Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
Just from a purely legal standpoint, people
Just from a purely legal standpoint, people
By FOS
25 Jun 2022 3:26 pm in No Holds Barred Political Forum
25 Jun 2022 3:26 pm
Roe v Wade was based on a retarded **** crazy idea that the constitution defended abortion.
You can read the Constitution yourself. It doesn't say **** about abortion.
It's kinda funny that in a country founded by protestants, there was some culture of accepting the interpretation of 'experts' (priests) interpreting a text in stupidly imaginative ways.
I am not a lawyer and do not need to be. I can read the constitution. And roe v Wade is retarded.. whether it is the right thing or not...I don't care where you land on that....it's a stupid legal argument..
My father actually was a lawyer. A very successful one. And he agreed. Legally Roe v Wade was stupid. But he would only whisper that to me cause he was always on board with the leftist agenda.
You can read the Constitution yourself. It doesn't say **** about abortion.
It's kinda funny that in a country founded by protestants, there was some culture of accepting the interpretation of 'experts' (priests) interpreting a text in stupidly imaginative ways.
I am not a lawyer and do not need to be. I can read the constitution. And roe v Wade is retarded.. whether it is the right thing or not...I don't care where you land on that....it's a stupid legal argument..
My father actually was a lawyer. A very successful one. And he agreed. Legally Roe v Wade was stupid. But he would only whisper that to me cause he was always on board with the leftist agenda.
25 Jun 2022 3:43 pm
FOS » 25 Jun 2022, 3:26 pm » wrote: ↑ Roe v Wade was based on a retarded **** crazy idea that the constitution defended abortion.
You can read the Constitution yourself. It doesn't say **** about abortion.
It's kinda funny that in a country founded by protestants, there was some culture of accepting the interpretation of 'experts' (priests) interpreting a text in stupidly imaginative ways.
I am not a lawyer and do not need to be. I can read the constitution. And roe v Wade is retarded.. whether it is the right thing or not...I don't care where you land on that....it's a stupid legal argument..
My father actually was a lawyer. A very successful one. And he agreed. Legally Roe v Wade was stupid. But he would only whisper that to me cause he was always on board with the leftist agenda.
I would argue that the Fourth Amendment is a pretty good hat-rack for an argument that a woman can punch herself in the stomach, take a tonic, cast a spell, jump off a stool, hire a jew - FIND A WAY to not be pregnant anymore.
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
25 Jun 2022 3:52 pm
FOS » 25 Jun 2022, 3:26 pm » wrote: ↑ Roe v Wade was based on a retarded **** crazy idea that the constitution defended abortion.
You can read the Constitution yourself. It doesn't say **** about abortion.
It's kinda funny that in a country founded by protestants, there was some culture of accepting the interpretation of 'experts' (priests) interpreting a text in stupidly imaginative ways.
I am not a lawyer and do not need to be. I can read the constitution. And roe v Wade is retarded.. whether it is the right thing or not...I don't care where you land on that....it's a stupid legal argument..
My father actually was a lawyer. A very successful one. And he agreed. Legally Roe v Wade was stupid. But he would only whisper that to me cause he was always on board with the leftist agenda.
I heard long ago that the lady involved in Roe v Wade was manipulated and it was mainly ****.
But the baby killers liked it.
25 Jun 2022 3:54 pm
FOS » 25 Jun 2022, 3:26 pm » wrote: ↑ Roe v Wade was based on a retarded **** crazy idea that the constitution defended abortion.
You can read the Constitution yourself. It doesn't say **** about abortion.
It's kinda funny that in a country founded by protestants, there was some culture of accepting the interpretation of 'experts' (priests) interpreting a text in stupidly imaginative ways.
I am not a lawyer and do not need to be. I can read the constitution. And roe v Wade is retarded.. whether it is the right thing or not...I don't care where you land on that....it's a stupid legal argument..
My father actually was a lawyer. A very successful one. And he agreed. Legally Roe v Wade was stupid. But he would only whisper that to me cause he was always on board with the leftist agenda.
it's all based on the meaning of "IS"
25 Jun 2022 4:10 pm
The fourth ammendment?Cannonpointer » 25 Jun 2022, 3:43 pm » wrote: ↑ I would argue that the Fourth Amendment is a pretty good hat-rack for an argument that a woman can punch herself in the stomach, take a tonic, cast a spell, jump off a stool, hire a jew - FIND A WAY to not be pregnant anymore.
Dude. Only if It's illegal to get pregnant lol
25 Jun 2022 4:26 pm
I woukd add that in his individual opinion, Clarence Thomas felt we need to look deeper into the 14th ammendment (a big part of the fake roe v Wade dicision)
The 14th is infamously easy to interpret in imaginative ways.
In fact it was an ammendment that the southern states were forced to sign under duress. Obe could in fact argue that it isn't even binding on that basis.
But regardless...it is also what supports birthright citizenship in the usa. Wonder if he was thinking of that?
The 14th is infamously easy to interpret in imaginative ways.
In fact it was an ammendment that the southern states were forced to sign under duress. Obe could in fact argue that it isn't even binding on that basis.
But regardless...it is also what supports birthright citizenship in the usa. Wonder if he was thinking of that?
25 Jun 2022 4:27 pm
FOS » 25 Jun 2022, 4:10 pm » wrote: ↑ The fourth ammendment?
Dude. Only if It's illegal to get pregnant lol
The way I read the fourth, it also protects the right to get pregnant.
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
25 Jun 2022 4:31 pm
the fourth is about criminal due process dude. Like you can't search people without a search warrant. **** like that..Cannonpointer » 25 Jun 2022, 4:27 pm » wrote: ↑ The way I read the fourth, it also protects the right to get pregnant.
As long as pregnancy is not a legal issue...abortion can't have anything to do with that..
If and only of being pregnant were illegal the sure I could see how the fourth is relevant..
Only if..
25 Jun 2022 4:34 pm
No, the fourth COMES UP in legal cases - but it is much bigger than that.FOS » 25 Jun 2022, 4:31 pm » wrote: ↑ the fourth is about criminal due process dude. Like you can't search people without a search warrant. **** like that..
As long as pregnancy is not a legal issue...abortion can't have anything to do with that..
Let's take an illegal search, for example. They toss out the evidence, right? 4th mentdment violation. But it doesn't end there. The cops can lose their qualified immunity over that ****, and have their houses taken away. Because they violated RIGHTS.
There are no criminal rights in our Consttution. Just rights - period. Nowhere does the Constitution suggest that any particular rights only come into play when you are charged with a crime.
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
25 Jun 2022 4:37 pm
No dude. 4th and 5th only apply to rights for people who are under suspicion of breaking the law.Cannonpointer » 25 Jun 2022, 4:34 pm » wrote: ↑ No, the fourth COMES UP in legal cases - but it is much bigger than that.
Let's take an illegal search, for example. They toss out the evidence, right? 4th mentdment violation. But it doesn't end there. The cops can lose their qualified immunity over that ****, and have their houses taken away. Becuse they violated RIGHTS.
There are no criminal rights in our Consttution. Just rights - period.
As long as pregnancy isn't illegal then none of this stuff applies.
I'd saymiscegenation were still illegal (as is was 200 years ago) one could argue that a woman pregnant with a mixed race fetus has a rights to abort it, based on the 4th.
You could argue it. Not saying it is sure but at least a case could be made.
But as long as pregnancy isn't illegal none of this stuff applies.
25 Jun 2022 4:40 pm
Based on your argument, the police are perfectly within their rights to search my house - PROVIDED I am not under suspicion.FOS » 25 Jun 2022, 4:37 pm » wrote: ↑ No dude. 4th and 5th only apply to rights for people who are under suspicion of breaking the law.
As long as pregnancy isn't illegal then none of this stuff applies.
You have an EXTREMELY ill-founded and incorrect view. I can be utterly unsuspected of anything - does not destroy my fourth and fifth amendment rights. They remain intact, even if I am not under suspicion.
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
25 Jun 2022 4:43 pm
You need to show me the word criminal in the 4th Amendment. It should be there, if your reading is correct.FOS » 25 Jun 2022, 4:31 pm » wrote: ↑ the fourth is about criminal due process dude. Like you can't search people without a search warrant. **** like that..
As long as pregnancy is not a legal issue...abortion can't have anything to do with that..
If and only of being pregnant were illegal the sure I could see how the fourth is relevant..
Only if..
I say the state can mind its business and not mine - ALWAYS. You say it can mind my business if it doesn't suspect me of a crime: I ONLY have 4th and 5th Amendment rights for criminal purposes. Since when do MY rights hang on what some cop or prosecutor believes?
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
25 Jun 2022 4:44 pm
Negative. The 4th explicitly states that they need to obtain a warrant from some judge. And that is up to the judge.Cannonpointer » 25 Jun 2022, 4:40 pm » wrote: ↑ Based on your argument, the police are perfectly within their rights to search my house - PROVIDED I am not under suspicion.
You have an EXTREMELY ill-founded and incorrect view. I can be utterly unsuspected of anything - does not destroy my fourth and fifth amendment rights. They remain intact, even if I am not under suspicion.
And also it must only apply to the defendant.
My father actually defended a somewhat famous case where the police had a warrant to search a guys home who was under suspicion..and they in fact found drugs belonging to their roommate.
The warrant was not even explicitly searching for drugs. And it was searching for evidence against the suspect, not his roommate.
And my father actually did win that case. On constitutional grounds. The 4th is quite explicit enough to get that thrown out.
25 Jun 2022 4:45 pm
Oh.FOS » 25 Jun 2022, 4:44 pm » wrote: ↑ Negative. The 4th explicitly states that they need to obtain a warrant from some judge. And that is up to the judge.
Is that all it says?
I thought it said some other stuff. You sure?
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
25 Jun 2022 4:46 pm
Cannonpointer » 25 Jun 2022, 4:43 pm » wrote: ↑ You need to show me the word criminal in the 4th Amendment. It should be there, if your reading is correct.
I say the state can mind its business and not mine - ALWAYS. You say it can mind my business if it doesn't suspect me of a crime: I ONLY have 4th and 5th Amendment rights for criminal purposes. Since when do MY rights hang on what some cop or prosecutor believes?
since the people in power said so.
Dude I'm not arguing what is ethical. I don't care. the constitution is not even my sthical guide.. I'm just saying what is in there and what a valid legal argument could be..
25 Jun 2022 4:47 pm
It has like 4 different sections. I forget what they all say verbatim.... None of them have any relevance to abortion.Cannonpointer » 25 Jun 2022, 4:45 pm » wrote: ↑ Oh.
Is that all it says?
I thought it said some other stuff. You sure?
They are not about giving rights to everyone...they are about restricting law enforcement.. they are specific to crime.
25 Jun 2022 4:48 pm
Oh, those guys.
Wait. Which ones?
I'm not either. I'm saying you need to read the 4th mendment again, because you are incorrect that I have no privacy rights except as a criminal defendant.
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
25 Jun 2022 4:49 pm
The 4th refers to law enforcement. Not to the defendant.Cannonpointer » 25 Jun 2022, 4:48 pm » wrote: ↑ Oh, those guys.
Wait. Which ones?
I'm not either. I'm saying you need to read the 4th mendment again, because you are incorrect that I have no privacy rights except as a criminal defendant.
25 Jun 2022 4:51 pm
There is NO protected :"right" to murder a baby in the mother's womb to be found in the Constitution.Cannonpointer » 25 Jun 2022, 4:27 pm » wrote: ↑ The way I read the fourth, it also protects the right to get pregnant.
Even RBG recognized that Roe was decided on EXTREMELY "shaky ground" and would most like be tossed as Unconstitutional.
She got exactly as she predicted would happen AND under the circumstances she said it would be decided. Even SHE never mentioned the 4th Amendment as a protection for abortion, pregnancy, or ANY OTHER reason you seem to think you have available under the 4th.
Liberals are spoiled children, miserable, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic & useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats ~O'Rourke
The Democratic Party seems intransigent on their position of keeping the party ‘woke,’ detached, exclusionary, and totally insane.
The Democratic Party seems intransigent on their position of keeping the party ‘woke,’ detached, exclusionary, and totally insane.
25 Jun 2022 4:52 pm
The right of the people to be secure in their PERSONS, papers, houses and effects shall not be infringed. I'd say abortion cn be inferred in tht, without too much of a pretzling.FOS » 25 Jun 2022, 4:47 pm » wrote: ↑ It has like 4 different sections. I forget what they all say verbatim.... None of them have any relevance to abortion.
The fact is, we have a right to do ANYTHING which the government is not explicitly empowered to prohibit - and abortion is not even MENTIONED in the Constitution, so - no prohibition there.
No, they are specific to limiting the state.FOS » 25 Jun 2022, 4:47 pm » wrote: ↑ They are not about giving rights to everyone...they are about restricting law enforcement.. they are specific to crime.
Even non-criminals have rights.
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
Who is online
In total there are 2895 users online :: 24 registered, 15 bots, and 2856 guests
Registered users: Vegas, Two If By Tea, Mrkelly, Blackvegetable, Zeets2, Buck Naked, ROG62, RebelGator, ConservativeWave, ConsRule, *GHETTO BLASTER, FJB, MR-7, *Beekeeper, jerra b, EDC4ALL!, murdock, LowIQTrash, PhiloBeddo, Sumela, Cedar, Harper Lee, nefarious101, *Huey
Bots: CriteoBot, Mail.RU_Bot, TTD-Content, proximic, DuckDuckBot, semantic-visions.com, app.hypefactors.com, Applebot, Mediapartners-Google, linkfluence.com, bingbot, ADmantX, YandexBot, Googlebot, curl/7