• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

A Deeply Fractured US

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,620
Points
1,090
Evangelical? 6 of them are Catholic. Kagan is Jewish. Gorsuch is characterized as "mainline". I doubt Brown Jackson is going to be influenced by what Evangelicals want.
Evangelical? 6 of them are Catholic. Kagan is Jewish. Gorsuch is characterized as "mainline". I doubt Brown Jackson is going to be influenced by what Evangelicals want.
Sure. The religious right then and it’s make up on the court.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,169
Points
1,010
Sure. The religious right then and it’s make up on the court.

Stop hand-waving and trying to blur the line. Catholics are not the "religious right" as it is understood in the US; Catholics are generally held to be religious moderates. Just climb down and admit the mischaracterization.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,620
Points
1,090
Stop hand-waving and trying to blur the line. Catholics are not the "religious right" as it is understood in the US; Catholics are generally held to be religious moderates. Just climb down and admit the mischaracterization.
No.

There are plenty of articles, supporting studies etc etc that demonstrates the growing influence of the religious right on the supreme court in the US. You can disagree if you want. I stand by the statement.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,169
Points
1,010
That what the religious right wants coincides with what the conservative constitution-respecting right wants doesn't establish cause-and-effect.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,620
Points
1,090
That what the religious right wants coincides with what the conservative constitution-respecting right wants doesn't establish cause-and-effect.
Plenty of stuff to counter that notion. There has been significant effort from the religious right in the US to reshape the landscape. The influence is far greater than you think.

Now, opinions on abortion aside (religious or not), it will be of interest to see how this might affect the upcoming mid terms which I thought would have been a locked in thing for the republicans to retake the senate and possibly the house. I wonder if this throws this notion out now given that this may become “the” issue.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,620
Points
1,090
Doesn't this really just put this in the hands of the states to legislate ?
It does. It’s sort of the Wild West.

Missouri’s law can actually go after non residents who conceive in the state. Oklahoma prevents any abortion including incest and rape from point of conception. Many states will allow civil suits against people who help people get abortions beyond state lines.

California is looking to solidify abortion rights.

New mexico is looking to become a sanctuary state for abortions.

And so on.
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
814
Points
1,010
You'd think the left and progressives would be happy with this as it might result in more left leaning state legislatures.

You just can't please some people no matter what.
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,256
Points
1,260
It does. It’s sort of the Wild West.

Missouri’s law can actually go after non residents who conceive in the state. Oklahoma prevents any abortion including incest and rape from point of conception. Many states will allow civil suits against people who help people get abortions beyond state lines.

California is looking to solidify abortion rights.

New mexico is looking to become a sanctuary state for abortions.

And so on.

So it's basically moving forward as their system intended it ?
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,169
Points
1,010
Doesn't this really just put this in the hands of the states to legislate ?

Yes. Congress, too, if it wishes. That's been the primary argument for overturning all along - that it's a legislative matter, not a constitutional right (disagreement over just how far privacy extends).

Reason.com State by State Rundown. Closes with the important point that what results is inequality in abortion access. (Not that it matters; it'd be accessible somewhere just like gun clubs in Canada for those who want to sports shoot...)

So it's basically moving forward as their system intended it ?

Yes. Per 10th Amendment: "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."
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,620
Points
1,090
You'd think the left and progressives would be happy with this as it might result in more left leaning state legislatures.

You just can't please some people no matter what.
Weird logic to think that criminalizing abortion would make the left happy.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,620
Points
1,090
So it's basically moving forward as their system intended it ?
Yes. Congress, too, if it wishes. That's been the primary argument for overturning all along - that it's a legislative matter, not a constitutional right (disagreement over just how far privacy extends).

Reason.com State by State Rundown. Closes with the important point that what results is inequality in abortion access. (Not that it matters; it'd be accessible somewhere just like gun clubs in Canada for those who want to sports shoot...)
While it may still be accessible in some places, some legislation will go after those that cross state lines to get one. Seems like overreach.
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
814
Points
1,010
My body my choice? I think that notion has been dealt a blow recently. Many have advocated there needs to be limits to bodily integrity. Because like vaccine mandates, it's about protecting others. It's not always about you. When determining the legality of abortions, more than the mother's life needs to be considered as there is also another life involved.

Some or all of the above may or may not be sarcasm
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,256
Points
1,260
Weird logic to think that criminalizing abortion would make the left happy.

Citizens are free to relocate to states that more align with their beliefs, no ?

While it may still be accessible in some places, some legislation will go after those that cross state lines to get one. Seems like overreach.

Then the residents of those those states that feel the same as your above post need to convince enough people in their states to agree and get that changed,
no ?

If not the relocate to an area that shares their beliefs if they feel strongly enough ?

My distaste from this comes from a court deciding this and not the people. Hold a referendum and let the people decide.

I understand that SCOTUS has a role to play but overturning this type of legislation seems out of place to me. So depending on the make up of of SCOTUS are these courts just going to overturn what they personally don't like according to how the personally interpret legislation ?
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
941
Points
1,060
My body my choice? I think that notion has been dealt a blow recently. Many have advocated there needs to be limits to bodily integrity. Because like vaccine mandates, it's about protecting others. It's not always about you. When determining the legality of abortions, more than the mother's life needs to be considered as there is also another life involved.

Some or all of the above may or may not be sarcasm
My Body, My Choice. Depends.
One would need to determine if they were pro or anti vax mandate.
Being pro mandate/ MBMC would make you a hypocritical liar.
However, there's millions of those types out there.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,620
Points
1,090
Citizens are free to relocate to states that more align with their beliefs, no ?



Then the residents of those those states that feel the same as your above post need to convince enough people in their states to agree and get that changed,
no ?

If not the relocate to an area that shares their beliefs if they feel strongly enough ?

My distaste from this comes from a court deciding this and not the people. Hold a referendum and let the people decide.

I understand that SCOTUS has a role to play but overturning this type of legislation seems out of place to me. So depending on the make up of of SCOTUS are these courts just going to overturn what they personally don't like according to how the personally interpret legislation ?
All valid points and don’t disagree. And 50 years of precedence being overturned and opening the door for more.

We can lament our system but I am glad we have a less politicized judiciary.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,169
Points
1,010
My distaste from this comes from a court deciding this and not the people. Hold a referendum and let the people decide.

I understand that SCOTUS has a role to play but overturning this type of legislation seems out of place to me. So depending on the make up of of SCOTUS are these courts just going to overturn what they personally don't like according to how the personally interpret legislation ?

The court didn't overturn legislation; it upheld legislation (the Mississippi case before it) by 6-3 and overturned its own prior decision (RvW, by 5-4) which had effectively prevented referenda/legislation from having any effect. Now referenda/legislation may proceed.
 
Top