PDA

View Full Version : Arkansas Act 45


bentheplayer
February 4th, 2017, 08:32 PM
When state law is reducing women to mere chattel in a supposedly secular state, people can still question the need for feminism? At the same time a cosponsor, Sen. David Sanders, for the bill claims that it will move them into a more compassionate society. What? Does he have shit for brains?

Since when is it constitutional for women to be barred from having an abortion by their spouse or family member, even in instances of spousal rape or incest?

Is this some kind of Sharia(Islamic) law going on here? Well no the law makers claim. Its American law for Americans. Yeah right and these lawmakers have just become some of the finest examples of people with shit filled brains. At least try to pass an act that isn't so glaringly against the constitution?

PlasmaHam
February 4th, 2017, 10:21 PM
Dude, you are first of all not encouraging debate if you start comparing the opposition to terrorists and misogynists. That's debate 101. And secondly, we already had this debate in your "Trump gag rule" thread. This is basically a duplicate thread, which is against the rules.

This whole argument depends less on facts and more upon opinions of the interpretation of the Constitution. You see anything that the Courts rule as Constitutional as totally Constitutional, and arguments over the Constitutionality of abortion is irrelevant since a group of seven people said that abortion is Constitutional and that group of people are always perfect in their decisions. Sounds harsh? That is the way your whole argument has been over the course of this abortion discussion, and is why I see it is impossible to have a reasonable abortion discussion with you.

bentheplayer
February 4th, 2017, 10:45 PM
Dude, you are first of all not encouraging debate if you start comparing the opposition to terrorists and misogynists. That's debate 101. And secondly, we already had this debate in your "Trump gag rule" thread. This is basically a duplicate thread, which is against the rules.

This whole argument depends less on facts and more upon opinions of the interpretation of the Constitution. You see anything that the Courts rule as Constitutional as totally Constitutional, and arguments over the Constitutionality of abortion is irrelevant since a group of seven people said that abortion is Constitutional and that group of people are always perfect in their decisions. Sounds harsh? That is the way your whole argument has been over the course of this abortion discussion, and is why I see it is impossible to have a reasonable abortion discussion with you.

Well the Trump gag rule is about him encroaching into the sovereignty of other nations and infringing your constitution; less about abortion. It was never my intent to discuss the topic of abortion under that thread but to point out Trump's incompetence in foreign policies.

In this case I am not really comparing them to terrorists since it has been established that terrorists are not true Muslims and are only using Islam as a smokescreen. Malaysia has sharia law but are they terrorist? No. As for misogynists, you said it urself. Seems like you consider those acts as misogynistic.

On the constitution, since you are a legal buff, what is the core principle of common law may I ask? Heard of something called stare decisis? The courts are there to interpret the constitution, not dictate/decide what the constitution is. Since your Supreme Court has chosen to interpret your current constitution as such, till there is a change in it, abortion will be a constitutional right. That is not my way of argument but rather the way your society is structured and since we are talking about US... This isn't exactly rocket science but legal 101. FYI other states have tried passing similar acts but they were all struck down. The least they could do is to try something more novel. I believe someone once said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results. The key discussion here is not so much on abortion per say but the inherent fecal encephalopathy that so many law makers seem to be inflicted with. I thought that it would be interesting to debate on how such people can be elected. My apologies for over estimating others inference skills.

Edit: To make it even clearer that this is not a debate on abortion, no meaningful debate can be made about abortion if country specific constitutions were used. Debates has to be done based on merits of various arguments and not with a fact that makes the whole debate pointless like a constitutional right. Ie discussing the legality of a right or allowed action brings no value to any meaningful debate as the focus should be on the act itself. A meaningful debate on abortion can only be made with the premise that there is no such right to abortion as the question is on abortion and not whether abortion is allowed or a right which is defined by legislature as interpreted by the courts. Please refrain from allowing your emotions on this topic to cloud your judgement.

mattsmith48
February 5th, 2017, 04:43 PM
When state law is reducing women to mere chattel in a supposedly secular state, people can still question the need for feminism? At the same time a cosponsor, Sen. David Sanders, for the bill claims that it will move them into a more compassionate society. What? Does he have shit for brains?

Since when is it constitutional for women to be barred from having an abortion by their spouse or family member, even in instances of spousal rape or incest?

Is this some kind of Sharia(Islamic) law going on here? Well no the law makers claim. Its American law for Americans. Yeah right and these lawmakers have just become some of the finest examples of people with shit filled brains. At least try to pass an act that isn't so glaringly against the constitution?

Its should be pretty clear by now that those people don't give a shit about secularism or any part of the constitution not named the second amendment, they are just stupid assholes hating on women trying to control their body because thats what Jesus would want. With the new supreme court judge President Pussy Grabber nominated its gonna get worst probably to the point of making abortion illegal everywhere in the US and people will die because of this either its a kid having a short and painful life because of genetic disorder or the women because she has to carry on pregnancy that put her life at risk or from an infection from a back-alley abortion that she can't treat because she lost her health insurance.

bentheplayer
February 7th, 2017, 08:01 AM
Before this spirals down into an abortion debate, I was talking about the people who get elected. I suspect that some of these people were elected on the basis of their promise to make abortion illegal or whatever. Now the idea of whether abortion should be legal or illegal isn’t the point. Rather it is the way these elected representatives act to deliver their promise/intent. If they were truly keen on making abortion legal then campaign to change the constitution so that it might actually work. Attempting to make abortion illegal by sponsoring some stupid state act that will most definitely be struck down by the federal Supreme Court doesn’t seem like a very smart move to do. Hence I said these people have shit brains. If they can’t even at least approach abolishing abortion properly given that the various failed means are so well known, how can these people be expected to react correctly to more challenging issues like the economy and other stuff where there is less information? This in turn causes me to question the intelligence of the voters and the law makers. Either it’s the voters who are fools for electing people who are working to deliver the promised “mandate” or the law makers who are fools for not choosing a more viable option to deliver their “mandate”. All that is happening is just merely wasting tax payer monies with all these pen pushing and absolutely no real result. Yet they can ask why their economy is going down the drain.

So who do you think is at fault for their own decline? The politicians or the voters?

mattsmith48
February 8th, 2017, 12:38 AM
Before this spirals down into an abortion debate, I was talking about the people who get elected. I suspect that some of these people were elected on the basis of their promise to make abortion illegal or whatever. Now the idea of whether abortion should be legal or illegal isn’t the point. Rather it is the way these elected representatives act to deliver their promise/intent. If they were truly keen on making abortion legal then campaign to change the constitution so that it might actually work. Attempting to make abortion illegal by sponsoring some stupid state act that will most definitely be struck down by the federal Supreme Court doesn’t seem like a very smart move to do. Hence I said these people have shit brains. If they can’t even at least approach abolishing abortion properly given that the various failed means are so well known, how can these people be expected to react correctly to more challenging issues like the economy and other stuff where there is less information? This in turn causes me to question the intelligence of the voters and the law makers. Either it’s the voters who are fools for electing people who are working to deliver the promised “mandate” or the law makers who are fools for not choosing a more viable option to deliver their “mandate”. All that is happening is just merely wasting tax payer monies with all these pen pushing and absolutely no real result. Yet they can ask why their economy is going down the drain.

So who do you think is at fault for their own decline? The politicians or the voters?

Most voters are just misinformed and don't know that this doesn't work and its a waste of time and money. Politicians should know its a waste of time and money, but they either don't care or you're right and they are just that stupid.

bentheplayer
February 8th, 2017, 12:55 AM
Most voters are just misinformed and don't know that this doesn't work and its a waste of time and money. Politicians should know its a waste of time and money, but they either don't care or you're right and they are just that stupid.

If its cos voters are misinformed then they are doubly at fault. First for being ignorant and second for condoning such acts. Politicians may be the ones who perpetrated the lies but it’s the voters that bought them. So while we may have one “criminal”, we have a whole bunch of society guilty of supporting these “criminal acts”.

Uniquemind
February 8th, 2017, 03:34 AM
What's always troubled me is that bills/laws are able to be written and enacted and enforced despite a history of the same issue already addressing it.

It's like you need a secondary filter to stop such an act or law from even going into effect despite a signature on it, so that the private sector isn't so scared of violating new laws.

Like I understand why people feel abortion is a moral wrong, but such people also fail to see other broader contexts other than their own, and that is selfishness, which is a form of intellectual greed, which is a sin, and immediately makes them a hypocrite in their own faith.

Even if they aren't religious or faith-based influenced, the former still holds, they're allowing their own feelings to have a domino effect upon others outside of their individuality and their family.

Even if a parent is being oppressive and is preventing their daughter to get an abortion, at least the issue becomes that of a personal household or cost issue, rather than a broader issue that affects large swaths of people.


Is it not true that those who are against abortion are of the mindset that they bear responsibility for other people's decisions on this topic?

bentheplayer
February 8th, 2017, 05:53 AM
Why should all these rewriting worry you? Isn't it good? It shows how these law makers can all be manipulated into puppets. The main problem on this abortion debate aside from the stuff you mentioned is that the "pro-life" campaign still can't offer a coherent logical answer that is congruent with the current societal framework. Their main non-religious argument is that a ball of cells is still a person and killing a ball of cells is no different from a murderer which I have already explained why this argument is severely flawed.

In terms of responsibility, the least they could do is to offer some form of adequate compensation or at the very least some kind of logical non-religious reason to explain why abortion should be abolished across society. Till they can justify the need to cause such an undue burden and gross infringement of liberty on a group of people then maybe a ban could be entertained.

In today's world, even beliefs have to be substantiated with firm prove, facts or logic. That is precisely why religion can never be used as an argument as there isn't any real prove apart from some verifiable facts. Apart from religion, all other opinions are usually born out of sheer ignorance and the believe that they have a higher "moral ground". But really if you guys would like to debate on abortion, may I suggest that someone create a separate thread for it? Before others who can't resist turning every topic that contains abortion into a debate on abortion while missing the larger issue on hand of this thread. I did hate to be accused of double posting threads because of the way others act.

Linking back to voters and politicians why is it so that logic and sound reasoning seems to be so far detached from the way they act?

Arkansasguy
February 8th, 2017, 11:50 AM
Lol, do leftists ever make cogent arguments? I mean seriously, we've all heard the profanity laced rants and accusations of stupidity countless times. Why not change it up a bit?

bentheplayer
February 8th, 2017, 01:07 PM
Lol, do leftists ever make cogent arguments? I mean seriously, we've all heard the profanity laced rants and accusations of stupidity countless times. Why not change it up a bit?

Yawn. So before entering this pointless accusatory game, offer up ur explainations for logical appraisal as i do on this forum. Please dont make me wait for too long. First off I dont consider myself to be a liberal but a pragmatist and using past comments made by others is just merely a poor attempt of shirking from providing valid arguments that can't be disproved. Profanity laced rants have always be heard from all paties and no party is less guilty of it. As for stupidity unless logical coherent arguments/actions can be offered then one shall be deemed as intellectually less capable ie stupid. Sometimes I use accusations for the sake of provoking thought and if it displeases you then by all means please prove my assertions wrong and not on the basis of what others say. I can't speak for them, only myself. This is precisely why you guys have a problem in the US, making every topic a partisan one.

Arkansasguy
February 9th, 2017, 12:22 AM
You didn't say anything worthy of a response. If you ever attempt to make a cogent argument, I will reply to that.

bentheplayer
February 9th, 2017, 01:26 AM
You didn't say anything worthy of a response. If you ever attempt to make a cogent argument, I will reply to that.

Then you are clearly deluded and incapable of comprehending simple logic. Accusing others of being unable to make a cogent argument when you can't defend your assertion proves it. If you are new to debate, then your first step is to explain why this Arkansas Act is a logical move to make by politicians when it will clearly be struck down by the federal court when challenged. Till you can do that, I won't bother replying cos as a rule I don't waste my time dealing with imbeciles. Mere repetition of your mantra doesn't make it right and only makes you sound like a nitwit.

ZqObqYOQE44 This is how you are acting.

Mars
February 9th, 2017, 06:23 PM
This thread is not only off topic in the first place and holding no substantial debate, but is starting to get personally insulting. Refrain from this behavior in the future. :locked: