doctor for answers?
I would very much like to know what motivates them to end a life. To stop the heart beat of an unborn child and how they rationalize that with do no harm.
If a doctor uses lethal injection on a death row inmate to stop their heart thus declaring that person dead, how can an abortion be different?
Other than that baby has done nothing to warrant the death penalty.
I wonder if an abortion provider would sit down with me and answer my questions nowadays.
They wouldn't twenty years ago.

[Edited by: theTower at 11/3/2013 10:20:54 AM EST]
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,821
Points:2,930,320
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Nov 3, 2013 10:06:23 AM

Women need to be protected from themselves? What?

Oh, yeah, the doctors who provide abortions who do it just for the money, despite death threats and the opprobrium of the antiabortion segment of society, those guys. Great.
Profile Pic
mweyant
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:7,801
Points:1,495,090
Joined:Feb 2010
Message Posted: Nov 3, 2013 4:12:30 AM

The judge's ruling protects women and the life of the fetus(more specifically, the unborn but very much alive baby).

[Edited by: mweyant at 11/3/2013 4:13:47 AM EST]
Profile Pic
theTower
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:15,180
Points:528,260
Joined:Jun 2007
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2013 12:43:25 PM

Court Reinstates Most of Texas' New Abortion Rules

At least until January
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,821
Points:2,930,320
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Oct 30, 2013 11:21:09 AM

"Libs push for larger and more crushing government. That by it's very nature will oppress the citizen and their freedoms."

And yet here, the federal judge is trying to block additional burdensome laws. Are you trying to have it both ways?
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:15,695
Points:2,263,435
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Oct 29, 2013 12:54:50 AM

RNorm: <<<"Oh, I donno, when the state's legislatures breaks THEIR OWN rules to ram thru that restrictive legislation, citizens of that state probably don't have much confidence of the State protecting the citizen's rights, which are still protected by the constitution...">>>

--Norm's got a point, this is exactly how ObamaCare© went down too!

Tower: <<<"Liberals have no problem accepting death when the heart stops beating but are unable to acknowledge a life when the heart starts.">>>

--There are some conservatives that share that same view too, and some liberals that don't. In any case, thanks for a very simple yet profound thought, one that will stick with me.
Profile Pic
jayrad1957
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:24,406
Points:2,152,315
Joined:Nov 2008
Message Posted: Oct 29, 2013 12:38:41 AM

"Do as I say and not as I do edicts from the liberal elite also seek to regulate our lives right down to the amount of toilet paper we use."

Right. The cons have never played that game.

As you said earlier, "DUH".
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:52,520
Points:1,219,675
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Oct 29, 2013 12:27:35 AM

"The Judge was within his bounds to make a decision but the plaintiffs were wrong (in my opinion) to go running to a Federal Judge to resolve a issue that was a Texas State issue. Where are State rights?"


Oh, I donno, when the state's legislatures breaks THEIR OWN rules to ram thru that restrictive legislation, citizens of that state probably don't have much confidence of the State protecting the citizen's rights, which are still protected by the constitution...

But its funny how you conservatives are quick to label judges "activists from the bench" when you disagree with their rulings, but yet call them defenders of the constitution when you agree with their rulings.

C'mon man, you can't have it both ways.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,821
Points:2,930,320
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Oct 29, 2013 12:15:22 AM

There are two main ways to get into federal court, diversity jurisdiction (parties from different states, so no one has a "home state advantage") or federal question jurisdiction.

Federal questions includes questions of constitutional rights.

So far, the right of a woman to handle her own body and her own health care is still one of her individual rights, and when a state writes legislation that infringes on that right, she most certainly has access to a federal court to find out whether the state has placed an undue burden on her constitutional right.
Profile Pic
theTower
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:15,180
Points:528,260
Joined:Jun 2007
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2013 11:01:10 PM

Libs push for larger and more crushing government.
That by it's very nature will oppress the citizen and their freedoms.
Do as I say and not as I do edicts from the liberal elite also seek to regulate our lives right down to the amount of toilet paper we use.
Liberals have no problem accepting death when the heart stops beating but are unable to acknowledge a life when the heart starts.

[Edited by: theTower at 10/28/2013 11:01:58 PM EST]
Profile Pic
jayrad1957
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:24,406
Points:2,152,315
Joined:Nov 2008
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2013 9:42:20 PM

"for the same reasons you libs stomp on the Constitution and want to oppress the American citizen."

Really? How are liberals trying to "oppress" the American public?
Profile Pic
theTower
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:15,180
Points:528,260
Joined:Jun 2007
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2013 9:23:04 PM

"why are cons so into messing with the Constitution when it doesn't meet their needs?"

for the same reasons you libs stomp on the Constitution and want to oppress the American citizen.
Duh.

[Edited by: theTower at 10/28/2013 9:24:23 PM EST]
Profile Pic
jayrad1957
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:24,406
Points:2,152,315
Joined:Nov 2008
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2013 9:17:48 PM

The U.S. Constitution overrides state Constitutions if they are in conflict. This judge agreed there was a conflict. As btc1 said, why are cons so into messing with the Constitution when it doesn't meet their needs?
Profile Pic
btc1
Champion Author Lexington

Posts:22,476
Points:881,230
Joined:Aug 2006
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2013 8:38:18 PM

LOL! The Constitution is the document your side says must be protected. And when a judge does do that, then that "activist" judge must be questioned.

The conservatives need to quit messing with the US Constitution. And abide by it.
Profile Pic
mnrick041
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:17,414
Points:1,921,740
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2013 7:05:02 PM

I'm well aware of the legal process and that people can go directly into Federal Court for a variety of things that they want resolved.

The Judge was within his bounds to make a decision but the plaintiffs were wrong (in my opinion) to go running to a Federal Judge to resolve a issue that was a Texas State issue. Where are State rights?
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:52,520
Points:1,219,675
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2013 6:41:46 PM

The plaintiffs sued in that venue, so the judge had to rule on the case. People (both plaintiffs and defendants) do that (sue based preferrable jurisdictions) all the time.
Post a reply Back to Topics