Scotus Friday!

Chishawk1425

HR Legend
Nov 27, 2019
43,935
74,281
113
This decision literally overturns two decisions that were legislating from the bench. This decision is the opposite of legislating from the bench because it sends the legislation back to actual legislative bodies. This decision is littered with references as to why courts aren't the proper place to decide things like when life is viable.

The SCOTUS isn't telling women what they can or can't do with their bodies. You won't find anything in this opinion that does that. The SCOTUS is saying it's a legislative matter. Roe and Casey actually did tell a woman what they can do with their bodies. Roe and Casey both have tests for when an abortion can happen. That's the very essence of legislating from the bench.

As for being Libertarian, the entire philosophy is to do whatever I want as long as I don't harm, or cause proximate harm, to someone else. Let that sink in. I don't know when a fetus becomes a person, and that's why I've never taken a strict position on abortion. I do know a fetus is viable well before it's born. At some point, abortion is causing harm to another person. I don't know when that is. My view on this is absolutely libertarian.

As long as you jump to conclusions without reading court opinions, or otherwise educating yourself, you will always be at odds with me. I really don't care what names you call me. First, it's just a message board. Second, there are a lot of message board tough guys.

When it comes to opinions, you can be right and I can be wrong. Some things aren't really opinions though. You threw out a term, I simply asked a question. Instead of getting an answer, you resorted to insults. Again, I don't care. I was trying to understand your perspective, but insulting me is never going to do that.
Libertarianism is a mental health disorder
 

BioHawk

HR Legend
Sep 21, 2005
38,610
39,320
113
This decision literally overturns two decisions that were legislating from the bench. This decision is the opposite of legislating from the bench because it sends the legislation back to actual legislative bodies. This decision is littered with references as to why courts aren't the proper place to decide things like when life is viable.

The SCOTUS isn't telling women what they can or can't do with their bodies. You won't find anything in this opinion that does that. The SCOTUS is saying it's a legislative matter. Roe and Casey actually did tell a woman what they can do with their bodies. Roe and Casey both have tests for when an abortion can happen. That's the very essence of legislating from the bench.
The fourth amendment guarantees a right to privacy. The Supreme Court didn't legislate, they guaranteed a right that already existed in the Bill of Rights that states were not providing to their citizens. This Supreme Court just decided to say that right no longer exists. One of those decisions guaranteed a right that was there, this recent one decided to take that right away. The second is definitely legislating, the first is ensuring a right is enforced. And just wait until this court takes away contraception and being able to love whoever you want. Oh, I know, they aren't actually "doing it", they are just giving permission.
As for being Libertarian, the entire philosophy is to do whatever I want as long as I don't harm, or cause proximate harm, to someone else. Let that sink in. I don't know when a fetus becomes a person, and that's why I've never taken a strict position on abortion. I do know a fetus is viable well before it's born. At some point, abortion is causing harm to another person. I don't know when that is. My view on this is absolutely libertarian.

As long as you jump to conclusions without reading court opinions, or otherwise educating yourself, you will always be at odds with me. I really don't care what names you call me. First, it's just a message board. Second, there are a lot of message board tough guys.

When it comes to opinions, you can be right and I can be wrong. Some things aren't really opinions though. You threw out a term, I simply asked a question. Instead of getting an answer, you resorted to insults. Again, I don't care. I was trying to understand your perspective, but insulting me is never going to do that.
If you can't understand how being anti-women's rights flies in the face of calling yourself a libertarian then there is no hope for you. You wrote, "the entire philosophy is to do whatever I want as long as I don't harm, or cause proximate harm, to someone else". So, evidently you don't think women qualify as someone else because this decision most definitely harms them.

And finally, I never insulted you. I said you were acting like a literal dunce. I didn't say you were one. If you feel that accurately describes yourself, then so be it. By the way, it wasn't even meant to be an insult, it was meant to describe someone who is using the letter of the law to defeat the spirit of the law in a nonsensical way. Honestly, I don't know how anyone can call themselves a libertarian and also say women shouldn't get to make decisions over their own body.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris

Finance85

HR Legend
Oct 22, 2003
16,734
17,468
113
The fourth amendment guarantees a right to privacy. The Supreme Court didn't legislate, they guaranteed a right that already existed in the Bill of Rights that states were not providing to their citizens. This Supreme Court just decided to say that right no longer exists. One of those decisions guaranteed a right that was there, this recent one decided to take that right away. The second is definitely legislating, the first is ensuring a right is enforced. And just wait until this court takes away contraception and being able to love whoever you want. Oh, I know, they aren't actually "doing it", they are just giving permission.

If you can't understand how being anti-women's rights flies in the face of calling yourself a libertarian then there is no hope for you. You wrote, "the entire philosophy is to do whatever I want as long as I don't harm, or cause proximate harm, to someone else". So, evidently you don't think women qualify as someone else because this decision most definitely harms them.

And finally, I never insulted you. I said you were acting like a literal dunce. I didn't say you were one. If you feel that accurately describes yourself, then so be it. By the way, it wasn't even meant to be an insult, it was meant to describe someone who is using the letter of the law to defeat the spirit of the law in a nonsensical way. Honestly, I don't know how anyone can call themselves a libertarian and also say women shouldn't get to make decisions over their own body.
You can't understand simple concepts. You clearly haven't read Roe, Casey, or Dodd.

I'll say it one more time, the libertarian philosophy is that my rights end when they cause harm to another. At some point a fetus is another person. That's an extremely simple concept. Why don't you focus on those things instead of trying to create your own definitions.
 

BioHawk

HR Legend
Sep 21, 2005
38,610
39,320
113
You can't understand simple concepts. You clearly haven't read Roe, Casey, or Dodd.

I'll say it one more time, the libertarian philosophy is that my rights end when they cause harm to another. At some point a fetus is another person. That's an extremely simple concept. Why don't you focus on those things instead of trying to create your own definitions.
Because your definition of life isn't a definition that is agreed to by everyone. It is a religiously based definition, one that does not come from the Bible, by the way, and you are trying to force it on other people. So now you are violating two rights of others with this ruling.

If the 1st amendment still exists, wait until Hindus sue to have cows stop being used as food. Based on your interpretation they can do that. Cows are sacred in their religion. In the Jewish faith, abortion access is actually guaranteed. There are already court cases for this one.

Just because you believe life begins at conception doesn't mean that's the case for everyone else. If that's what you feel, great! No one is stopping you. You just can't force that particular belief on other people.
 

Chishawk1425

HR Legend
Nov 27, 2019
43,935
74,281
113
It's not a mental health disorder. Like communism, it's something that sounds really good on paper but doesn't actually work in practice.
That's the point it's laughable and so many still try and operate on it. Lots of our current whys as well.