Just means I have a new list of States I'd never move to!To close the topic, I think this post captures the essence of the argument succinctly.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Just means I have a new list of States I'd never move to!To close the topic, I think this post captures the essence of the argument succinctly.
That's an untruth, heartbeats are detectable as early as 3 to 4 weeks after conception…. And a developing fetus is not a blob of cells, it very quickly takes on the visual characteristics of a human baby…I'd say that happens a few months before birth. Prior to that, it's just a cell-growth in your body. It's up to the bearer, IMO, whether to carry that load or not.
man, if you think that's human-like, no wonder the rules are so lax.That's an untruth, heartbeats are detectable as early as 3 to 4 weeks after conception…. And a developing fetus is not a blob of cells, it very quickly takes on the visual characteristics of a human baby…
View attachment 1228529
I guess that's good information for anyone to have.Just means I have a new list of States I'd never move to!
Kinda like that comment?I guess that's good information for anyone to have.
Kinda like that comment?
Actually it is a very good day. Before you go into a rant, I am very pro choice. Why I say it is a good day is that the opinions in Bruen and Dobbs are consistent. The court states that it is getting out of the policy business and interpreting the constitution by what is actually says. It says that there is right to keep and bear arms and it does not mention abortion. If you think that they should make policy in one area, you must accept that they can do it in all areas, which would mean the loss of our second amendment rights with a change of just a few justices.Idaho needs to be relocated to the bible-belt. Where folks seem to use mysticism to justify their laws.
Anyone who really believes in demons and ghosts shouldn't be in charge of making rules for the sane.
It's a sad and tragic day for America.
I think that we can all agree on that.for those of you that might wonder why i click "Like" on an opposing viewpoint, i'm all for discussion and discourse, so long as it doesn't devolve to killing the messenger.
They kinda sorta did when they rebuked the 9th Circuit Court for legislating from the benchRegarding the topic of this thread, I hope the Supreme Court now starts to take more "direct" infringement cases such as firearm/magazine restrictions.
And age restrictionsRegarding the topic of this thread, I hope the Supreme Court now starts to take more "direct" infringement cases such as firearm/magazine restrictions.
If the pattern holds, we'll be losing other Rights soon enough.Regarding the topic of this thread, I hope the Supreme Court now starts to take more "direct" infringement cases such as firearm/magazine restrictions.
The Ninth Circus Court needs a smackdown... like a left-handed, red-headed stepchild would get...They kinda sorta did when they rebuked the 9th Circuit Court for legislating from the bench
I'm thinking if you can join the Army at 18, you should be able to own a gun.And age restrictions
That'll be a tough nut to crack to get changed, seeing's as how it's in Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution, and would require the legislatures of 3/4 of the States (currently, that would be 38 of 50) to vote in favor of it, or a 2/3 majority of both Houses of Congress. It could happen, but unlikely in our lifetimes...If the pattern holds, we'll be losing other Rights soon enough.
This is why I don't think it's a good idea that the POTUS nominates court appointments.
Oh no, it has had massive errors going forward and mythical rights have been granted at the expense of legislative decision making. Same-sex marriage is one. There's just no "guarantee" of it in the Constitution, but we are told it is in fact there is because, "Roe" proved it existed even if we couldn't find it.....Furthermore, there was no "rights" or "laws" created making abortion legal by the in err decision back in 1973. ...
Strengthening existing rights via NYRSPA v Bruen, eliminating fictional ones with Dobbs, will make a big change in the long run for the better. There's a coming decision that can be even more impactful - WV vs EPA, where the administrative state is on trial. Waiting on that."should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell"
I was kind of hoping that Trump would strategically appoint Khate Brown or other somesuch lefty Oregon politician to the 9th to get them out of the way. No harm no foul since the 9th is almost always overturned by SCOTUS.The Ninth Circus Court needs a smackdown... like a left-handed, red-headed stepchild would get...