Supreme Court Leak

[Merge]

Not deflecting. I think most on the pro life side would suggest that any future decision should be left up to the states.

Ultimately I'm not sure I agree with that. I don't think this stops with overturning Roe and states deciding what they want to do.

Yes, the issue will be passed on to the states at first but the next step from there is that some states will start to enact personhood laws. States without personhood laws will then be sued and that will make its way to the supreme court as well.

 

[cernjSHU]

Conspiracy theory day on PirateCrew.

You are clueless.

 

[HALL85]

Ultimately I'm not sure I agree with that. I don't think this stops with overturning Roe and states deciding what they want to do.

Yes, the issue will be passed on to the states at first but the next step from there is that some states will start to enact personhood laws. States without personhood laws will then be sued and that will make its way to the supreme court as well.

Stop listening to Biden…

 

[shu09]

You are clueless.

Takes one to know one.

 

[cernjSHU]

Takes one to know one.

Good one! Very witty retort.

 

[Merge]

Stop listening to Biden…

Roe has been the barrier for the attempts at creating personhood laws.

Iowa, Oklahoma, South Carolina and West Virginia all introduced laws already to create fetal personhood this year. That is where this is heading.

 

[HALL85]

Roe has been the barrier for the attempts at creating personhood laws.

Iowa, Oklahoma, South Carolina and West Virginia all introduced laws already to create fetal personhood this year. That is where this is heading.

Yes, which was my point. States will do what their electorate wants. Nothing will happen on a national level.

 

[shu09]

Good one! Very witty retort.

I mean, personally I would support such a ban morally at the state level, but not legally at the federal level. It would never happen federally anyway. 1) it's Federal overreach, 2) it is not feasible, 3) it would never pass because it would cause massive unrest by all the baby killers and their supporters.

 

[Merge]

Yes, which was my point. States will do what their electorate wants. Nothing will happen on a national level.

I have no issue with it going back to the states, but this is not the end for those who fight against abortion. Their goal is to ban all abortion.

Now that Roe is gone that path is through personhood bills which will occur at a state level first and will be another battle in the courts.

A personhood bill will pass a republican controlled house. I'm not sure it would get through the senate but it won't be for a lack of trying, and is within the realm of possibility that it does pass.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/99/cosponsors

Currently has 19 senators on board.

 

[Pirata]

Are you going to feel the same way when the Republicans have the House, the Senate and the Presidency and the pass a law to abolish abortion throughout the land?

Because that’s the next step.

Yes.

 

[Pirata]

Oh do tell why? I have heard the moral argument that abortion is murder from out of the people on this board. If so, and that is your belief, then the rational and logical conclusion to that belief is to abolish in all the land.

I thought you were a lawyer.

"Generally, the crime of murder is prosecuted in state courts as a state crime. But murder becomes a federal crime when it occurs in violation of federal law, or when it takes place on a federal land or territory. "

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

Are you going to feel the same way when the Republicans have the House, the Senate and the Presidency and the pass a law to abolish abortion throughout the land?

Because that’s the next step.

All typical political BS played by both sides. The democrats are going to take away every gun. The republicans are going to abolish abortion everywhere. Scare tactics people fall for every time.

 

[HALL85]

All typical political BS played by both sides. The democrats are going to take away every gun. The republicans are going to abolish abortion everywhere. Scare tactics people fall for every time.

And nothing ever happens.....gun control, immigration, tax simplification/loopholes, abortion, the list goes on and on....better to keep the issue alive to condemn the other side, rather than solve it.

 

[cernjSHU]

I thought you were a lawyer.

"Generally, the crime of murder is prosecuted in state courts as a state crime. But murder becomes a federal crime when it occurs in violation of federal law, or when it takes place on a federal land or territory. "

Stay in your lane. You confuse the arguments as always.

If those that argue and that’s most Conservatives think abortion is murder, then they will look to abolish it throughout the land.

Now, criminalizing it is a different thing. However, if Congress chooses to pass a law criminalizing abortion, then it becomes a crime. They can conceivably write a law and treat abortion as murder. Although I don’t believe abortion was ever treated as a murder in the past. However, considering the moral outrage that abortion is murder, should these same people now move to make it a federal crime of murder? Now, don’t you think that is contradictory? If you believe abortion is murder, then should it not be treated as a murder criminally?

Moreover, you don’t know anything about criminal law. The federal law provides for many killings to be prosecuted as a murder that do not occur on federal land. for example, killing during a bank robbery, killing a federal judge or family member, Use of the mails ala Unabomber, murder happens in the commission of a sexual crime against a minor. Murders involved in a RICO crime normally within drug trafficking. All of these examples are not in federal lands. However, the jurisdiction becomes federal because Congress say so. So all Congress has to do is pass the law. Done.

 

[Merge]

All typical political BS played by both sides. The democrats are going to take away every gun. The republicans are going to abolish abortion everywhere. Scare tactics people fall for every time.

There is a bill with 100+ republican members of congress and 19 senators which supports banning abortion entirely. Abortion will start to be banned in republican states this year.

Not really a scare tactic to acknowledge that it is happening.

 

[shu09]

There is a bill with 100+ republican members of congress and 19 senators which supports banning abortion entirely. Abortion will start to be banned in republican states this year.

Not really a scare tactic to acknowledge that it is happening.

Last time I checked, 100 representatives and 19 senators isn't nearly close enough to pass a bill.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

There is a bill with 100+ republican members of congress and 19 senators which supports banning abortion entirely. Abortion will start to be banned in republican states this year.

Not really a scare tactic to acknowledge that it is happening.

Everything that is used as a scare tactic is really happening. The issues are all real. They don't make up the issue itself. You can acknowledge they are all really happening. You can also acknowledge that the threat that they are scaring you with will never happen like all the other scare tactics the last 25 years. Were there scare tactics used with the immigration problem, of course. Was/Is immigration a real issue? Of course. It's all the same principle. Take a real issue and blow it up. If you can't acknowledge both sides play the same game I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Merge]

Last time I checked, 100 representatives and 19 senators isn't nearly close enough to pass a bill.

Indeed, but was just saying it is a bad comparison to his example of democrats wanting to take all guns away. No democrats are pushing that.

It's not a scare tactic to say republicans want to ban abortion. They campaign on that agenda and have supported bills which would do it and it is about to start happening at the state level. I'd still say it is unlikely to get through the senate, but I wouldn't be shocked if it did.

 

[Merge]

Everything that is used as a scare tactic is really happening. The issues are all real. They don't make up the issue itself. You can acknowledge they are all really happening. You can also acknowledge that the threat that they are scaring you with will never happen like all the other scare tactics the last 25 years. Were there scare tactics used with the immigration problem, of course. Was/Is immigration a real issue? Of course. It's all the same principle. Take a real issue and blow it up. If you can't acknowledge both sides play the same game I don't know what to tell you.

Right. Both sides try to make you afraid of the other. I get that.

But when a Dem says, republicans are trying to take away your access to abortion... It's because republicans are pushing bills to do it.

When a republican says democrat's are trying to take all of your guns, that's not really based on anything.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

Right. Both sides try to make you afraid of the other. I get that.

But when a Dem says, republicans are trying to take away your access to abortion... It's because republicans are pushing bills to do it.

When a republican says democrat's are trying to take all of your guns, that's not really based on anything.

Beto never came out and flat out said that he was going take away people's AR-15s and mandatory buy backs? What world are you living in? It really happened. And then the scare tactics of blowing it up happened. But it's not based on nothing.

 

[cernjSHU]

Beto never came out and flat out said that he was going take away people's AR-15s and mandatory buy backs? What world are you living in? It really happened. And then the scare tactics of blowing it up happened. But it's not based on nothing.

Your indignation is laughable. You are dismissive about 100 Congressman and 19 Senators on a bill SO FAR. Yet, you point out Beto who wants AR-15’s to be banned. Lol. That’s not all guns and it’s one politician who doesn’t even hold elected office wanting to ban one specific weapon.

 

[Merge]

Beto never came out and flat out said that he was going take away people's AR-15s and mandatory buy backs? What world are you living in? It really happened. And then the scare tactics of blowing it up happened. But it's not based on nothing.

He's not even in office?
He doesn't believe people should own a certain type of gun. He does not want to ban all guns.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

Your indignation is laughable. You are dismissive about 100 Congressman and 19 Senators on a bill SO FAR. Yet, you point out Beto who wants AR-15’s to be banned. Lol. That’s not all guns and it’s one politician who doesn’t even hold elected office wanting to ban one specific weapon.

What does that have to do with the playbook? It doesn’t take much to blow it up say that guys getting a cabinet position. He’s going to start with the big weapons then come after your gun.

Are you telling me there were no democratic politicians looking abolish guns? You can find many Democrat anti gun articles.

 

[HALL85]

Right. Both sides try to make you afraid of the other. I get that.

But when a Dem says, republicans are trying to take away your access to abortion... It's because republicans are pushing bills to do it.

When a republican says democrat's are trying to take all of your guns, that's not really based on anything.

Just like defund the police wasn’t a thing…

 

[Pirata]

Stay in your lane. You confuse the arguments as always.

You are obtuse as always and also quite full of yourself (as always).

The point is (which you never can seem to comprehend any point but your own) is that the States will decide how to treat this, crime or not.

And yes, we are all so proud of you that you made it through law school. Do you have a stamp on your forehead that says "Lawyer"?

I'd prefer if you would just hit the ignore button for me. I'd rather not deal with your crap.

 

[cernjSHU]

You are obtuse as always.

The point is (which you never can seem to comprehend any point but your own) is that the States will decide how to treat this.

I guess you didn’t see merge’s post which goes To prove my point. You are either woefully ignorant or blind.

 

[Pirata]

Now, don’t you think that is contradictory? If you believe abortion is murder, then should it not be treated as a murder criminally?

Show me the post where I said it was murder. You can't, because I have never said that.

Go back to your obtuse lane.

 

[Pirata]

"Generally, the crime of murder

I guess you cannot read.

Do you know what the word "Generally" means???

7 Situations Where "Murder" Is a Federal Crime

In most cases, the crime of murder is prosecuted in state courts as a state crime. But there are seven scenarios when an unlawful killing violates federal law and thus is prosecuted as a federal crime. These include when: the murder is of a federal judge or a federal law enforcement official...

www.shouselaw.com

 

[Merge]

Just like defund the police wasn’t a thing…

Right, another good example of something that didn't have 100+ members of congress supporting.

 

[HALL85]

Right, another good example of something that didn't have 100+ members of congress supporting.

Do you have a number? It was a lot at first until they realized it was a losing strategy.

 

[Merge]

Do you have a number? It was a lot at first until they realized it was a losing strategy.

Supporting a bill to remove all funding of police departments?

Yes. Zero.

 

[HALL85]

Supporting a bill to remove all funding of police departments?

Yes. Zero.

Defunding didn’t mean “all”. It meant redirecting money from law enforcement resources to mental health and other “community programs”. They blundered in that the term was just plain stupid and was turning the public off.

 

[SHUSA]

And nothing ever happens.....gun control, immigration, tax simplification/loopholes, abortion, the list goes on and on....better to keep the issue alive to condemn the other side, rather than solve it.

but then how will we all forget that its the super wealthy thats the enemy and not the other political party?

 

[Pirata]

I guess you didn’t see merge’s post which goes To prove my point. You are either woefully ignorant or blind.

Correct I have Merge on ignore and generally do not read his posts. He, like you, only tolerates one view of the world and believe any statment you make is an absolute truth.

I'm neither blind or ignorant. Is that what you do in court. When your argument falls apart you call the other side names?

If you care to discuss it, the please cite the the Merge post you referenced.

 

[cernjSHU]

Show me the post where I said it was murder. You can't, because I have never said that.

Go back to your obtuse lane.

Let’s start off with you posting to a reply of mine that was sent to Hall85

HALL85 said:
No it’s not. That would have no chance of happening.
Oh do tell why? I have heard the moral argument that abortion is murder from out of the people on this board. If so, and that is your belief, then the rational and logical conclusion to that belief is to abolish in all the land.

You respond to my reply to Hall85 with calling me out as a lawyer and posting something about federal murder. So you try to call me out and I reply to you stating that it’s not on federal land, I gave u examples of other murders that are federal and told you that all Congress has to do is pass a law making abortion murder. That’s how it get done.

You then want to pick out of context that I accused you as saying abortion is murder. Here is the full statement:
“ If those that argue and that’s most Conservatives think abortion is murder, then they will look to abolish it throughout the land.

Now, criminalizing it is a different thing. However, if Congress chooses to pass a law criminalizing abortion, then it becomes a crime. They can conceivably write a law and treat abortion as murder. Although I don’t believe abortion was ever treated as a murder in the past. However, considering the moral outrage that abortion is murder, should these same people now move to make it a federal crime of murder? Now, don’t you think that is contradictory? If you believe abortion is murder, then should it not be treated as a murder criminally? ”

Clearly what you picked out is out of context as I was speaking generally of people who claim abortion is murder. Your points are so disingenuous. And have no merit.

You claim that it will just be the states that decide it. I say that is not necessarily true and the movement is in the way to a push it federally . It’s a simple point.

Oh by the way, use some originality when responding back to me instead of just parroting my words.

 

[Merge]

Defunding didn’t mean “all”. It meant redirecting money from law enforcement resources to mental health and other “community programs”. They blundered in that the term was just plain stupid and was turning the public off.

Sure. It was stupid. I've agreed with that many times, but was not something where politicians were actually supporting defunding police departments even though that was the narrative being pushed (even by some on this board). No democrats are pushing to take away all guns even though that is the political rhetoric against any democratic gun control.

There are however elected members of congress who want to ban abortion across the country.

The end goal is not to just send it to the states to decide.

 

[HALL85]

Sure. It was stupid. I've agreed with that many times, but was not something where politicians were actually supporting defunding police departments even though that was the narrative being pushed (even by some on this board). No democrats are pushing to take away all guns even though that is the political rhetoric against any democratic gun control.

There are however elected members of congress who want to ban abortion across the country.

The end goal is not to just send it to the states to decide.

It was what Democrats were pushing broadly....redistributing money from police budgets to other programs. The name they gave it was stupid and they started backtracking like crazy once they saw the public response.

And I disagree on abortion....I just don't see any will by the majority of Republican's to propose federal abortion laws.

 

[cernjSHU]

It was what Democrats were pushing broadly....redistributing money from police budgets to other programs. The name they gave it was stupid and they started backtracking like crazy once they saw the public response.

And I disagree on abortion....I just don't see any will by the majority of Republican's to propose federal abortion laws.

Defunding the police. There were some politicians pushing this on the local level and maybe a couple of Congresswomen. I think that is clear. But it was a very small minority. The people who wanted this had no idea what they were talking about. A stupid idea which I hope is dead forever.

However, while you may not think a federal abortion ban will ever take place, you have to admit it has substantial support from Republicans. And this is just the beginning. You may be right in the end it won’t get there. But there will be a big push. And it’s possible.

 

[Merge]

It was what Democrats were pushing broadly....redistributing money from police budgets to other programs. The name they gave it was stupid and they started backtracking like crazy once they saw the public response.

And I disagree on abortion....I just don't see any will by the majority of Republican's to propose federal abortion laws.

I'd agree it's unlikely at the moment, but it's also ok to acknowledge that is the goal of many elected politicians currently. It's not like this goes to the states and they walk away saying their work is done and never talk about it again.

 

[HALL85]

Defunding the police. There were some politicians pushing this on the local level and maybe a couple of Congresswomen. I think that is clear. But it was a very small minority. The people who wanted this had no idea what they were talking about. A stupid idea which I hope is dead forever.

However, while you may not think a federal abortion ban will ever take place, you have to admit it has substantial support from Republicans. And this is just the beginning. You may be right in the end it won’t get there. But there will be a big push. And it’s possible.

The redirection of police funding was a hot topic and supported by just about everyone on the Democratic Presidential Debate stage....it was not a couple of Congresswomen.

I don't agree with your second paragraph.