Congratulations, you took freedom away…

[Lionfish]

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Stringfellow Hawk]

SO there is nothing specific that took your policy away? Did Policies ever change before Obamacare was enacted?

the requirements of OBamacare were not covered in my cadillac plan and my employer could not afford to carry multiple plans to satisfy that legislation hence I lost the great insurance and had to pick between bronze, silver, and gold with none being close to what I had. this has been covered at least 100 times, Jesus, wake the fuck up

 

[Jarod]

the requirements of OBamacare were not covered in my cadillac plan and my employer could not afford to carry multiple plans to satisfy that legislation hence I lost the great insurance and had to pick between bronze, silver, and gold with none being close to what I had. this has been covered at least 100 times, Jesus, wake the fuck up

So, your employer chose not to offer the plan, It was not Obamacare, I understand, thanks for telling the truth.

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Concart]

You're projecting what could result from the decision rather than focusing on the ruling itself. You are using the same argument that some people use in the "assault weapons" debate. They are afraid a ban on so called assault weapons will ultimately lead to a ban on all guns just as you are afraid a ruling against abortion will lead to a loss of gay marriage and birth control.

Yes, I am because THAT'S WHAT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT.

Your analogy is completely wrong. It would be like banning assault weapons AND stating that you are doing so because the second amendment doesn't apply to private citizens. And then having one judge say 'but of course this doesn't apply to handguns' while another says 'handguns are next!!!!'

That's the analogy.

 

[Truth Detector]

It’s actually the right to Privacy, which was much larger than abortion. It was the right to make basic personal decisions that most directly affect who we as individuals are.

That's a pile of bullshit. Where was my right to not be forced to get an experimental shot then?

The United States Constitution does not contain any explicit right to privacy. The Constitution foes not guarantee any rights. It limits Governments intrusion on those rights. There is no constitutional right to an abortion halfwit.

The conservatives could easily have left that right alone and carved Abortion out of it. Instead these guys took it away giving the government the power to once again regulate access to birth control, who we can marry and any other number of personal decisions.

See above halfwit.

They took power away from individuals and gave it to the government.

The only power taken away was activist jurists power to fabricate rights where none existed.

 

[Sawyerloggingon]

Yes, I am because THAT'S WHAT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT.

Your analogy is completely wrong. It would be like banning assault weapons AND stating that you are doing so because the second amendment doesn't apply to private citizens. And then having one judge say 'but of course this doesn't apply to handguns' while another says 'handguns are next!!!!'

That's the analogy.

Which amendment was taken away by this courts ruling? We both know the answer to that. The court took power away from itself and put law making back where it belongs. It did not take abortion away from American citizens as you falsely claim. Now it's up to elected officials in the legislative branch of government to enact legitimate laws defining the limits or lack thereof on abortion.

 

[Earl]

I am beginning to believe that posters of the ilk of Jarod just don't want to admit that this ruling does not ban abortion. It clearly states that there was never an enumerated Constitutional right to abortion (the murder of an unborn child).

These far left loons just want this non-issue to remain an issue.

If you have an issue, take it up with the state legislatures who are elected by the people.

The real issues are the top issues with hard working American citizens...the out of control inflation, borders, crime and a president who is losing his metal capacity...breathe in, Joe...breathe out, Joe...breathe in Joe.

 

[Earl]

Oh yes, that big mama doesn't have to worry about becoming pregnant.

 

[Concart]

Which amendment was taken away by this courts ruling? We both know the answer to that. The court took power away from itself and put law making back where it belongs. It did not take abortion away from American citizens as you falsely claim. Now it's up to elected officials in the legislative branch of government to enact legitimate laws defining the limits or lack thereof on abortion.

There isn't one taken away in mine either. Try to keep up. It is a change in how the 4th is interpreted. And in my analogy how the 2nd is interpreted. I never claimed it took abortions away from American citizens. That's a lie. I said Federal Protection was taken away. Why are you incapable of making an honest argument?

 

[Sawyerloggingon]

There isn't one taken away in mine either. Try to keep up. It is a change in how the 4th is interpreted. And in my analogy how the 2nd is interpreted. I never claimed it took abortions away from American citizens. That's a lie. I said Federal Protection was taken away. Why are you incapable of making an honest argument?

You said it would be like "banning assault weapons" . This ruling did not ban abortions.

Why are you incapable of making an honest argument?

 

[ExpressLane]

Oh yes, that big mama doesn't have to worry about becoming pregnant.

They like to pretend.

 

[Life is Golden]

Which amendment was taken away by this courts ruling? We both know the answer to that. The court took power away from itself and put law making back where it belongs. It did not take abortion away from American citizens as you falsely claim. Now it's up to elected officials in the legislative branch of government to enact legitimate laws defining the limits or lack thereof on abortion.

Egg-actly.

They will lie at any opportunity. Anyone who reads knows the truth.

 

[Concart]

You said it would be like "banning assault weapons" . This ruling did not ban abortions.

Why are you incapable of making an honest argument?

Because my ruling would not ban assault weapons, stupid. You just don't get how the courts work at all. The court would hear a case about banning assault weapons if a state did so. Which it has. And those bans have been upheld. But they are upheld on very narrow grounds. If they were upheld on the grounds that the 2nd only applied to militias, that would be the equivalent of what just happened.

 

[Flash]

Im a libertarian. I take privacy rights to heart, and that includes anything to do with my body.
I fully support "my body my choice"
but the decision was only for the implied right to privacy, which is not in the Constitution
It was right in the Alito decision

Agreed. And, the "keep your hands off my body" argument was not taken way by Dobbs because Roe allowed the states to control a woman's body. States could regulate abortion (method, waiting period, parental consent) during the second trimester and could prohibit abortion during the third trimester. If a state can prohibit abortion the third trimester it is still controlling a woman's body and forcing her to carry the child to term.

I prefer my state keep abortion legal, but nothing in the Constitution specifies a right to privacy. Our rights are enumerated in amendments 1-8 and the 9th (like the 10th) is a statement of principle and contains no specific rights.

The Supreme Court has no power to make up rights they think should be included in the 9th.

The same thing applies to the NY gun control law. The 2nd amendment and all other other rights in the Bill of Rights were meant to restrict only the federal government and not the states and that interpretation was accepted until 1925. To say the 14th amendment due process clause makes those rights applicable to the states was as farfetched a decision as Roe. I like the results because it expands our freedoms, but it is not good constitutional law. The 2nd amendment was not applied to the states until 2010 and prevents the states from passing its own gun regulations if the SC objects.

 

[Flash]

I am beginning to believe that posters of the ilk of Jarod just don't want to admit that this ruling does not ban abortion. It clearly states that there was never an enumerated Constitutional right to abortion (the murder of an unborn child).

True.

Can a state prohibit a parent from sending his child to private/religious school? If not, what right does that violate. The court said that state violates our right to privacy. If there is not right to privacy then it does not protect abortion, sending children to private school, or forcing a person to undergo a medical procedure because all these were struck down based on the privacy right.

 

[christiefan915]

Thank you. Your own map shows the hyperbolic buffoons buying democrats manufactured hysteria have nothing to worry about if they want an abortion.

Nice deflection. My map shows that a bunch of red states have the same abortion policies as CA, which you claim is number one in easy abortion access.

 

[Sawyerloggingon]

Because my ruling would not ban assault weapons, stupid. You just don't get how the courts work at all. The court would hear a case about banning assault weapons if a state did so. Which it has. And those bans have been upheld. But they are upheld on very narrow grounds. If they were upheld on the grounds that the 2nd only applied to militias, that would be the equivalent of what just happened.

Your words post #606:

"It would be like banning assault weapons AND stating that you are doing so because the second amendment doesn't apply to private citizens"

Once again for those who can't deal with reality this decision says nothing about the legality of abortion. It merely says the previous court overstepped it's authority. Even Ruth saw this coming and said RW was flawed law.

 

[Sawyerloggingon]

Nice deflection. My map shows that a bunch of red states have the same abortion policies as CA, which you claim is number one in easy abortion access.

I made no such claim. My point was states can make any abortion laws they want. Sorry if my mocking California confused you but yes your map proves this ruling did not make abortion illegal or even difficult to obtain.