Living in the dark ages..

All things philosophical, related to belief and / or religions of any and all sorts.
Personal philosophy welcomed.
Post Reply
User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33642
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Living in the dark ages..

Post by Gob »

Arkansas has passed a new law banning nearly all abortions in the state, a sweeping measure that supporters hope will force the US supreme court to revisit Roe v Wade but opponents vow to block before it takes effect later this year.

The state’s Republican governor, Asa Hutchinson, said he was signing the bill because of its “overwhelming legislative support and my sincere and long-held pro-life convictions”.

Hutchinson has signed several major abortion restrictions into law since taking office in 2015, but he had voiced concerns about the bill, which only allows the procedure to save the life of the mother and does not provide exceptions for those impregnated in an act of rape or incest. He repeated those concerns as he announced his decision.

“(The ban) is in contradiction of binding precedents of the US supreme court, but it is the intent of the legislation to set the stage for the supreme court overturning current case law,“ he said in a statement released by his office. “I would have preferred the legislation to include the exceptions for rape and incest, which has been my consistent view, and such exceptions would increase the chances for a review by the US supreme court.”

Arkansas is one of at least 14 states where legislators have proposed outright abortion bans this year.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

Burning Petard
Posts: 4048
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: Living in the dark ages..

Post by Burning Petard »

What would America be without its Arkies? Believe it was the legislature of this same state that passed a regulation declaring that within it borders, pi would be equal to 3.1400000.

snailgate

User avatar
Crackpot
Posts: 11264
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 2:59 am
Location: Michigan

Re: Living in the dark ages..

Post by Crackpot »

That was Indiana. And it only passed the state house I believe.
Okay... There's all kinds of things wrong with what you just said.

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 16540
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Living in the dark ages..

Post by Scooter »

In another time, forcing someone to use their body in the service of another was called slavery.

So let's just call these measures for what they are, the wholesale enslavement of women in the service of the fetuses they carry.

Silly me, I thought that the 13th Amendment was supposed to take care of that.
"If you don't have a seat at the table, you're on the menu."

-- Author unknown

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8542
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: Living in the dark ages..

Post by Sue U »

“(The ban) is in contradiction of binding precedents of the US supreme court, ..."
So Hutchinson and the Arkansas Legislature reject the entire concept of "rule of law." Good to know who are the enemies of the Constitution.
GAH!

Burning Petard
Posts: 4048
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: Living in the dark ages..

Post by Burning Petard »

You are under a mis-apprehension. The constitution only means whatever the supremes say it means. That is why we now have Miranda protections.

The fundamentalists are sure the Trump court will agree with them about almost everything.

snailgate

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8542
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: Living in the dark ages..

Post by Sue U »

Burning Petard wrote:
Wed Mar 10, 2021 4:55 pm
The constitution only means whatever the supremes say it means.
That may be true, but only when there is some actual dispute about the meaning of what the the Constitution says. And since the Supremes have already spoken directly to this issue, enacting a law that is inarguably unconstitutional on its face is a poor vehicle for obtaining Supreme Court review -- unless we are now giving up all pretense to applying principles of law and doctrines of jurisprudence in favor arbitrary rule-making by five jurists unanswerable to the American electorate.

Given the controlling precedent, the Arkansas law cannot survive a legal challenge in the District Court or the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals. I don't think even the Trump appointees would vote to take up a case that gives them no basis for review other than "we don't like the Court's prior rulings, so throw them all out." There are no new arguments presented, no change in the legal theory underlying previous decisions and no change in any facts or circumstances relevant to the issue. Simply having a legislative majority that wants to outlaw abortion does not make such a restrictive law any less of a violation of a woman's rights than it was in 1973. This is all culture-war theater to appease the forced-birth radicals that now dictate GOP priorities.
GAH!

Post Reply