While Eva Burch spoke on the Senate floor about her planned abortion, almost all of her GOP colleagues found something else to do
While Eva Burch spoke on the Senate floor about her planned abortion, almost all of her GOP colleagues found something else to do
cant wait until someone proposes a gun ban, on the precedent of the abortion ban. Will be a funny day.
But that doesn’t really make sense, there is no federal law about abortion, the constitution protects gun ownership.ax
Whoa! Everyone come look! I found someone who believes that outcomes from courts are rationally connected to historical intent and can’t be wiggled through with modern anti-logic funded by thinktank-generated-idealogues.
Damn, you’re like a shiny Pokémon. So rare!
If the last few years have taught me anything, its that money and time can yield judges who will say or do anything the donors want.
I guess the fatal pinhole in my comment is that liberal judges aren’t produced via a billionaire’s money treadmill and so we don’t end up with anti-logical rulings from that side of the court. Don’t get me wrong, that would be a bad thing and I don’t wish for liberal judges to do this, but conservative judges will and actively are doing these things.
To the respondee, I made a light joke at your expense but intend no insult, only humor is intended. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with your comment besides that it naïvely assumes good faith actions from the court. The court is clearly and demonstrably a compromised institution.
I’m with you my man, but you’re speaking to a bunch of 17-year old furry tumblerinas in here, you need to take that into consideration.
yeah, that’s my point.
There was a federal law about abortion. We dont have it anymore.
Except it was written nowhere near as explicitly.
idk man it was pretty explicit, considering the fact that the second it was removed, legislation went into place in order to ban it on a state level. Seems pretty explicit to me.
Wdym? The SCOTUS ruling was explicit, the constitution never mentioned it though.
yeah, idk if you noticed, but generally, theres this pretty cool thing about the US government where its really fucking bloated, and so anything can come from anywhere. It’s not like amendments are set in stone either. I mean slavery would be a thing still otherwise, and women wouldn’t have rights.
Yeah no but amendments have to be explicitly changed.
so did roe v wade.
Technically, both gun ownership rights and abortion rights were based on supreme Court interpretation of the 2nd and 14th amendments (respectively). Given the reversal of the right to abortion under the 14th amendment, an argument could be made that a similar reversal is due for the 2nd amendment as well. The 2nd amendment could simply be interpreted to mean that gun ownership is only a right as part of a "well regulated militia.'. In my opinion, that is the plain meaning of the provision anyway, but I’m just a gun toting liberal that doesn’t get sexually aroused or validated by the size of my firearm.