Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog Tech Info Tech Forums
 
  Search our site:    
 Cart  | Project List | Order Status | Help    
  Join us November 1st for Casino Night at the Pelican Parts Open House!
Benefiting LuMind - Research and Treatment for individuals with Down Syndrome
Go Back   Pelican Parts Technical BBS > 5 - Miscellaneous > Off Topic Discussions > Off Topic - Politics and Religion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread    Reply
Registered User
 
techweenie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: West L.A.
Posts: 17,031
Garage
Bush2 Supreme Court -- what else goes along with Roe v Wade?

Roberts has stated he'd like to see Roe v Wade 'overturned.'

Roe v Wade was adjudged on an implied right to privacy. Something not explicitly stated in the constitution. Since Roberts, Thomas and Scalia are "originalists," they believe we cannot interpret (I'm simplifying the position here) what the framers of the constitution implied or would have intended in circumstances that have subsequently developed (like government involvement in nearly every aspect of life).

So if Roe v Wade is the target, the right to privacy must be explicitly struck down. What will that lead to?

I believe that in pulling the privacy underpinnings out from under Wade, the Supreme Court will quite likely cause unintended consequences. Most threatening is that the movement toward unifying databases on citizens under the federal government will move forward, unimpeded. It's already mostly there. Itís not an Orwellian fantasy to project this a little further into a nightmare.

Imagine a citizenís file within, say HEW, one day containing health history, voting history, service history, employment history, credit history, fingerprints, emails, and yes, DNA information. Maybe that's fine on all counts for some of the 'why should I care, I've done nothing wrong' crowd. But anyone who has dealt with a mistaken entry in their credit record knows the error rate on this type of database is not small enough, and correcting wrong data is tough enough within private enterprise when you have (some) law on your side. Now put that power in the hands of 900,000 bureaucrats...

Has anyone seen "Brazil?"
__________________
techweenie
News: Youtube.com/fastlanedaily Stories: Youtube.com/drive
'02 Turbo, '72 911 Beige Gray hot rod, '72 911 Gemini Blue Metallic hot rod
'13 Chevy Volt parts fetcher
Old 09-12-2005, 09:37 AM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #1 (permalink)
Banned
 
Mulhollanddose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: On a boat in the Great NW
Posts: 6,148
Maybe it is about time we allowed the people the right to vote and make their own decision regarding abortion...Roe v. Wade was a direct violation of the Constitution and Roe never had an abortion...The infanticide left's weakness in position is further illustrated by them calling it a "reproductive rights" issue, when NOBODY has EVER stopped or called for legislation for or against the right to reproduce (their flowery smoke-screen suggests they are hiding something).

The Supreme Court overstepped themselves on Roe v. Wade, they are to INTERPRET the law, not make it...Worst case scenario, should Roe be overturned, is that the states still have legalized profiteering from the murder of babies.

This obviously has moral motivation, but primarily this is an issue of the prevention of a tyrannical judiciary, writing legislation from the bench...in direct violation of separation of powers.

Last edited by Mulhollanddose; 09-12-2005 at 10:17 AM..
Old 09-12-2005, 10:15 AM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #2 (permalink)
Registered User
 
techweenie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: West L.A.
Posts: 17,031
Garage
Quote:
Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
Maybe it is about time we allowed the people the right to vote and make their own decision regarding abortion...Roe v. Wade was a direct violation of the Constitution and Roe never had an abortion...The infanticide left's weakness in position is further illustrated by them calling it a "reproductive rights" issue, when NOBODY has EVER stopped or called for legislation for or against the right to reproduce (their flowery smoke-screen suggests they are hiding something).

The Supreme Court overstepped themselves on Roe v. Wade, they are to INTERPRET the law, not make it...Worst case scenario, should Roe be overturned, is that the states still have legalized profiteering from the murder of babies.

This obviously has moral motivation, but primarily this is an issue of the prevention of a tyrannical judiciary, writing legislation from the bench...in direct violation of separation of powers.
Can't make heads or tails out of your first paragraph, but the contention in the second that states are profiteering from abortion is really puzzling.

The third paragraph is a good issue to discuss: can you imagine what total chaos will result if the new court revisits prior rulings and overturns great numbers of them on the basis of violating principles of originalism? This is a course of action Thomas has openly endorsed.
__________________
techweenie
News: Youtube.com/fastlanedaily Stories: Youtube.com/drive
'02 Turbo, '72 911 Beige Gray hot rod, '72 911 Gemini Blue Metallic hot rod
'13 Chevy Volt parts fetcher
Old 09-12-2005, 10:24 AM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #3 (permalink)
Back in Cali
 
Tyson Schmidt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 4,305
Quote:
Originally posted by techweenie

The third paragraph is a good issue to discuss: can you imagine what total chaos will result if the new court revisits prior rulings and overturns great numbers of them on the basis of violating principles of originalism? This is a course of action Thomas has openly endorsed.


Just let me know in advance about the book burnings. I love a good weenie roast!
__________________
R-Gruppe member #382

'69 911E coupe' 3.2 (PRC 911-Spec racer)
'92 C2 Cabriolet (stolen)
2000 Boxster S
Old 09-12-2005, 10:29 AM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #4 (permalink)
Registered User
 
techweenie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: West L.A.
Posts: 17,031
Garage
Quote:
Originally posted by Tyson Schmidt
Just let me know in advance about the book burnings. I love a good weenie roast!
Hey!

HEY!

Ow!
__________________
techweenie
News: Youtube.com/fastlanedaily Stories: Youtube.com/drive
'02 Turbo, '72 911 Beige Gray hot rod, '72 911 Gemini Blue Metallic hot rod
'13 Chevy Volt parts fetcher
Old 09-12-2005, 10:30 AM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #5 (permalink)
Registered User
 
bryanthompson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 5,069
Garage
Send a message via ICQ to bryanthompson Send a message via AIM to bryanthompson Send a message via Yahoo to bryanthompson
Quote:
Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
Maybe it is about time we allowed the people the right to vote and make their own decision regarding abortion...Roe v. Wade was a direct violation of the Constitution and Roe never had an abortion...The infanticide left's weakness in position is further illustrated by them calling it a "reproductive rights" issue, when NOBODY has EVER stopped or called for legislation for or against the right to reproduce (their flowery smoke-screen suggests they are hiding something).
I started a reply to this post, which was almost identical to yours. I agree completely, this should be left to the people to decide, not the courts. If enough people vote in favor of killing babies, well, that's just the way it will be then. I won't complain.
__________________
1983 944 - Sable Brown Metallic / Saratoga / LSD : IceShark Light Cannons
2001 Dodge Stratus - White - Daily driver
Old 09-12-2005, 10:33 AM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #6 (permalink)
Registered User
 
techweenie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: West L.A.
Posts: 17,031
Garage
The issue here really isn't Roe v Wade, because that's the main target. Bush won't proffer any nominees that don't want to strike it down.

The real issue I wanted to discuss here is whether anyone is concerned that 'implied privacy' underpinnings will topple a wide range of protections we enjoy?

The majority of states have privacy clauses in their laws. But the federal government only has the implied right.
__________________
techweenie
News: Youtube.com/fastlanedaily Stories: Youtube.com/drive
'02 Turbo, '72 911 Beige Gray hot rod, '72 911 Gemini Blue Metallic hot rod
'13 Chevy Volt parts fetcher
Old 09-12-2005, 10:41 AM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #7 (permalink)
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
 
legion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Suwanee, GA
Posts: 23,621
Privacy is a tricky issue.

Putting it in the constitution could choke commerce. (No business could collect any personally identifiable info. Industries like insurance couldn't exist.)

Leaving it completely out has risks, as Techweenie has pointed out.

Sounds like a case for one of those classic "balancing" tests that the Supreme Court loves to create.
__________________
Some Porsches Long Ago...
Nothing fun now
-Chris

"There is freedom in risk, just as there is oppression in security."
Old 09-12-2005, 10:46 AM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #8 (permalink)
Banned
 
Mulhollanddose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: On a boat in the Great NW
Posts: 6,148
People seem to be mesmerized by the majesty of the Supreme Court...Guess what?...They are lawyers, humans, flawed and finite...In this case they are also unaccountable and, therefore, should not have powers to write laws from the bench.

The Founders formulated the separation of powers for a reason, and explicitly warned against a tyrannical judiciary...This is something the left seems to conveniently forget in their lip-service defense of the Constitution; understandable given the only way they can get their way is by the neo-tyranny of fiat.
Old 09-12-2005, 11:39 AM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #9 (permalink)
Registered User
 
RallyJon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: SE PA
Posts: 3,188
Lot's of people "state" that they'd like to see Roe v Wade overturned in a context that makes it politically advantageous to say so. It's not clear how many of those who make public proclamations really mean it.

Of all the right wing zealots Bush could have nominated, he picks a guy who is barely on that side of the fence (if at all).

Hmm.
__________________
993911STIS4rally car
Old 09-12-2005, 01:41 PM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #10 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Moses's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: I'm out there.
Posts: 12,850
Quote:
Originally posted by techweenie


The majority of states have privacy clauses in their laws. But the federal government only has the implied right.
I have no problem with that. It seems to me that a nation filled with people of divergent values and dreams should be allowed to construct laws that reflect the local culture. As a nation we are joined by our constitution and hopefully a shared love of freedom.

I have no problem with a nation where it may be legal to smoke pot in Oregon, but illegal to smoke a cigarette in Utah.
__________________
My work here is nearly finished.
Old 09-12-2005, 02:02 PM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #11 (permalink)
Registered User
 
stevepaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: san jose
Posts: 4,970
Ah, but would you allow Utah to prosecute one of their citizens because he smoked a cigarette on vacation in Hawaii?
__________________
steve
old rocket inguneer
Old 09-12-2005, 02:07 PM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #12 (permalink)
 
Now Available for Ordering:   101 Projects For Your BMW 3 Series 1982-2000  [more info]
Registered User
 
Moses's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: I'm out there.
Posts: 12,850
Quote:
Originally posted by stevepaa
Ah, but would you allow Utah to prosecute one of their citizens because he smoked a cigarette on vacation in Hawaii?
For years states had different drinking ages, speed limits, tax laws. It's all good. Find a state filled with like-minded people and move there. America! Gotta love it.
__________________
My work here is nearly finished.
Old 09-12-2005, 02:11 PM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #13 (permalink)
Registered User
 
speedkillz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: So.Cal.
Posts: 166
If men were the ones to have babies...this would never have been an issue. With big brother watching every move...we are all like mice in a cage.
__________________
Craig Owen
80 911SC Targa
99 Boxster
Old 09-12-2005, 02:50 PM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #14 (permalink)
Registered User
 
stevepaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: san jose
Posts: 4,970
I thought that some women were prosecuted for having abortions in nearby states? Am I wrong on that?
__________________
steve
old rocket inguneer
Old 09-12-2005, 02:59 PM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #15 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Moses's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: I'm out there.
Posts: 12,850
Quote:
Originally posted by stevepaa
I thought that some women were prosecuted for having abortions in nearby states? Am I wrong on that?
I know of no state that can rightfully claim jurisdiction over events in another state.
__________________
My work here is nearly finished.
Old 09-12-2005, 03:02 PM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #16 (permalink)
Banned
 
Mulhollanddose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: On a boat in the Great NW
Posts: 6,148
Re: Bush2 Supreme Court -- what else goes along with Roe v Wade?

Quote:
Originally posted by techweenie
I believe that in pulling the privacy underpinnings out from under Wade, the Supreme Court will quite likely cause unintended consequences. Most threatening is that the movement toward unifying databases on citizens under the federal government will move forward, unimpeded. It's already mostly there. Itís not an Orwellian fantasy to project this a little further into a nightmare.
You can start your conspiracy back in 1994 with Clinton's little diddy...

In 1994 President Clinton signed the Communications Assistance in Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), also known as the digital telephony bill. This bill requires regional telephone service providers to work with the FBI in establishing a standard interface for law enforcement to use when tapping a phone line. Law enforcement can already tap copper phone lines, but new technology in the form of digital fiber optics, smart call services like call forwarding, and wireless cellular and PCS communications, left FBI wiretappers in the dust - hence, the campaign for greater wiretapping capability.

When CALEA passed in 1994, it promised to reimburse regional carriers for embedding a common law enforcement interface into the backbone of their call switching networks. Instead of restoring law enforcement to their old vantage ground, the new requirements would give police immediate access into the nerve center of the regional telephone carrier - a massive leap past what they had before. Where before law enforcement had to work to find the correct copper wire to tap into, now they are asking for the equivalent of requiring every new home to be built with listening devices in the walls in case they want to eavesdrop someday. The capabilities of the next century's system of surveillance are still being hammered out and the following proposals are on the table.


The above is obviously from a right-wing website...Seems the lefty media sorta forgot to focus on it...So, get this, Clinton made this bugging technology mandatory on ALL cell phones...except his and his buddies I am sure.

Oh, BTW...This was his rationale..."national security" from a "terrorist threat".

http://www.thewinds.org/1997/06/wiretap.html


What about that 4th Amendment techweenie?...Call up Babs Boxer and Feinswine and get them an ear-full.
Old 09-12-2005, 03:06 PM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #17 (permalink)
Banned
 
Mulhollanddose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: On a boat in the Great NW
Posts: 6,148
Quote:
Originally posted by stevepaa
I thought that some women were prosecuted for having abortions in nearby states? Am I wrong on that?
Yes, you are wrong...scare tactic, just like the overblown theory of "back-alley abortions."
Old 09-12-2005, 03:07 PM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #18 (permalink)
Registered User
 
techweenie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: West L.A.
Posts: 17,031
Garage
Re: Re: Bush2 Supreme Court -- what else goes along with Roe v Wade?

Quote:
Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
You can start your conspiracy back in 1994 with Clinton's little diddy...

In 1994 President Clinton signed the Communications Assistance in Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), also known as the digital telephony bill. This bill requires regional telephone service providers to work with the FBI in establishing a standard interface for law enforcement to use when tapping a phone line. Law enforcement can already tap copper phone lines, but new technology in the form of digital fiber optics, smart call services like call forwarding, and wireless cellular and PCS communications, left FBI wiretappers in the dust - hence, the campaign for greater wiretapping capability.

When CALEA passed in 1994, it promised to reimburse regional carriers for embedding a common law enforcement interface into the backbone of their call switching networks. Instead of restoring law enforcement to their old vantage ground, the new requirements would give police immediate access into the nerve center of the regional telephone carrier - a massive leap past what they had before. Where before law enforcement had to work to find the correct copper wire to tap into, now they are asking for the equivalent of requiring every new home to be built with listening devices in the walls in case they want to eavesdrop someday. The capabilities of the next century's system of surveillance are still being hammered out and the following proposals are on the table.


The above is obviously from a right-wing website...Seems the lefty media sorta forgot to focus on it...So, get this, Clinton made this bugging technology mandatory on ALL cell phones...except his and his buddies I am sure.

Oh, BTW...This was his rationale..."national security" from a "terrorist threat".

http://www.thewinds.org/1997/06/wiretap.html

What about that 4th Amendment techweenie?...Call up Babs Boxer and Feinswine and get them an ear-full.

Yes, and under Clinton, it still required a judge's order. Now under Bush it does not. I'm pretty sure Babs and Dianne tried to keep the "Patriot" Act provisions from continuing, but guess who has the majority? The Big Brother boys.
__________________
techweenie
News: Youtube.com/fastlanedaily Stories: Youtube.com/drive
'02 Turbo, '72 911 Beige Gray hot rod, '72 911 Gemini Blue Metallic hot rod
'13 Chevy Volt parts fetcher
Old 09-12-2005, 03:16 PM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #19 (permalink)
Banned
 
Mulhollanddose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: On a boat in the Great NW
Posts: 6,148
Babs and Diane are from the party of concentration camps for Japs...The party of "Uncle Joe" aint such a bad guy...The party of "Republicans are racist. Robert Byrd?...aw, that whole KKK thing was just a youthful indiscretion."...The party of "lets bomb Serbia, seems like we need to distract the country, we will let the next adminstration deal with terrorism."...The party of "we really f'ed up in New Orleans...quick!...blame the Republicans!"
Old 09-12-2005, 07:03 PM
  Recommend this thread for the PelicanWiki    Reply With Quote #20 (permalink)
Old 09-12-2005, 07:03 PM
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

 



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:39 PM.


 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2011 Pelican Parts - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page
 

DTO Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.