The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
News & Current Events

Heartbeat bill

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3
chaski On about 11 hours ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#31New Post! May 25, 2019 @ 15:09:37
When Mississippi, or any state, passes any given piece of legislation, clearly the law makers want(ed) that piece of legislation.

However, that does not mean that the piece of legislation in question is "legitimate" or "constitutional".

This is the on-going (on-going since the inception of the USA as a country) push & pull between:

> States' Rights and Federal Authority
> proposed laws (either state or federal) and the Constitution of the USA.
> the legislative branch and Judicial branch authority
> the rights of citizens and the authority of the government (either state or federal)

It is part of the three-way check and balance between the executive, legislative and judicial branch of our government... and the check and balance between states' rights and federal authority.

Sometimes the States get to do whatever they "want".

Other times States do not get to do whatever they "want"

In the case at hand, apparently, U.S. District Judge Joseph H. McKinley Jr., U. S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky has determined that the law in question violates the U.S. Constitution. This opinion may or may not stand. No doubt various appeals will be made and judicial determinations based on those appeals will be made... possibly it will go all the way the our Supreme Court.

Bottom line: Sometimes it matters what state law makers "want" and sometimes it does not matter what state legislators "want".
chaski On about 11 hours ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#32New Post! May 25, 2019 @ 15:28:46
@chaski Said

When Mississippi, or any state, passes any given piece of legislation, clearly the law makers want(ed) that piece of legislation.

However, that does not mean that the piece of legislation in question is "legitimate" or "constitutional".

This is the on-going (on-going since the inception of the USA as a country) push & pull between:

> States' Rights and Federal Authority
> proposed laws (either state or federal) and the Constitution of the USA.
> the legislative branch and Judicial branch authority
> the rights of citizens and the authority of the government (either state or federal)

It is part of the three-way check and balance between the executive, legislative and judicial branch of our government... and the check and balance between states' rights and federal authority.

Sometimes the States get to do whatever they "want".

Other times States do not get to do whatever they "want"

In the case at hand, apparently, U.S. District Judge Joseph H. McKinley Jr., U. S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky has determined that the law in question violates the U.S. Constitution. This opinion may or may not stand. No doubt various appeals will be made and judicial determinations based on those appeals will be made... possibly it will go all the way the our Supreme Court.

Bottom line: Sometimes it matters what state law makers "want" and sometimes it does not matter what state legislators "want".



As a side not to that this is why judicial appointments are so important from a political perspective.

What is happening right now, right or wrong, is that the Republican party (for the most part) does not like the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v Wade.

So the Republican party (via President Trump) is doing (primarily) two (2) things:

1. Appointing more conservative justices, who (presumably) will be willing to in someway overturn Roe v Wade.

&

2. Some Republican controlled state legislators are passing laws that challenge i]Roe v Wade.

The strategy is to overturn i]Roe v Wade.

The tactic is to appoint conservative anti-abortion judges and pass legislation that is directly and legally contrary to i]Roe v Wade.

In our system, and in this situation, laws (legislation) are not strong enough alone on issues like i]Roe v Wade. The law makers in question want a complete win. They want these laws challenged in court. They want one or more of these cases to make it to the Supreme Court...

...in hopes that a conservative dominated Supreme Court will over turn i]Roe v Wade.

This is the Republican game plan and has been their game plan since before the election of President Trump. It what the 2016 presidential election was all about.
mrmhead On about 23 hours ago




NE, Ohio
#33New Post! May 25, 2019 @ 15:43:46
@chaski Said

As a side not to that this is why judicial appointments are so important from a political perspective.

What is happening right now, right or wrong, is that the Republican party (for the most part) does not like the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v Wade.

So the Republican party (via President Trump) is doing (primarily) two (2) things:

1. Appointing more conservative justices, who (presumably) will be willing to in someway overturn Roe v Wade.

&

2. Some Republican controlled state legislators are passing laws that challenge i]Roe v Wade.

The strategy is to overturn i]Roe v Wade.

The tactic is to appoint conservative anti-abortion judges and pass legislation that is directly and legally contrary to i]Roe v Wade.

In our system, and in this situation, laws (legislation) are not strong enough alone on issues like i]Roe v Wade. The law makers in question want a complete win. They want these laws challenged in court. They want one or more of these cases to make it to the Supreme Court...

...in hopes that a conservative dominated Supreme Court will over turn i]Roe v Wade.

This is the Republican game plan and has been their game plan since before the election of President Trump. It what the 2016 presidential election was all about.


I think we're within the window of precedent where if a SCOTUS judge steps down, we should wait until after the next presidential election to choose the next.
Erimitus On July 01, 2021




The mind of God, Antarctica
#34New Post! May 25, 2019 @ 15:54:17
Q. How do you detect a heartbeat?
A. EKG

I wonder if it is possible to fake an EKG to show no heartbeat.
DiscordTiger On December 04, 2021
The Queen of Random

Administrator




Emerald City, United States (g
#35New Post! May 25, 2019 @ 16:05:18
They don’t give fetuses EKGs.

They would have to be removed for that.

They detect a heartbeat by listening and declaring any sound in rhythm a heartbeat.
Erimitus On July 01, 2021




The mind of God, Antarctica
#36New Post! May 25, 2019 @ 21:04:55
@DiscordTiger Said

They don’t give fetuses EKGs.

They would have to be removed for that.

They detect a heartbeat by listening and declaring any sound in rhythm a heartbeat.



Even easier to fake
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Be Respectful of Others

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Abortion
Mon Feb 02, 2009 @ 12:21
30 4342
New posts   Jokes & Humor
Sun Feb 08, 2009 @ 12:54
3 414
New posts   Abortion
Tue Apr 06, 2010 @ 09:51
50 3307
New posts   Abortion
Tue Sep 21, 2010 @ 01:30
80 6408
New posts   Abortion
Wed Dec 29, 2010 @ 14:02
293 28815