maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Fri Nov 16, 2018 4:36 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 982 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 99  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Kavanaugh Supreme Court nominee
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:05 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 11923
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 15961
Well, given that your typical woman understandably "wants control" over her reproduction, it seems to me that any kind of hardcore "NO ABORTION!" stance is a losing one at the polls. Easily going to alienate a large fraction of any electorate.

It doesn't really matter what the "morality" of it is, if the policy cannot be democratically instated then it is a stupid policy.

I can tell you, the idea that the age of consent is (a) allowed to vary across states, and (b) set ridiculously low relative to actual human mental maturation (age 25 would be a safe number to say "the average person is fully capable of consent") is "immoral" in that it establishes standards of conduct which lead to self-destructive behavior for millions of young folks. Granted, we are talking about laws which are built on top of thousands of years of tradition, and in fact represent a "scaling back" from traditional notions that the onset of menarche, adrenarche WERE the onset of something like the "age of consent."

Academically, my argument is virtually impregnable; but politically it would be (c) incomprehensible to most people; (d) almost certainly LOSE at the polls. There is no way that either fat cat Republican or Democrat old geezers want to have to wait till their interns are age 25 to fondle them at the office! :lol:

What I'm saying here is: "the left" commit self-destructiveness in their extremist ideological insistences, but the right is seemingly almost as prone to it in their own special way.

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kavanaugh Supreme Court nominee
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:16 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 27691
Reputation points: 20000
I would be happy if the Hyde Amendment were followed (no federal funding for abortion).

If you made everyone look at the tiny little hands and feet in the suction jar at the end of an abortion that would be the virtual end of it.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kavanaugh Supreme Court nominee
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 4:15 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 11923
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 15961
jack t ripper wrote:
I would be happy if the Hyde Amendment were followed (no federal funding for abortion).

If you made everyone look at the tiny little hands and feet in the suction jar at the end of an abortion that would be the virtual end of it.


Yup . . . if I let myself dwell on it, it is chilling to consider that I, in my youthful ignorance and irresponsibility, was party to that.

I think that this evaluation is "the way" forward for the "pro-life" movement, but it needs to be done patiently and with as little ideological zeal, waving of banners, inciting of prayers, and chanting of mantras as possible. The abortion topic is probably about as big of a thing in modern society as slavery was in American society in the mid 19th century. I don't think we need a civil war to "solve it," though I can agree that the current situation is unsatisfactory.

My own wife, who is a lovely rational person, and a political moderate for all intents and purposes, becomes a veritable raving harpy feminist whenever this topic comes up. That tells me that the society at large is not yet ready for a hard-core pro-life stance in which abortions are restricted to medical necessity.

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kavanaugh Supreme Court nominee
PostPosted: Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:50 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 15879
Reputation points: 720
Kavanaugh in 2000: Congress had 'constitutional duty' to investigate president.



:roll:

_________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kavanaugh Supreme Court nominee
PostPosted: Sat Aug 04, 2018 8:46 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 27691
Reputation points: 20000
Nemo;


I realize you are not intimately familiar with the Constitution, but this is what is termed an "orignalist" stance. The Congress is granted the sole authority of oversight over the Executive Branch and the the Judicial Branch has oversight over the laws passed by Congress and (usually) signed by the President. There is no "Department of Justice" in the Constitution. The DOJ is part of the Executive Branch. In addition, the voters can eject the Prezzy every four years if they wish and there is the never before used 25th Amendment.

Simply stated, Kavanaugh is right.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kavanaugh Supreme Court nominee
PostPosted: Sat Aug 04, 2018 8:49 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 27691
Reputation points: 20000
Also...here is a little secret...Trump was not President in 2000. Anything else you want me to 'splain, let me know.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kavanaugh Supreme Court nominee
PostPosted: Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:02 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 31261
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
jack t ripper wrote:
Also...here is a little secret...Trump was not President in 2000. Anything else you want me to 'splain, let me know.



You are forgetting that even in the year 2000, the Russians realized that Trump would be elected President.
And they started training that Marina Buttin chick (then 12 yrs old) to become a KGB agent and throw the election for Trump.

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kavanaugh Supreme Court nominee
PostPosted: Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:13 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 27691
Reputation points: 20000
chijohnaok wrote:
jack t ripper wrote:
Also...here is a little secret...Trump was not President in 2000. Anything else you want me to 'splain, let me know.



You are forgetting that even in the year 2000, the Russians realized that Trump would be elected President.
And they started training that Marina Buttin chick (then 12 yrs old) to become a KGB agent and throw the election for Trump.


Many people don't know this but Kavanaugh changed his name. He was originally Kavanov and was voted "Most likely to become Supreme Court Justice" at the 1978 Odessa Young Pioneer Camp.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kavanaugh Supreme Court nominee
PostPosted: Sat Aug 04, 2018 3:24 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 15879
Reputation points: 720
jack t ripper wrote:
Nemo;


I realize you are not intimately familiar with the Constitution, but this is what is termed an "orignalist" stance. The Congress is granted the sole authority of oversight over the Executive Branch and the the Judicial Branch has oversight over the laws passed by Congress and (usually) signed by the President. There is no "Department of Justice" in the Constitution. The DOJ is part of the Executive Branch. In addition, the voters can eject the Prezzy every four years if they wish and there is the never before used 25th Amendment.

Simply stated, Kavanaugh is right.

As far I know it is not the job of the doj, or the congress or any other organ but the supreme court to decide what is constitutional or not.

I find it odd that you have such old and obscure constitution that you need none sages to tell what your constitution really means. Why not rewrite the constitution for this time? :roll:

But you can't, your political system is so fucked up that you can not even build a border wall. :shock:

_________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kavanaugh Supreme Court nominee
PostPosted: Sat Aug 04, 2018 4:32 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 27691
Reputation points: 20000
nero wrote:
jack t ripper wrote:
Nemo;


I realize you are not intimately familiar with the Constitution, but this is what is termed an "orignalist" stance. The Congress is granted the sole authority of oversight over the Executive Branch and the the Judicial Branch has oversight over the laws passed by Congress and (usually) signed by the President. There is no "Department of Justice" in the Constitution. The DOJ is part of the Executive Branch. In addition, the voters can eject the Prezzy every four years if they wish and there is the never before used 25th Amendment.

Simply stated, Kavanaugh is right.

As far I know it is not the job of the doj, or the congress or any other organ but the supreme court to decide what is constitutional or not.

I find it odd that you have such old and obscure constitution that you need none sages to tell what your constitution really means. Why not rewrite the constitution for this time? :roll:

But you can't, your political system is so fucked up that you can not even build a border wall. :shock:


A splendid idea! Tear up the Constitution of the most successful and long-lasting large representative republic in the history of the known universe! Why didn't we think of that earlier?!

A Constitutional Convention, which is a provision of the Constitution would be the world's largest food-fight. It would make the LA riots look like Easter mass at the Vatican

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 982 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 99  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jwilkerson and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group