Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturned

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21648
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturned

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:23 am

Judge overturns North Dakota law banning most abortions

Judge says Roe v Wade is still the law of the land.

A federal judge ruled Wednesday that North Dakota's abortion law, considered one of the most restrictive in the nation, is unconstitutional.

The law banned most abortions after six weeks, when a fetal heartbeat can be first detected.

"The North Dakota strict ban on abortions at the time when a 'heartbeat' has been detected -- essentially banning all abortions as early as six weeks of pregnancy -- cannot withstand a constitutional challenge," U.S. District Judge Daniel L. Hovland wrote in his decision.

"A woman's constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy before viability has been recognized by the United States Supreme Court for more than 40 years. The United States Supreme Court has clearly determined the dispositive issue presented in this lawsuit. This court is not free to impose its own view of the law."


I assume the Republicans in North Dakota will try to enact something else, even if that gets overturned. They got to appeal to their base, as elections are coming up.

Gentle Man
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 2:39 pm

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby Gentle Man » Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:26 am

Henry Vilas wrote:I assume the Republicans in North Dakota will try to enact something else, even if that gets overturned. They got to appeal to their base, as elections are coming up.


Well if they do try to enact something else you have to at least admire their willingness to stand on principle. Like you, I disagree with those particular principles and support the court's ruling. But contrast this with all but the most rabid of anti-gun politicians who frequently frustrate their base by abandoning and avoiding all talk of new anti-gun measures as elections draw closer. Obama frustrated the hell out of anti-gunners by doing next to nothing during his first term in terms of gun control and doing his best to avoid gun control as an issue during the 2012 election. I know this because I routinely monitor what's going on among the anti-gun crowd and what's on their minds. It wasn't until Sandy Hook after the election that Obama unleashed his all-out, but ineffective push for gun control. So I have more admiration, of a sort, for politicians who consistently represents their principles at all times and don't play games with them-- even when I disagree with those principles. What about you Henry?

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21648
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:37 am

The GOP is looking for votes. Those in power within the Republican Party care little about social issues. It's their wealth they are trying to protect. That is why they appeal to the relatively poor Tea Party types to get their votes, who will cast their ballots based on those conservative social issues even when it isn't in their economic interest.

Detritus
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2664
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:42 pm

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby Detritus » Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:42 am

Gentle Man wrote:Well if they do try to enact something else you have to at least admire their willingness to stand on principle. Like you, I disagree with those particular principles and support the court's ruling. But contrast this with all but the most rabid of anti-gun politicians who frequently frustrate their base by abandoning and avoiding all talk of new anti-gun measures as elections draw closer.

It's hard to believe, but you're even more tiresome with your new moniker than you were with the old one. And no, we don't have to admire "their willingness to stand on principle" when their principle is wholly repugnant.

Gentle Man
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 2:39 pm

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby Gentle Man » Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:46 pm

Detritus wrote:
Gentle Man wrote:Well if they do try to enact something else you have to at least admire their willingness to stand on principle. Like you, I disagree with those particular principles and support the court's ruling. But contrast this with all but the most rabid of anti-gun politicians who frequently frustrate their base by abandoning and avoiding all talk of new anti-gun measures as elections draw closer.

It's hard to believe, but you're even more tiresome with your new moniker than you were with the old one. And no, we don't have to admire "their willingness to stand on principle" when their principle is wholly repugnant.


Thanks. At least I am able to become more tiresome. You reached your peak long ago.

Gentle Man
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 2:39 pm

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby Gentle Man » Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:51 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:The GOP is looking for votes. Those in power within the Republican Party care little about social issues. It's their wealth they are trying to protect. That is why they appeal to the relatively poor Tea Party types to get their votes, who will cast their ballots based on those conservative social issues even when it isn't in their economic interest.


Exactly what wealth is protected by their stance on abortion? Wouldn't their wealth (and appeal to the electorate) be better protected by not taking a position on such a divisive and controversial issue?

kurt_w
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6095
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 3:11 pm
Contact:

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby kurt_w » Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:59 pm

Gentle Man wrote:Thanks. At least I am able to become more tiresome. You reached your peak long ago.

Maybe so. But in Detritus's case, that must be a very low peak. Whereas you have a seemingly unlimited ability to turn every thread you touch into The Gun Thread.

I know that I have my own tiresome obsessions that probably rival yours in their intensity and tiresomeness to others. But at least I usually manage to confine mine to the appropriate threads. It would be nice if you would make an effort to do the same.

Plus, that would allow you to show your witty and non-tiresome side in all the other threads. We've seen enough to know that side exists, but at the moment it kind of gets buried under all the gun mania.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21648
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Apr 17, 2014 2:00 pm

Gentle Man wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:The GOP is looking for votes. Those in power within the Republican Party care little about social issues. It's their wealth they are trying to protect. That is why they appeal to the relatively poor Tea Party types to get their votes, who will cast their ballots based on those conservative social issues even when it isn't in their economic interest.

Exactly what wealth is protected by their stance on abortion?

If you didn't understand what I wrote, I'll rephrase it. The wealthy who control the GOP want the votes of those who oppose abortion, so they can keep laws that protect their financial well-being. Tax laws, for a start.

Gentle Man
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 2:39 pm

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby Gentle Man » Thu Apr 17, 2014 3:55 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:
Gentle Man wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:The GOP is looking for votes. Those in power within the Republican Party care little about social issues. It's their wealth they are trying to protect. That is why they appeal to the relatively poor Tea Party types to get their votes, who will cast their ballots based on those conservative social issues even when it isn't in their economic interest.

Exactly what wealth is protected by their stance on abortion?

If you didn't understand what I wrote, I'll rephrase it. The wealthy who control the GOP want the votes of those who oppose abortion, so they can keep laws that protect their financial well-being. Tax laws, for a start.


I understood it just fine. And that's why I asked whether "appeal to the electorate" is a reason to not get involved with such a divisive and controversial topic.

You may be right, the GOP may simply thinks it will get more votes by taking the stance is does on abortion than it would by remaining neutral. It's also possible that they don't care how it affects their vote count, they're standing on principle. How would we ever know? I also think that it's reasonable to believe the Republicans wouldn't lose votes by becoming neutral on abortion. The anti-abortion crowd is probably going to vote GOP anyway, wouldn't you think?

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21648
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Apr 17, 2014 4:00 pm

Gentle Man wrote:The anti-abortion crowd is probably going to vote GOP anyway, wouldn't you think?

If they show up at the polls. It's a GOTV effort and its also helps in fund raising. In order to succeed they need to rile their base, which is shrinking.

Ned Flanders
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 13867
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 2:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby Ned Flanders » Thu Apr 17, 2014 4:05 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:
Gentle Man wrote:The anti-abortion crowd is probably going to vote GOP anyway, wouldn't you think?

If they show up at the polls. It's a GOTV effort and its also helps in fund raising. In order to succeed they need to rile their base, which is shrinking.

Aren't the Dims doing the same with Abortion Barbie?

Gentle Man
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 2:39 pm

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby Gentle Man » Thu Apr 17, 2014 4:14 pm

kurt_w wrote:
Gentle Man wrote:Thanks. At least I am able to become more tiresome. You reached your peak long ago.

Maybe so. But in Detritus's case, that must be a very low peak. Whereas you have a seemingly unlimited ability to turn every thread you touch into The Gun Thread.

I know that I have my own tiresome obsessions that probably rival yours in their intensity and tiresomeness to others. But at least I usually manage to confine mine to the appropriate threads. It would be nice if you would make an effort to do the same.

Plus, that would allow you to show your witty and non-tiresome side in all the other threads. We've seen enough to know that side exists, but at the moment it kind of gets buried under all the gun mania.


Give me a break. Merely mentioning an example that includes gun control in no way turned this into a gun thread. It was very much on the topic that Henry raised in his initial post: whether the Republicans would introduce new anti-abortion legislation merely to pander to votes from a certain subset of the electorate. I simply asked people to put some additional thought into Henry's theory by considering the differences between introducing controversial legislation around election time based on principle as opposed to just pandering to votes, and to further contrast it with those who submerge their principles and avoid controversial legislaton around election time. These are three distinct political approaches that we should consider-- not just the single one that Henry proposed. I made an attempt to stimulate thought and take the discussion to a deeper level. I always try to at least consider whether there are other explanations or possibilities when someone (i.e., Henry) proposes just one possible explanation.

If I had used a different example, e.g., Republicans trying to stay out of gay rights debates around election time, that would in no way turn this into a gay rights thread.

Detritus
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2664
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:42 pm

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby Detritus » Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:39 pm

Gentle Man wrote:Give me a break. Merely mentioning an example that includes gun control in no way turned this into a gun thread. It was very much on the topic that Henry raised in his initial post: whether the Republicans would introduce new anti-abortion legislation merely to pander to votes from a certain subset of the electorate..... I made an attempt to stimulate thought and take the discussion to a deeper level.

Not buying it. Number one, although you could have picked another topic you thought was related, you didn't. You reached for the one topic you just can't get enough of. Moreover, you posted in response to Henry, with whom you have gone back and forth on gun stuff for hundreds of pages. Number two, you characterized the position on gun rights you disagree with as negatively as possible ("rabidly anti-gun"), creating a cartoon opponent in order to dismiss their concerns with as little thought as possible. You weren't interested in "stimulating thought" much less deepening discussion--you were trying to make Henry look like a hypocrite.

In short, Flanders said the same thing you did, but more succinctly. Granted his example was misogynist, and yours was not, but we expect that from him.

snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 12960
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby snoqueen » Thu Apr 17, 2014 8:45 pm

Look. I didn't try to turn this topic into a discussion of architecture, did I?

But I still can.

Guns in the gun room, abortion in the abortion room. Poo in the poo room, for that matter.

Please.

Igor
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1706
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 11:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Most restrictive anti-abortion law in the U.S. overturne

Postby Igor » Thu Apr 17, 2014 9:46 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:The GOP is looking for votes. Those in power within the Republican Party care little about social issues. It's their wealth they are trying to protect. That is why they appeal to the relatively poor Tea Party types to get their votes, who will cast their ballots based on those conservative social issues even when it isn't in their economic interest.


Voting against one's economic interest because of principles is usually viewed as honorable when rich people do it. It is pretty unsubtle classism to think that poor people that vote against their own financial interest are uninformed or stupid.


Return to “National Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests