Liberal Forum

Misty » 28 Jun 2014 2:13 pm » wrote:So.....'buffer zones' are permissible around circuses, churches, and funeral services (and of course the Supreme Court), and you can have 'free speech pens' around political conventions, but women who are seeking their right to a legal medical procedure, are now allowed to be harassed up close by a bunch of so-called 'pro-life' bullies.

For Chief Justice John Roberts to call these zealots 'peaceful sidewalk counselors' is ludicrous.
I guess he forgot that the reason that the Massachusetts law was passed in the first place was because two clinic workers were shot and killed by a gunman peaceful sidewalk counselor at abortion clinics in Brookline in 1994.

The Justices Don't Like Buffer Zones, Unless It's A Buffer Zone Around The Supreme Court

Misty » 25 Jun 2014 6:50 pm » wrote: What I want is for guns not to allowed in restaurants at all, especially the type of guns carried by those two jackholes.
If I'm paying for a meal, I want to be able to eat it without wondering if some clown is going to start shooting up the place.
I will not eat in a restaurant that allows idiots like that to carry their big penis substitutes guns into it.
And from the looks of it, more people seem to agree with me than with you, since these jackholes have been told by more than one restaurant that they can't bring their guns in.

golfboy » 18 Jun 2014 12:27 pm » wrote: Sorry, but did you NOT see his headline MONDAY when this was news? News today is the bls report on inflation.
You need to keep up.

DRUDGE REPORT 2014®www.drudgereport.com
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS582US582&ion=1&espv=2&es_th=1&ie=UTF-8#Drudge ReportUSA captures Benghazi suspect in secret raid...
Held on ship...
Faces charges in civilian court...
Mother of Victim: What Took so Long....

RECENT DRUDGE HEADLINES.
U.S. captures Benghazi suspect in secret raid...

golfboy » 28 Jun 2014 8:00 pm » wrote: It's not going to happen 99.9% of the time you go anywhere.
Suck it up and stop making an issue out of something you're never even going to have happen to you.

What an abortifacient is -- and what it isn't.

The reality is that there is overwhelming scientific evidence that the IUD and Plan B work only as contraceptives.

There is only one drug approved to induce abortion. It is called RU-486 (mifepristone) and is not on the FDA's list of approved contraception. It is available only by prescription and no employer is forced to pay for it as part of an employee health plan.

To understand why scientists believe that the IUD, Plan B and Ella are not abortifacients, it is important first to understand the biology of conception. In order for a woman to become pregnant after sexual intercourse, her ovaries must release an egg (ovulation). Sperm can remain viable inside her reproductive tract for five days. Therefore, if intercourse takes place up to five days before ovulation or within two days after, both sperm and egg are viable and the egg cell can be fertilized.

Now, just because an egg is fertilized doesn't necessarily mean that it will develop into an embryo. For that to happen, the fertilized egg must be implanted into the endometrium that lines the uterus. Implantation happens seven days after fertilization, if it happens at all. Scientists estimate that, at a minimum, two-thirds of fertilized eggs fail to implant. Some scientists estimate that the number may even be as high as 80 percent, according to Discover Magazine.

For this reason, according to the medical definition, a woman is not considered pregnant until the developing embryo successfully implants the lining of the uterus.
Some church officials argue that a woman is pregnant at the moment of fertilization. If that is the case, then it follows that 60 to 80 percent of the time, this natural process results in a massive loss of life.

crimsongulf » 02 Jul 2014 12:51 pm » wrote:Ya need to find a safer area to shop, Marlo

Misty » 02 Jul 2014 12:50 pm » wrote:I am wondering why Justice Alito just accepted Hobby Lobby's premise that they believed that the contraceptive methods at issue in the case are abortifacients?

bingster » 02 Jul 2014 1:21 pm » wrote: His statement truly opens the floodgates down the slippery slope, doesn't it? Muslims believe that all but Muslims are evil. Guess they don't have to hire anyone but Muslims anymore.... A large group of Christians used to think blacks were evil, according to the Bible, guess they don't have to hire blacks anymore.... Most orthodox religions believe the woman is subservient to a man. Guess pay equity is off of the table... This whole thing is truly insane!!!

On July 1, the state of Georgia enacted the Georgia Safe Carry Protection Act — also known as the “guns everywhere” law — which allows licensed gun-owners to bring their weapons to churches, bars, government buildings and other places where they were previously prohibited.

The Valdosta Daily Times reported Tuesday evening that the new law had already pitted two armed citizens against each other in a standoff at a local convenience store.

“Essentially, it involved one customer with a gun on his hip when a second customer entered with a gun on his hip,” Valdosta Police Chief Brian Childress told the Daily Times.

Around 3:00 p.m., a customer entered the Enmark store on Park Avenue with a gun holstered to his hip. Another customer, who was also carrying a holstered weapon, approached the first man and demanded to see his ID and gun permit.

As he demanded the first customer’s ID, the second man pulled his own gun from its holster, but pointed it at the floor. The first customer protested that he isn’t legally required to show any ID or permits.

Still holding his gun, the second customer demanded again to see the other man’s permit and ID. The first customer, undeterred by the unholstered weapon, paid for his purchases and exited the store, then called police.

When police arrived, they arrested 62-year-old Ronald Williams for disorderly conduct related to pulling a loaded weapon inside a place of business. Police took Williams’ gun and remanded him to the Lowndes County Jail.

Chief Childress told the Daily Times that not even he and his officers have the authority to demand to see gun owners’ permits under the new law.

“This is an example of my concern with the new gun law,” he said, “that people will take the law into their own hands, which we will not tolerate.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/07/02/f ... -showdown/

Misty » 02 Jul 2014 2:12 pm » wrote:
More assholes with guns.
Under the new law, cops are not even allowed to ask a gun owner for his permit? WTF?

According to Golfboy, we are all at the mercy of jackholes like this, and there is nothing we can do about it.
Their freedom to be an asshole with a gun apparently overrides our freedom to be safe.

golfboy » 02 Jul 2014 3:02 pm » wrote: Your Papers Please!!!

The left is nothing more than jack booted thugs.

Misty » 02 Jul 2014 2:12 pm » wrote: Under the new law, cops are not even allowed to ask a gun owner for his permit? WTF?

Misty » 02 Jul 2014 2:12 pm » wrote: More assholes with guns.
Under the new law, cops are not even allowed to ask a gun owner for his permit? WTF?

According to Golfboy, we are all at the mercy of jackholes like this, and there is nothing we can do about it.
Their freedom to be an asshole with a gun apparently overrides our freedom to be safe.

Misty » 02 Jul 2014 12:52 pm » wrote: It was a safe area.

Endoscopy » 02 Jul 2014 5:25 pm » wrote: WHERE DO MOST MASS KILLINGS HAPPEN???

IN GUN FREE ZONES

bingster » 02 Jul 2014 8:28 pm » wrote:Really? Prove it. I remember one in a parking lot, a theater, a school with armed guards (columbine), a mall, etc.... Are you just talking out of your ***?

bingster » 02 Jul 2014 3:29 pm » wrote:
Stealing a quote from Wayne LaPierre that caused George H W Bush to withdraw his lifetime membership in the NRA?

Endoscopy » 02 Jul 2014 5:25 pm » wrote: WHERE DO MOST MASS KILLINGS HAPPEN???

IN GUN FREE ZONES

The Growing Myth Of Mass Shootings And "Gun-Free Zones"

As Mother Jones reported as part of its ongoing analysis of gun rampages, "Among the 62 mass shootings over the last 30 years that we studied, not a single case includes evidence that the killer chose to target a place because it banned guns." An analysis from Mayors Against Illegal Guns found that fewer than one quarter of mass shootings in public spaces from January 2009 through January 2013 occurred in gun-free zones.

Instead, most gunmen choose their killing sites because they have a personal connection to it (i.e. it's their workplace or school), not because of the location's posted gun policy.

Secondly, if more guns, and access to more guns, is the answer to curbing shooting sprees, then why haven't more guns curbed shooting sprees? As
Mother Jones noted, nearly 100 state laws loosening gun restrictions have been passed in the last four years, yet 2012 was the worst year for mass shootings in recent history.