Hardcore troubadour 13,009 Posted May 10, 2022 If Hollywood gave up their goody bags at the Oscar’s and all their other award shows they could fly a lot of women to get abortions. Throw in a pedicure too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 549 Posted May 10, 2022 39 minutes ago, TimHauck said: The question will be whether the GC righties still think that’d be “government overreach.” I’d guess no. I would 10th Amendment Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,459 Posted May 10, 2022 14 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said: To have a federal ban of abortion, over riding the states, that now possess that power? Then how else. Besides passing a law, also in the constitution and the 60 pct of the representatives of the states would still have to go for it. The what ifs are silly. Besides, god willing, McConnell will be long gone before there is enough to make it law. Pay no mind. Murder is illegal federally. Drugs. Felons possessing firearms. Kidnapping. Etc. There are all kinds of federal laws so why not one against killing babies? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 13,009 Posted May 10, 2022 2 minutes ago, IGotWorms said: Murder is illegal federally. Drugs. Felons possessing firearms. Kidnapping. Etc. There are all kinds of federal laws so why not one against killing babies? If you do it within the parameters of the constitution. Roe didn’t. And it’s not happening. You know this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,459 Posted May 10, 2022 Just now, Hardcore troubadour said: If you do it within the parameters of the constitution. Roe didn’t. And it’s not happening. You know this. We’re not arguing about Roe now. We’re discussing whether the federal government can criminalize abortion. I’m nearly certain they could. As I sit here today it doesn’t seem especially likely. But I also thought they’d never actually overturn Roe Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,459 Posted May 10, 2022 You know, now that I think about it, I suspect a really aggressive conservative AG could take the position it is already federally illegal. It’s murder, right? https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1111 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,613 Posted May 10, 2022 4 minutes ago, IGotWorms said: Murder is illegal federally. Drugs. Felons possessing firearms. Kidnapping. Etc. There are all kinds of federal laws so why not one against killing babies? Legislation one way or the other is impossible since half the country sees it as a crime while the other half doesn’t. It’s why the dumb as dirt Dems need to keep the filibuster. This time next year, they’ll be delighted that they didn’t scrap it.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baker Boy 1,507 Posted May 10, 2022 54 minutes ago, Voltaire said: Legislation one way or the other is impossible since half the country sees it as a crime while the other half doesn’t. It’s why the dumb as dirt Dems need to keep the filibuster. This time next year, they’ll be delighted that they didn’t scrap it.. Democrats used filibuster 327 times, compared to only once by GOP in 2020: Report https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/democrats-used-filibuster-over-300-times-gop-once Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,613 Posted May 10, 2022 4 hours ago, Baker Boy said: Democrats used filibuster 327 times, compared to only once by GOP in 2020: Report https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/democrats-used-filibuster-over-300-times-gop-once That’s one of the dumbest article ever. In 2020, the GOP didn’t need to filibuster because they controlled the Senate. The Dems did because they were the minority party. Now do 2021 and see the numbers flip in the exact opposite direction. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 13,009 Posted May 10, 2022 Merick Garland is a disgrace not shutting down these protests. It’s unacceptable and there are laws on the books to stop it. And Obama tried to sell him as a centrist. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,459 Posted May 10, 2022 4 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said: Merick Garland is a disgrace not shutting down these protests. It’s unacceptable and there are laws on the books to stop it. And Obama tried to sell him as a centrist. Well if they’re trespassing or causing damage or doing real threats, then yeah. But if it’s just people assembled on public property or if neighbors are letting them be there or whatever, there’s really not a ton Garland or anyone else can or should do about it. I do wish they’d just stick to protesting the Supreme Court building though, that’s much more civil 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reality 2,711 Posted May 10, 2022 10 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said: Merick Garland is a disgrace not shutting down these protests. It’s unacceptable and there are laws on the books to stop it. And Obama tried to sell him as a centrist. Yup, this is an actual threat to democracy. Terrorizing justices at their homes. Not surprised that the same people who were outraged about people being welcomed into the capitol are ok with this. Let's you know exactly how full of shlt they were. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 13,009 Posted May 10, 2022 10 minutes ago, IGotWorms said: Well if they’re trespassing or causing damage or doing real threats, then yeah. But if it’s just people assembled on public property or if neighbors are letting them be there or whatever, there’s really not a ton Garland or anyone else can or should do about it. I do wish they’d just stick to protesting the Supreme Court building though, that’s much more civil Yes there is. There are laws prohibiting exactly what is happening. Besides, if they are in the street then get them out of the street. It’s called blocking vehicular traffic. Every time I look they are in the street. And making noise. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TimHauck 1,890 Posted May 10, 2022 3 minutes ago, Reality said: Yup, this is an actual threat to democracy. Terrorizing justices at their homes. Not surprised that the same people who were outraged about people being welcomed into the capitol are ok with this. Let's you know exactly how full of shlt they were. You sure they’re not just taking selfies? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 13,009 Posted May 11, 2022 Section 1507 of title 18 of the us code. Now get on it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gladiators 1,914 Posted May 11, 2022 3 minutes ago, TimHauck said: You sure they’re not just taking selfies? You sure you’re not a liberal? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reality 2,711 Posted May 11, 2022 Just now, TimHauck said: Well, actually.... Your schtick is tired. Fock off, nerd. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,613 Posted May 11, 2022 The entire point of SCOTUS being structured the way it was was to insulate and protect them from public pressure. POS Merrick Garland should know better. This guy is a disgrace and a hack. At the time he was nominated for SCOTUS, I’d thought he was treated unfairly. My God, he’s the worst, did we dodge a bullet. I expect Jumanji to be a liberal jurist but not a POS liberal jurist. Jeff Sessions and surprisingly John Ashcroft were solid Attorney Generals, but for most of the 21st century, its been one sh1tbag after the other and Garland is the worst. You’d think Biden* could have found a better token straight white guy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Utilit99 4,099 Posted May 11, 2022 1 hour ago, Gladiators said: You sure you’re not a liberal? He's a liberal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,087 Posted May 11, 2022 Has anything changed yet? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Strike 4,116 Posted May 11, 2022 3 hours ago, IGotWorms said: Well if they’re trespassing or causing damage or doing real threats, then yeah. But if it’s just people assembled on public property or if neighbors are letting them be there or whatever, there’s really not a ton Garland or anyone else can or should do about it. I do wish they’d just stick to protesting the Supreme Court building though, that’s much more civil Actually no. There's literally a federal law that makes it illegal to protest judges to try to influence them. As usual, you're ignorant of the law "counselor." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,459 Posted May 11, 2022 3 minutes ago, Strike said: Actually no. There's literally a federal law that makes it illegal to protest judges to try to influence them. As usual, you're ignorant of the law "counselor." You’re right this time, I stand corrected. Looked up the law HT referenced and it is certainly on point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,087 Posted May 11, 2022 I haven't read through all this thread but here goes: 1. In college I had cops come to my rental house and told me to turn down the music at a party as it was a public nuisance . I'll just leave that there. Surly one can equate that with "protesting" in a neighborhood. 2. Nothing legal wise has changed from today since two weeks ago. For the dummies just google what "draft" means. 3. 90% of the dumbfocks in America actually do not realize even if the Supreme Court overturns Roe vs Wade that it does not mean abortion is just automatically illegal. I hate you all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TimHauck 1,890 Posted May 11, 2022 1 hour ago, KSB2424 said: 3. 90% of the dumbfocks in America actually do not realize even if the Supreme Court overturns Roe vs Wade that it does not mean abortion is just automatically illegal. I hate you all. it will in 13 states Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TimmySmith 2,782 Posted May 11, 2022 6 hours ago, TimHauck said: it will in 13 states What does that have to do with the SC? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TimmySmith 2,782 Posted May 11, 2022 11 hours ago, Voltaire said: The entire point of SCOTUS being structured the way it was was to insulate and protect them from public pressure. POS Merrick Garland should know better. This guy is a disgrace and a hack. At the time he was nominated for SCOTUS, I’d thought he was treated unfairly. My God, he’s the worst, did we dodge a bullet. I expect Jumanji to be a liberal jurist but not a POS liberal jurist. Jeff Sessions and surprisingly John Ashcroft were solid Attorney Generals, but for most of the 21st century, its been one sh1tbag after the other and Garland is the worst. You’d think Biden* could have found a better token straight white guy. Worse than Holder and Lynch? No way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TimHauck 1,890 Posted May 11, 2022 9 minutes ago, TimmySmith said: What does that have to do with the SC? The SC is the reason it’s currently not legal Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 13,009 Posted May 11, 2022 Yesterday I learned from the treasury Secretary that if there is no abortion it will be bad for the economy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike Honcho 4,171 Posted May 11, 2022 9 hours ago, Strike said: Actually no. There's literally a federal law that makes it illegal to protest judges to try to influence them. As usual, you're ignorant of the law "counselor." Cmon man...it's a law nobody heard of until 2 days ago...probably taught in the third year of law school in the chass really obscure laws. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike Honcho 4,171 Posted May 11, 2022 9 hours ago, KSB2424 said: I haven't read through all this thread but here goes: 1. In college I had cops come to my rental house and told me to turn down the music at a party as it was a public nuisance . I'll just leave that there. Surly one can equate that with "protesting" in a neighborhood. 2. Nothing legal wise has changed from today since two weeks ago. For the dummies just google what "draft" means. 3. 90% of the dumbfocks in America actually do not realize even if the Supreme Court overturns Roe vs Wade that it does not mean abortion is just automatically illegal. I hate you all. 2. You should google how opinions get written in the Supreme Court before calling people dummies. 3. Yes, you are correct, it doesn't become automatically illegal. The 22 states with trigger laws make it automatically illegal in 30 days after it be overturned. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TBayXXXVII 2,215 Posted May 11, 2022 12 hours ago, Gladiators said: You sure you’re not a liberal? Oh, he is... and a troll. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gladiators 1,914 Posted May 11, 2022 Just now, TBayXXXVII said: Oh, he is... and a troll. Makes sense. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 13,009 Posted May 11, 2022 16 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said: Cmon man...it's a law nobody heard of until 2 days ago...probably taught in the third year of law school in the chass really obscure laws. Yeah, because protesting at judges houses has happened so many times. There’s a law, prohibiting exactly what is happening, and it’s not being enforced. That’s the point, not the level of awareness of the law. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike Honcho 4,171 Posted May 11, 2022 1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said: Yeah, because protesting at judges houses has happened so many times. There’s a law, prohibiting exactly what is happening, and it’s not being enforced. That’s the point, not the level of awareness of the law. No, it was the level of awareness of an obscure federal law that Strike decided was worth taking a shot at a former lawyer for not knowing it. I offered no opinion on the law or what is happening now or in the past that caused the establishment of that law. So lighten up Francis. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike Honcho 4,171 Posted May 11, 2022 13 hours ago, Voltaire said: That’s one of the dumbest article ever. In 2020, the GOP didn’t need to filibuster because they controlled the Senate. The Dems did because they were the minority party. Now do 2021 and see the numbers flip in the exact opposite direction. Only one GOP filibuster in 2000...without looking it up, I'm going to say it was one of the big 'look at me' senators---Cruz or Paul, guessing it's Rand Paul. Did I win? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 13,009 Posted May 11, 2022 2 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said: No, it was the level of awareness of an obscure federal law that Strike decided was worth taking a shot at a former lawyer for not knowing it. I offered no opinion on the law or what is happening now or in the past that caused the establishment of that law. So lighten up Francis. Fine. Why do you think it’s not being enforced? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 'Tator Salad' White 88 Posted May 11, 2022 10 hours ago, KSB2424 said: Has anything changed yet? got us distracted from Hunters laptop Child grooming Inflation Ukraine Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 13,009 Posted May 11, 2022 2 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said: Only one GOP filibuster in 2000...without looking it up, I'm going to say it was one of the big 'look at me' senators---Cruz or Paul, guessing it's Rand Paul. Did I win? Nothing. Neither were Senators in 2000 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Utilit99 4,099 Posted May 11, 2022 1 minute ago, Ron 'Tator Salad' White said: got us distracted from Hunters laptop Child grooming Inflation Ukraine Southern border. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 13,009 Posted May 11, 2022 1 minute ago, Ron 'Tator Salad' White said: got us distracted from Hunters laptop Child grooming Inflation Ukraine Crime Bidens dementia Baby Formula shortage. Stock Market Share this post Link to post Share on other sites