Roe V Wade has been repealed

[Lodad]

1. It's pretty selfish to only care about things that affect you. I'm sorry if that's how you navigate the world.
2. The overturning of Roe is bad, regardless of whether or not it affects you personally.
3. A court that can take away one group's civil rights can take away your civil rights.
4. Roe itself has been used as specific precedent for other cases, including but not limited to cases pertaining to contraception, many sex acts, and same-sex marriage. Thomas himself says in his concurring opinion striking down Roe that these cases should be reexamined.

That's what I said.

Regarding #1 and #3: People don't ever realize that eventually, once the guys at the top run out of other people to shit on, they'll be next.

 

[Dakitten]

I'm sorry you are being so disingenuous. Everybody and there mother recognizes how tragic the uvalde school shooting was. But it's pretty damn telling from the way the left reacts to these tragedies just where their heads are. If they wanted to they could easily have drafted up a bill that renovates each and every school to single point of entry, multiple exit facilities like airports, upped security, etc and it would have bipartisan support. The government can protect federal buildings and airports, and can send billions to fund some stupid war across the ocean, but can't invest in protecting our students from bad guys. Instead their solutions always go to how can we take rights away from legal, responsible gun owners. Then when they don't get their way, they decide to not do anything and wait for the next school shooting so they can spark more outrage.

No, being pro life and being pro 2nd amendment aren't mutually exclusive. I can hate children being murdered whilst also recognizing that I have the right to protect my loved ones from harm.

A gun should always be a privilege, not a right. If you have to take a test to drive a car, you should need one to wield a murder tool. Hell, if you really think it is a right, then everyone should be given a firearm paid for by tax dollars upon reaching whatever nonsense age threshold the right believes is viable.

But its pretty damn telling from the way the right reacts to these tragedies just where their heads are. If they wanted to they could easily have drafted up a bill that looks at the most realistic factor in these shootings, an abundance of firearms and a lack of regulations on them that allows the mentally unsound and disgruntled to obtain as much ammo and hardware as they can afford, but instead they come up with insane solutions like single entry access points and armed guards like a prison.

Sorry, but being anti choice and anti gun regulation does mean you value your own status quo over the lives of children and women... Some sources might even call this viewpoint selfish and evil! Jesus, maybe! Probably should look into that.

 

[MariArch]

The

Regarding #1 and #3: People don't ever realize that eventually, once the guys at the top run out of other people to shit on, they'll be next.

The whole point of this decision is that they're taking away power from the top and giving it to states lmfao. Y'all are whack

 

[hippy dave]

Right? And I like how their solution seems to be to take away take away guns and 2a rights from the citizenry. Then what? They realize that deaths from guns are done with pistols nearl


The
The whole point of this decision is that they're taking away power from the top and giving it to states lmfao. Y'all are whack

Ah shit you forgot to reply to my other comment and confirm that you will indeed be using your gun to prevent people's other fundamental rights being taken away. That was pretty careless of you but I'll let it go if you do it now.

 

[Foxi4]

@Noctosphere Changed the thread title in line with the section rules - repealing Roe v. Wade did not “make abortion illegal” in the United States, it simply relegated the matter of legislating abortion to individual states. The original title was misleading.

 

[MariArch]

A gun should always be a privilege, not a right. If you have to take a test to drive a car, you should need one to wield a murder tool. Hell, if you really think it is a right, then everyone should be given a firearm paid for by tax dollars upon reaching whatever nonsense age threshold the right believes is viable.

But its pretty damn telling from the way the right reacts to these tragedies just where their heads are. If they wanted to they could easily have drafted up a bill that looks at the most realistic factor in these shootings, an abundance of firearms and a lack of regulations on them that allows the mentally unsound and disgruntled to obtain as much ammo and hardware as they can afford, but instead they come up with insane solutions like single entry access points and armed guards like a prison.

Sorry, but being anti choice and anti gun regulation does mean you value your own status quo over the lives of children and women... which some might in fact call selfish and evil! Jesus, maybe. Probably should look into that!

Or maybe the common factor here is that... They're mentally unsound? Lmao

Since the 90s we've seen a dramatic increase in the amount of guns in distribution and owned by the citizenry, but also a sharp decrease in crime. The problem isn't that safe gun owners, which is the vast vast majority who got their guns pretty easily, it's that we don't focus on these creeps with obvious mental problems

 

[Foxi4]

A gun should always be a privilege, not a right. If you have to take a test to drive a car, you should need one to wield a murder tool. Hell, if you really think it is a right, then everyone should be given a firearm paid for by tax dollars upon reaching whatever nonsense age threshold the right believes is viable.

But its pretty damn telling from the way the right reacts to these tragedies just where their heads are. If they wanted to they could easily have drafted up a bill that looks at the most realistic factor in these shootings, an abundance of firearms and a lack of regulations on them that allows the mentally unsound and disgruntled to obtain as much ammo and hardware as they can afford, but instead they come up with insane solutions like single entry access points and armed guards like a prison.

Sorry, but being anti choice and anti gun regulation does mean you value your own status quo over the lives of children and women... Some sources might even call this viewpoint selfish and evil! Jesus, maybe! Probably should look into that.

You should have a de facto right to arm yourself for whatever purpose you find appropriate unless there are pre-existing circumstances which prevent you from exercising that right. In the same way you are entitled to purchase a vehicle, you do not require a driver’s license to buy one. You need a license to participate in traffic, which is a different matter entirely.

 

[hippy dave]

Or maybe the common factor here is that... They're mentally unsound? Lmao

Since the 90s we've seen a dramatic increase in the amount of guns in distribution and owned by the citizenry, but also a sharp decrease in crime. The problem isn't that safe gun owners, which is the vast vast majority who got their guns pretty easily, it's that we don't focus on these creeps with obvious mental problems

So you agree more gun control legislation is needed.

 

[pustal]

Personally I’m glad that the decision was overturned - it was unconstitutional from day one. Now individual states should move to enshrine it in law, either in the state’s constitution like Florida or via other legislation. Naturally some states will choose to ban the practice, but that can’t be helped. The people will vote accordingly during election season if it’s an important issue for them.

Would you say the same for slavery? After all, that was what was the US civil war all about: the 'right' for individual states to legislate on limitations on basic basic civil right.

 

[SyphenFreht]

It's interesting to see how many gun rights activists are against having their rights stripped away but when any talk of bodily autonomy in any form gets brought up it's deflection after deflection. "Abortion is bad!" "Personal responsibility!" "It's not in the Constitution!" but God forbid someone wants to regulate gun control, which has absolutely nothing to do with the Second Amendment. It's almost like these people value property over basic human values just because some dead guys who thought they were above anyone that wasn't a white man made some rules on paper.

The right is about control, first and foremost, and they hide under the guise of less government, but then lick the boots of any politician that radicalizes them for votes.

The Democrats might be crap, but when's the last time they thought dehumanizing people was the way to go? Back when they had slaves 200 years ago? What a bunch of whiny hypocrites.

 

[MariArch]

My question is how can Democrats not see the hypocrisy of allowing illegals to pour through our southern border, where drug trafficking has become a really big fucking problem and has fueled an illegal industry of narcotics, but not see how banning guns would just give the cartels one more industry to profit from, gun running. So we can let our criminals be armed, but god forbid a law abiding citizen get to exercise his or her constitutional right

 

[hippy dave]

My question is how can Democrats not see the hypocrisy of allowing illegals to pour through our southern border, where drug trafficking has become a really big fucking problem and has fueled an illegal industry of narcotics, but not see how banning guns would just give the cartels one more industry to profit from, gun running. So we can let our criminals be armed, but god forbid a law abiding citizen get to exercise his or her constitutional right

I'm more concerned about your hypocrisy claiming you've got to have guns to prevent the government from taking rights away, but won't use yours to do so. You're full of shit and anything you have to say on the subject is irrelevant.

 

[MariArch]

Would you say the same for slavery. After all, that was what was the US civil war all about: the 'right' for individual states to legislate on limitations on basic basic civil right.

14th amendment explicitly bans slavery lmao.

There's no amendment making abortion a right however.

See the difference? One is in the constitution, the other isn't

 

[MariArch]

I'm more concerned about your hypocrisy claiming you've got to have guns to prevent the government from taking rights away, but won't use yours to do so. You're full of shit and anything you have to say on the subject is irrelevant.

What rights is this decision taking away? None. It simply relegates the power to the states under the 10th amendment lmao. So if anything, we have more control over how our government runs after this decision then before

 

[Foxi4]

Would you say the same for slavery. After all, that was what was the US civil war all about: the 'right' for individual states to legislate on limitations on basic basic civil right.

Slavery was always at odds with the Constitution which clearly states that all men are created equal. The Founders, including the ones who owned slaves, have always held the opinion that it was abhorrent, but it had to be permitted at the time in order to reach a consensus that would allow states to unify against a common enemy. It was rightfully abolished, thus fulfilling the promise of the Constitution for all. We know this from their personal correspondence and many of the papers they wrote. Some quotes:

“There is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do, to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it." - George Washington

“Every measure of prudence, therefore, ought to be assumed for the eventual total extirpation of slavery from the United States (…) I have, through my whole life, held the practice of slavery in abhorrence." - John Adams

“Slavery is (…) an atrocious debasement of human nature." - Benjamin Franklin

"We have seen the mere distinction of colour made in the most enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man." - James Madison

The Constitution was always designed with the intention of the eventual abolition of slavery, from day one.

 

[hippy dave]

What rights is this decision taking away? None. It simply relegates the power to the states under the 10th amendment lmao. So if anything, we have more control over how our government runs after this decision then before

Bodiliy autonomy, thanks for asking. But my post you're ignoring listed the other rights they are actively planning to take away next.

 

[MariArch]

Bodiliy autonomy, thanks for asking. But my post you're ignoring listed the other rights they are actively planning to take away next.

What amendment says you have the right to bodily autonomy? I must've missed that. And anyways, you can do whatever the hell you want with your body, just not a babies body. A human being with its own DNA



And also, regarding contraception, gay marriage, and sodomy. I must've missed those rights being in the constitution too....

Not that I don't think that women should have access to contraceptives or gay folks should or shouldn't be able to get married. Its just.. either pass a federal law doing so or add an amendment lmao. Because as it stands. These rights were entirely made up by oligarchs in robes.

 

[Valwinz]

if you really think about it
SCOTUS has ruled that the federal government has no authority over women's bodies

 

[hippy dave]

What amendment says you have the right to bodily autonomy? I must've missed that. And anyways, you can do whatever the hell you want with your body, just not a babies body. A human being with its own DNA

And also, regarding contraception, gay marriage, and sodomy. I must've missed those rights being in the constitution too....

Not that I don't think that women should have access to contraceptives or gay folks should or shouldn't be able to get married. Its just.. either pass a federal law doing so or add an amendment lmao. Because as it stands now, none of those things are "rights" by any measure

Imagine unironically believing that actual fundamental human rights are genuinely defined by some shitty document. Also try again on the "sodomy" one, it's actually any person's right to have sex for any other reason than procreation within marriage. It might even affect you, if you were more interested in having sex with other humans than you are in fucking your guns.

 

[MariArch]

Imagine unironically believing that actual fundamental human rights are genuinely defined by some shitty document. Also try again on the "sodomy" one, it's actually any person's right to have sex for any other reason than procreation within marriage. It might even affect you, if you were more interested in having sex with other humans than you are in fucking your guns.

Question: what are they defined by then?

If not by a god and not protected by the constitution, where do you come up with what is and isn't a human right?

Godless people cant point to anything. Because our concepts are morality fundamentally are rooted in religion. And without such rules, you can change the meaning of what is and isn't a right to what you see fit