RIP Ruth Bader Ginsburg!

[Elwher]

Roe v. Wade does not rule on when life begins. The beginning of the trimester is chosen arbitrarily as when the right to life of the fetus outweighs the mother's right to privacy. Planned Parenthood v. Casey introduces the concept of viability, but unwisely it didn't draw an arbitrary line so now we have states trying to set the line at 20 weeks because one fetus was prematurely delivered at that age and survived. The vast majority of fetuses would not survive, and imo that line of "viability" should be set not at the extreme case but at the developmental age that 50% (or more) of premature deliveries survive.

Roe was wrongly decided, not due to the abortion issue, but due to the 10th Amendment. Regulation of medical procedures is not a right explicitly granted to the Federal government, therefore it is reserved to the several states. A Federal measure prohibiting abortions would be no more legitimate than the one authorizing them. The medical boards of each state whould have that power.

[Tarsonis]

I can say the country and culture should change with all sincerity (and I do), even if I can't personally affect the change. The same as someone in the Antebellum North could say with all sincerity that slavery should be abolished, even if they personally never freed any slaves or were able to do that.

Tip: that sounds nice, but it is not how you improve the world. Do what you can. Feed the beggar in front of your supermarket. Care for the abandoned kitten. Do not buy stuff made with child labour. Etc.
Will it solve world hunger, animal suffering, slavery etc forever ? No. But it will solve the problem for individuals for a little while. And that makes a difference. For them at least.

:?:

This a debate forum, not a charity house. Get over yourself.

And the debate was what matters more - what people say should be done or what is actually done in reality. I argue for the second (and have in fact been doing that for years on this forum), as did justice Ginsberg.

And behold - back on topic. I am willing to continue the tangent in a new topic if people deem it interesting enough though.

Yeah not buying that bull. You were clearly trying to invalidate Salus' position, by insinuating that unless he's donated money to the cause he doesn't actually support it. It's a staggering display of elitism and privilege to suggest those who can't financially contribute aren't true supporters, especially broke college students. It's utter bullshit. And what's worse is I know that you know it's bullshit. Which makes your display of intellectual dishonesty here, really quite sad.

[The Alma Mater]

Tip: that sounds nice, but it is not how you improve the world. Do what you can. Feed the beggar in front of your supermarket. Care for the abandoned kitten. Do not buy stuff made with child labour. Etc.
Will it solve world hunger, animal suffering, slavery etc forever ? No. But it will solve the problem for individuals for a little while. And that makes a difference. For them at least.

I’m well aware. I am a Catholic after all, good works are a thing. I do my best.

Still doesn’t make your initial argument not a tu quoque.

*shrug* You are just upset that I, someone who opposes catholicism, has done more to improve the world than you ever will despite first arrogantly assuming I would not.
And yes, that is a fallacy as well. But Ginsburg would have liked it.

[Kowani]

I’m well aware. I am a Catholic after all, good works are a thing. I do my best.

Still doesn’t make your initial argument not a tu quoque.

*shrug* You are just upset that I, someone who opposes catholicism, has done more to improve the world than you ever will despite first arrogantly assuming I would not.

Well now that's just bullshit.
"how dare you be poor"
The fuck kind of argument is that?

[Tarsonis]

I’m well aware. I am a Catholic after all, good works are a thing. I do my best.

Still doesn’t make your initial argument not a tu quoque.

*shrug* You are just upset that I, someone who opposes catholicism, has done more to improve the world than you ever will despite first arrogantly assuming I would not.
And yes, that is a fallacy as well. But Ginsburg would have liked it.

Nah, were just amused at how your head and your ass are occupying the same 3 dimensional point in space time. Surely you must do pilates.

[The Alma Mater]

Tip: that sounds nice, but it is not how you improve the world. Do what you can. Feed the beggar in front of your supermarket. Care for the abandoned kitten. Do not buy stuff made with child labour. Etc.
Will it solve world hunger, animal suffering, slavery etc forever ? No. But it will solve the problem for individuals for a little while. And that makes a difference. For them at least.


And the debate was what matters more - what people say should be done or what is actually done in reality. I argue for the second (and have in fact been doing that for years on this forum), as did justice Ginsberg.

And behold - back on topic. I am willing to continue the tangent in a new topic if people deem it interesting enough though.

Yeah not buying that bull. You were clearly trying to invalidate Salus' position, by insinuating that unless he's donated money to the cause he doesn't actually support it. It's a staggering display of elitism and privilege to suggest those who can't financially contribute aren't true supporters, especially broke college students. It's utter bullshit. And what's worse is I know that you know it's bullshit. Which makes your display of intellectual dishonesty here, really quite sad.

As you wish. You are aware that volunteer work also exists ?
If someone cares, they can make a change however small. Whining that things should change but expecting others to do so is pathetic.

[Tarsonis]

Yeah not buying that bull. You were clearly trying to invalidate Salus' position, by insinuating that unless he's donated money to the cause he doesn't actually support it. It's a staggering display of elitism and privilege to suggest those who can't financially contribute aren't true supporters, especially broke college students. It's utter bullshit. And what's worse is I know that you know it's bullshit. Which makes your display of intellectual dishonesty here, really quite sad.

As you wish. You are aware that volunteer work also exists ?
If someone cares, they can make a change however small. Whining that things should change but expecting others to do so is pathetic.

I'll get right on that as soon as I'm done working 50 hrs a week just to make ends meet.

Seriously though, while you're visually inspecting your colon in front of us, what's your main source of fiber?

[Cordel One]

This is so sad, at least she left us that oil pipeline through a native American reservation to remember her by. RIP

[Novus America]

This is so sad, at least she left us that oil pipeline through a native American reservation to remember her by. RIP

The oil pipeline is not on the reservation. It is near it, but not on it.

[Salus Maior]

You are aware that volunteer work also exists ?

Which I have done and am doing while here at college.

But whatever man, you don't know me or what I do. Nor is it ever relevant to whatever debate we end up having.

[Salus Maior]

I’m well aware. I am a Catholic after all, good works are a thing. I do my best.

Still doesn’t make your initial argument not a tu quoque.

*shrug* You are just upset that I, someone who opposes catholicism, has done more to improve the world than you ever will despite first arrogantly assuming I would not.
And yes, that is a fallacy as well. But Ginsburg would have liked it.

I didn't assume anything about what you do.

I have nothing to do with your personal issues with the Church, and what you have suffered at the hands of Catholics I have said I supported your side. So maybe have some discipline and not drag out your personal resentments every time we debate, alright?

[Fluvannia]

May Justice Ginsburg rest in peace, and may her family find condolence in the memories she has left behind. Love her, hate her, agree or disagree with her rulings, she leaves an impressive legacy and served her country well.

I did want to back up a few pages, ever so briefly:

Ultimately, I think that for those opposed to abortion like myself should stray from theology and try to make our case against abortion in a constitutional manner. I'm personally trying to gain a better understanding to make that case.

Sundiata, you may want to look into the justifications for a pro-life stance taken by Libertarians for Life. (link goes to Wiki)
None of these arguments are based on any theological principle, and are presumed to have better appeal to more secular people as a result.

[-Ra-]

Dropping by to say that Amy Coney Barrett is amazing. Hats off to the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

[The Black Forrest]

Dropping by to say that Amy Coney Barrett is amazing. Hats off to the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

Ok. How is she amazing?

[Greater Miami Shores]

Ok. How is she amazing?

I would say, because Judge Amy Coney Barrett is a highly qualified conservative Republican catholic Judge worthy to be a US Supreme Court Justice.

Because she is Pro Life, I happen to be anti abortion, I think it prevents the life of a baby to be, a kid to be and a person to be, this is the way I say it, and express it, I don't know the way my fellow Republicans say it and express it.

[The Black Forrest]

Ok. How is she amazing?

I would say, because Judge Amy Coney Barrett is a highly qualified conservative Republican catholic Judge worthy to be a US Supreme Court Justice.

Because she is Pro Life, I happen to be anti abortion, I think it prevents the life of a baby to be, a kid to be and a person to be, this is the way I say it, and express it, I don't know the way my fellow Republicans say it and express it.

That really doesn’t explain how she is amazing.

[New haven america]

Ok. How is she amazing?

I would say, because Judge Amy Coney Barrett is a highly qualified conservative Republican catholic Judge worthy to be a US Supreme Court Justice.

Because she is Pro Life, I happen to be anti abortion, I think it prevents the life of a baby to be, a kid to be and a person to be, this is the way I say it, and express it, I don't know the way my fellow Republicans say it and express it.

All of that is awful.

[Aclion]

Roe was wrongly decided, not due to the abortion issue, but due to the 10th Amendment. Regulation of medical procedures is not a right explicitly granted to the Federal government, therefore it is reserved to the several states. A Federal measure prohibiting abortions would be no more legitimate than the one authorizing them. The medical boards of each state whould have that power.

Hah. Tenth amendment. There's no tenth amendment.

[Kowani]

Roe was wrongly decided, not due to the abortion issue, but due to the 10th Amendment. Regulation of medical procedures is not a right explicitly granted to the Federal government, therefore it is reserved to the several states. A Federal measure prohibiting abortions would be no more legitimate than the one authorizing them. The medical boards of each state whould have that power.

Hah. Tenth amendment. There's no tenth amendment.

The 10th amendment is a placeholder in the eyes of the law.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Roe was wrongly decided, not due to the abortion issue, but due to the 10th Amendment. Regulation of medical procedures is not a right explicitly granted to the Federal government, therefore it is reserved to the several states. A Federal measure prohibiting abortions would be no more legitimate than the one authorizing them. The medical boards of each state whould have that power.

Hah. Tenth amendment. There's no tenth amendment.

The Tenth amendment proposed first was not passed. However, amendments are numbered by order of passage.

The tenth amendment is a very open amendment. It actually reads "... to the States, respectively, or to the People".

Trying to make the case that the Federal government cannot regulate abortion therefore State governments can fails on the basis that the States also cannot do anything contrary to the Constitution, therefore abortion remains a matter for the People. Ie a freedom.

Roe v. Wade was binding on States as well as Federal government, because since incorporation, all SCOTUS rulings are.

How forced procedures like ultrasound were not instantly struck down on the same basis as Roe v Wade, ie privacy, baffles me.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I would say, because Judge Amy Coney Barrett is a highly qualified conservative Republican catholic Judge worthy to be a US Supreme Court Justice.

Because she is Pro Life, I happen to be anti abortion, I think it prevents the life of a baby to be, a kid to be and a person to be, this is the way I say it, and express it, I don't know the way my fellow Republicans say it and express it.

All of that is awful.

Assuming that a Catholic must be unmoveably anti-abortion is pretty sketchy ... but shh.

[Tarsonis]

Hah. Tenth amendment. There's no tenth amendment.

The 10th amendment is a placeholder in the eyes of the law.

I wouldn't say thats true. The Tenth Amendment supports the federalist design of the constitution. Any power not given to the United States (government) by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it, is reserved for the states.

This might seem like an obvious statement but its important that it remains law. For example DOMA. Congress doesn't have the power to legislate on marriage, which makes DOMA unconstitutional, because the 10th amendment delegates that power to the states. States must however recognize same sex marriages because the 14th amendment prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, so by the 10th amendment, they also cannot discriminate.

It has imprtant legal function, it's not just a benign statement of the obvious

[Tarsonis]

All of that is awful.

Assuming that a Catholic must be unmoveably anti-abortion is pretty sketchy ... but shh.

That's, well, more complicated than the trads would like to believe.

[Tekania]

The 10th amendment is a placeholder in the eyes of the law.

I wouldn't say thats true. The Tenth Amendment supports the federalist design of the constitution. Any power not given to the United States (government) by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it, is reserved for the states.

This might seem like an obvious statement but its important that it remains law. For example DOMA. Congress doesn't have the power to legislate on marriage, which makes DOMA unconstitutional, because the 10th amendment delegates that power to the states. States must however recognize same sex marriages because the 14th amendment prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, so by the 10th amendment, they also cannot discriminate.

It has imprtant legal function, it's not just a benign statement of the obvious

The DOMA really doesn't counter the 10th Amendment as it did not proscribe anything to the states, if there were any legal issue with DOMA prior to the Obergefell decision it would be the issue it has with the full faith and credit clause. Given same-sex marriages legally entered into in one state could be legally ignore in another state. Effectively meaning if someone were to get into a same-sex marriage in a state that allowed it, and then moved to a state which didn't, the couple would effective loose all spousal rights and privileges in the law. Basically it made a mockery of full faith and credit.

[Grinning Dragon]

Is there really any reason to convene the senate judiciary committee portion of the nominee process since either barrett or lagoa has already gone through the grilling process just recently and just move straight to a confirmation vote on the senate floor.
IMO, it would serve as nothing more than a dog and pony show to convene a senate judiciary hearing.