Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 4:51:14 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

If the republican party marginalizes the Dominionists their power gains in other places will be much less worrisome. If not then those other maneuvers are extremely endangering this nation.

If we assume that the Republican Party has been co-opted, how precisely is the minority in this co-opted Party apparatus supposed to "marginalize" the majority? And if you attack "Republicans" as a class, instead of calling a spade a spade and attacking the Christian Right, how do you think that is going to help anything? You're just insulting the Republican voters who fucking agree with you!

K.


So which is it? You cannot simultaneously argue that voting against republicans only hurts the non Dominionists and then argue that the non Dominionists in the Republican party are powerless.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 4:57:01 PM   
imperatrixx


Posts: 903
Joined: 3/29/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

If we assume that the Republican Party has been co-opted, how precisely is the minority in this co-opted Party apparatus supposed to "marginalize" the majority? And if you attack "Republicans" as a class, instead of calling a spade a spade and attacking the Christian Right, how do you think that is going to help anything? You're just insulting the Republican voters who fucking agree with you!

K.[/font][/size]


"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

Technically, the Christian Right didn't vote on this law in Kansas - Republicans did.

The Christian Right may have supported pledges to de-fund Planned Parenthood, but Republicans are the ones who took it.

The Christian Right might vote for the fundamentalists looking at the Presidency in 2012, but they will be running on a Republican ticket.

I'm sure not every Republican is a Christian Fundamentalist, but how many have the balls to stand opposed to it?

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 5:56:14 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
Did a poster just suggest that because a majority of a particular states voters are against a thing......they have the right to take that thing away.I know this particular thread is dealing with abortion( and in some minds it is perfectly okay to deny woman dominion over their own bodies)... but does a supposedly intelligent adult actually think the majority is empowered to restrict/ strip rights from a dissenting minority ?
Is this really what the education system of this country is producing...folks whose understanding of how a Republic works....and how the minority is PROTECTED from the majority within that Republic.....I fear for our Nation...I really do

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to imperatrixx)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 6:32:15 PM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:


How is this different from arguing that the sooner people who value their freedom wake up to the threat of Radical Islam and start shunning Muslims the better?

(Not to mention that not all Republicans are even Christians in the first place.)


What's the breakdown in KS? Who's supporting it?



Gov. Sam Brownback RAN on getting Kansas to be abortion free. He received slightly more that 63% of the vote. More than twice the next candidate.

One of the previous Atty. Gen. for Kansas was discussing starting a legal process against those who provide abortions to minors and do not report rape.

The breakdown is that the state population is anti-abortion. This is the purpose of federalism. The citizens of the state get to make these choices.

Wrong. The majority does not get to take away the minority's rights.


Are you also upset that 25 counties in Kansas are dry?

Where do you get the idea that anyone had the RIGHT to an abortion?

Your statement also suggests that the minority gets to dictate to the majority.

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 6:50:43 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
The right to purchase a drink has not been affirmed by the Supreme Court...and having to drive to a "wet" county to have/purchase a drink is not analogous to being denied a medical procedure that is ,according to the law of the land,a "right".
The minority does not get to dictate to the majority....but sure as shit they are to be protected from the wants desires or peccadillos of the majority.

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 7:01:36 PM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Did a poster just suggest that because a majority of a particular states voters are against a thing......they have the right to take that thing away.I know this particular thread is dealing with abortion( and in some minds it is perfectly okay to deny woman dominion over their own bodies)... but does a supposedly intelligent adult actually think the majority is empowered to restrict/ strip rights from a dissenting minority ?
Is this really what the education system of this country is producing...folks whose understanding of how a Republic works....and how the minority is PROTECTED from the majority within that Republic.....I fear for our Nation...I really do


Are you suggesting that elections do not have consequences?

Or are you suggesting that the majority got to enact their platform in the election of 2008, because you liked the outcome, but for the gubernatorial election of 2010, the majority does not get to enact their platform because you disagree with it?

By the by, yes that IS the way a republic works. There are safeguards to prevent dissenters being loaded into cars and sent to a gulag.

Another point: abortion is not a right. Furthermore no one is being denied an abortion. You can live in Kansas and still get an abortion.

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 7:09:38 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
The Majority does not get to restrict,contract or in any way impede the RIGHTS of the minority...I do not give a shit what an election results are.
I am not suggesting this...I am yelling it....proclaiming it,adhering to it.....swearing by it....and any other emphatic statement you can conceive.
If the citizens of a state are of a mind that African Americans should not drink from the same water fountains as white people...shall we hold an election and put it to a vote ?
Are you really going to try t make this argument ? If so you have my sincere condolences....and I will be quite happy to help you with a token contribution...you should hire a lawyer and immediately sue whatever school system that failed you.

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 7:14:48 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
By the way you are right...what is being done in Kansas is not a direct attack on Roe v Wade...it is a despicable,diabolical end run around that decision.It is the enactment of legislation designed to make it impossible to operate a clinic that offers such services to the citizens of Kansas...it is an underhanded backdoor attempt at nullification of the Supreme Courts decision...and as such it doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of standing up to a court challenge....so all Kansas will have accomplished is the wasting of public monies and the besmirching of it's reputation.

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 7:36:31 PM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

The right to purchase a drink has not been affirmed by the Supreme Court...


Amendment 21 of the US Constitution. This amendment, as you know, gave the states the right to regulate alcohol sales. The same thing that Roe v Wade did. It gave the regulatory power to the states.

Although Amendment 21 was passed by a majority of citizens. Roe v Wade was decided by 9 people.

quote:

and having to drive to a "wet" county to have/purchase a drink is not analogous to being denied a medical procedure that is ,according to the law of the land,a "right".

Abortions for medical necessity are not being affected.

Abortion is not a right.

Roe v Wade said that the right to privacy under the due process clause in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution extends to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that right must be balanced against the state's two legitimate interests for regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting the mother's health

A woman will still have the right to privacy regarding her decision regarding an abortion. The voters of Kansas have voted to elect someone who places a high priority on protecting prenatal life.

An even smaller minority (ya know, those groups we have to protect) would be the unborn. What are their rights? Are they having their unalienable rights stripped from them by a different minority?

quote:

The minority does not get to dictate to the majority....but sure as shit they are to be protected from the wants desires or peccadillos of the majority.


Libya.

Obamacare: which does not pay for abortions. Despites all these claims I keep seeing that abortion is a right. One would think that a government health care system would cover such a right. Especially since it would be a goverment-created right.



_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 7:42:36 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
You are,and there is no way to be nice about this,speaking out of your ass.You are involved in a pernicious little game of intellectual dishonesty.....by allowing your own pro life beliefs to lead you to take a stand that has no foundation.I will ask you again ...if the good citizens of the sovereign state of Kansas decided that white folks should not have to drink from the same fountains as black folks.....would you still be proclaiming that thendesire of the majority holds sway ?

< Message edited by slvemike4u -- 6/26/2011 7:43:21 PM >


_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 7:51:37 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973),[1] was a landmark controversial decision by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion. The Court decided that a right to privacy under the due process clause in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution extends to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that right must be balanced against the state's two legitimate interests for regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting the mother's health

..............Saying that these state interests become stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the mother's current trimester of pregnancy.

The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion up until viability. The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid," adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks."



Basically, up until that age of viability, the SC has granted a woman the right to choose to have an abortion.

It was assumed by most observers of the Court in 1992 that Planned Parenthood v Casey would be the vehicle for for overturning Roe. Instead, three swing members of the Court (Souter, O'Connor, Kennedy) joined in an opinion retaining the core right recognized in Roe while rejecting the trimester-based framework. The three justices used stare decisis to justify their decision. Casey leaves courts to grapple with abortion regulations through application of a new test: Does the regulation in question place an undue burden on a woman's right to choose an abortion? Using this new test, courts have upheld some abortion regulations (such as 24-hour waiting periods) while striking down others.



_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 7:57:19 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

Of course it's true that not all Republicans support Christian Right positions, but considering the group of potential candidates in 2012 is all pro-life (and all but one took a pledge to defund Planned Parenthood) you have to admit that seems to be the strategy the party as a whole is taking.


Even Santorum, who is dead set against all abortions... but was considering it in the case of his own wife.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to imperatrixx)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 8:00:22 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
And what would the court decide,and I guess there is a chance they might have to,were a state to enact laws so onerous that there only applicable intention were to restrict,perhaps even choke off a woman's access to services allowing her to exercise those rights?
These laws will not stand up to a court challenge ...but as Alyee asserts "elections have consequences".
In this case the ultimate consequence will be that the taxpayers of Kansas have won the right to spend public funds defending a doomed and flawed position that can not hope but be struck down eventually .

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 8:01:34 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
All in the hopes of votes. How proud they must be!

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 8:09:21 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee
Where do you get the idea that anyone had the RIGHT to an abortion?

The Supreme Court, maybe you've heard of them.

(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 8:13:19 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
Which may be where Kansas finds themselves before long.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 8:20:26 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
Update...

A lawyer for the Aid for Women clinic in Kansas City, Kan., said Friday that it received a notice that its application for a license had been denied by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment without an inspection. Attorney Cheryl Pilate said the clinic was looking at its legal options but would have to close, at least temporarily.

The clinic received its notice on the same day the leader of a regional Planned Parenthood chapter said inspectors who spent two days at its Overland Park clinic found it will comply with all new regulations. An inspection of the third provider is scheduled for Wednesday. All three are in the Kansas City area.

"We're doomed," said Dr. Herbert Hodes, who performs abortions for the third provider, the Women's Health Center, also in Overland Park.

But Peter Brownlie, president and chief executive officer of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri, said if the health department bases its decision on the 20-hour inspection of the group's clinic, it should get a license.
"The findings of the inspection indicate we will be in full compliance with the abortion facility license regulations when they go into effect on July 1," Brownlie said.

Health department spokeswoman Miranda Myrick declined to comment because the licensing process for all three abortion providers is ongoing. But she said the providers can't offer abortions until they obtain licenses -- meaning the procedures would be illegal if a licensing decision still is pending July 1.


Abortion rights advocates are suspicious of the licensing process because Republican Gov. Sam Brownback strongly opposes abortion and anti-abortion groups pushed the law through the GOP-controlled Legislature.

"I find that incredibly un-American, that we would tell women that just because of where they live in the United States of America, that they are not entitled to legal health care," said Julie Burkhart, founder of the abortion rights political action committee Trust Women. "It's quite shocking."

But Mary Kay Culp, executive director of Kansans for Life, said the providers are merely being required to make good on their long-stated promises that legal abortion is safe. She said their complaints amounted to "screaming like long-tailed cats in a room full of rocking chairs."

Culp said she and fellow abortion opponents didn't think the Aid for Women clinic could obtain a license because it would need extensive renovations. She said the Planned Parenthood clinic is the most likely to obtain a license because it's already regulated as a surgical center.

"We don't have any reason that they in particular wouldn't, except that they fought us for so long," she said, referring to past legislative debates over imposing specific rules for abortion providers.





Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/24/1-3-kansas-abortion-clinics-denied-state-license/#ixzz1QRVF2lvx

That last statement is going to fuck them.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 8:29:07 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
It is hard to imagine any folks more deserving of a good fucking Perhaps a good fucking is what then need....in a bad way

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 8:32:34 PM   
FatDomDaddy


Posts: 3183
Joined: 1/31/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


Is there a political party in the US heavily influenced by radical islam? Are there muslim politicans trying to force their version of morality upon the rest of us? Are muslims killing doctors in Kansas? Is there a state or national political party platform full of ideas backed by radical islamists?


You know.... if you don't think the democrat party isn't heavily influenced by Christians, you are beyond naive.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade - 6/26/2011 8:32:51 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
Notice how when I enter a discussion like this, others leave?

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Christian Taliban In Kansas versus Roe v. Wade Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109