Democrat threats to ignore the Supreme Court abortion decision

Thistle

Thistle

Well-known member
Most of the threats about ignoring the Supreme Court decision at the federal level will not work. The one that comes nearest to being plausible would be to provide abortions for military personnel on military bases in the states that otherwise prohibit it. But in order to accomplish that something would have to be done to the Hyde Amendment which states that federal dollars cannot be used to provide abortions.

More generally, do our friends on the left endorse the insurrection against this ruling of the Supreme Court? Inquiring minds would like to know…
 
Thistle said:
Most of the threats about ignoring the Supreme Court decision at the federal level will not work. The one that comes nearest to being plausible would be to provide abortions for military personnel on military bases in the states that otherwise prohibit it. But in order to accomplish that something would have to be done to the Hyde Amendment which states that federal dollars cannot be used to provide abortions.

More generally, do our friends on the left endorse the insurrection against this ruling of the Supreme Court? Inquiring minds would like to know…
Click to expand...
I would assume so.

They agitated their "insurrection" claim against conservatives. No one believed it. No one thought these liberals thought it was an insurrection either. They claim it because they know only conservatives actually care about the subject.

I can tell they never cared by how fast they raised their fist and started insurrecting over the Supreme Court. (By their own definitions)

It's a hilarious comedy of leftist dingdongery. Not funny hilarious, tragic hilarious.
 
Thistle said:
Most of the threats about ignoring the Supreme Court decision at the federal level will not work. The one that comes nearest to being plausible would be to provide abortions for military personnel on military bases in the states that otherwise prohibit it. But in order to accomplish that something would have to be done to the Hyde Amendment which states that federal dollars cannot be used to provide abortions.

More generally, do our friends on the left endorse the insurrection against this ruling of the Supreme Court? Inquiring minds would like to know…
Click to expand...
Hold on, let's be very clear, democrats are not against insurrection. They are against other people starting an insurrection.
 
Furion said:
I would assume so.

They agitated their "insurrection" claim against conservatives. No one believed it. No one thought these liberals thought it was an insurrection either. They claim it because they know only conservatives actually care about the subject.

I can tell they never cared by how fast they raised their fist and started insurrecting over the Supreme Court. (By their own definitions)

It's a hilarious comedy of leftist dingdongery. Not funny hilarious, tragic hilarious.
Click to expand...
I think in order to be on the left you just simply have to have a complete lack of any self-awareness whatsoever.
 
Thistle said:
I think in order to be on the left you just simply have to have a complete lack of any self-awareness whatsoever.
Click to expand...
That makes it much easier. They seem to think they can say and do whatever they like and if you speak against it then you have the problem not them.
 
Nedsk said:
Hold on, let's be very clear, democrats are not against insurrection. They are against other people starting an insurrection.
Click to expand...
Good point. Their principle is, if it's good for their agenda, it's good, if it's bad for their agenda, it's bad.
 
Thistle said:
I think in order to be on the left you just simply have to have a complete lack of any self-awareness whatsoever.
Click to expand...
Whatever "argument" that can win the post is considered victory.

For instance you can go fishing, have a great time, pluck a bass from the water and then feast.

A leftist can rail on and on, fish feelings, endangered fins, eating fish equals death, first nation food sources, etc.

And then on Friday night go to a fish fry because they are good abortion rights catholics, like Nancy.

It's a crazy world.
 
Furion said:
Whatever "argument" that can win the post is considered victory.

For instance you can go fishing, have a great time, pluck a bass from the water and then feast.

A leftist can rail on and on, fish feelings, endangered fins, eating fish equals death, first nation food sources, etc.

And then on Friday night go to a fish fry because they are good abortion rights catholics, like Nancy.

It's a crazy world.
Click to expand...
Speaking of "abortion rights Catholics" has anyone other than myself heard a rumor that pope Francis is on the verge of resigning? Maybe I've got this all wrong, but it seems like I've heard there's a movement afoot among conservative Catholics that this current pope needs to move on down the road.
 
Furion said:
Whatever "argument" that can win the post is considered victory.

For instance you can go fishing, have a great time, pluck a bass from the water and then feast.

A leftist can rail on and on, fish feelings, endangered fins, eating fish equals death, first nation food sources, etc.

And then on Friday night go to a fish fry because they are good abortion rights catholics, like Nancy.

It's a crazy world.
Click to expand...
Just a.reminder there is no such thing as a "good" abortion rights Catholic. This isn't like, what's a woman. Someone isn't a good Catholic just because they "identify" as one like Nancy and Joe.
 
Thistle said:
Speaking of "abortion rights Catholics" has anyone other than myself heard a rumor that pope Francis is on the verge of resigning? Maybe I've got this all wrong, but it seems like I've heard there's a movement afoot among conservative Catholics that this current pope needs to move on down the road.
Click to expand...
I understand it was started by Megan Kelly. Lots of Catholics dont like him but tough.
 
Thistle said:
Most of the threats about ignoring the Supreme Court decision at the federal level will not work. The one that comes nearest to being plausible would be to provide abortions for military personnel on military bases in the states that otherwise prohibit it. But in order to accomplish that something would have to be done to the Hyde Amendment which states that federal dollars cannot be used to provide abortions.

More generally, do our friends on the left endorse the insurrection against this ruling of the Supreme Court? Inquiring minds would like to know…
Click to expand...
From my understanding there is federal land in every state that could be used for abortion clinics.

There’s certainly ways around the Hyde Amendment. Support the clinics through donations, etc.
 
Thistle said:
Speaking of "abortion rights Catholics" has anyone other than myself heard a rumor that pope Francis is on the verge of resigning? Maybe I've got this all wrong, but it seems like I've heard there's a movement afoot among conservative Catholics that this current pope needs to move on down the road.
Click to expand...
I have kept an eye out for stories. I saw an underling made a supporting comment about the US Supreme Court. I think francy may actually be pro abortion. But I don't follow too closely
 
Nedsk said:
Just a.reminder there is no such thing as a "good" abortion rights Catholic. This isn't like, what's a woman. Someone isn't a good Catholic just because they "identify" as one like Nancy and Joe.
Click to expand...
Oh I don't get involved in your particulars.

The whole idea of a good "xxxxxx" is stupid to me.
 
Nedsk said:
Just a.reminder there is no such thing as a "good" abortion rights Catholic. This isn't like, what's a woman. Someone isn't a good Catholic just because they "identify" as one like Nancy and Joe.
Click to expand...
You've got a point. Under that procedure a proctologist could be a good astronaut.
 
Furion said:
Oh I don't get involved in your particulars.

The whole idea of a good "xxxxxx" is stupid to me.
Click to expand...
I understand entirely but it doesnt change the facts. Just like a woman isnt a woman because someone says so, a "good" whatever isn't good simply because one declares it. That's a universal truth in my estimation no matter whose "particulars" we are talking about.
 
Nedsk said:
I understand entirely but it doesnt change the facts. Just like a woman isnt a woman because someone says so, a "good" whatever isn't good simply because one declares it. That's a universal truth in my estimation no matter whose "particulars" we are talking about.
Click to expand...
Dude, the MSM barrages me with good Catholic talk, it's not me. What do I care? I don't.
 
Backup said:
From my understanding there is federal land in every state that could be used for abortion clinics.
Click to expand...
State law governs what happens on federal land within their states. Indian reservations have a dubious argument which I don't think would prevail ultimately. But there is a specific law that says the military can do things on military bases that might violate the laws of the state in which they are domiciled. That provision does not apply to Indian reservations, and it does not apply to federal land more generally.
Backup said:
There’s certainly ways around the Hyde Amendment.
Click to expand...
The traditional way of getting around it is to claim that Planned Parenthood is a organization that helps women screen for cancer. So Congress would send them $300 million every year so that they can screen for cancer which they would then spend on abortions. So, the way of getting around it is to lie.
Backup said:
Support the clinics through donations, etc.
Click to expand...
You mean kind of like Iran Contra? That's an interesting idea. Wonder nobody ever thought of it before? Oh wait a minute…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top