Politics: Where we struggle to kneel in the muck.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Gattigap
I disagree with the result that you've come to for (among other things) the reasons that Ty raises above, but I do feel compelled to note that this is one of the more cogent articulations of the pro-life position that I've seen.

Thanks. It scares me to think that, in a hundred years, our current take on abortion is going to be equated, morally, with the pro-slavery position.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Not a freaking chance. Pro-lifers in every state mobilize over this issue. Pro-choicers mobilize as well. Pro-lifers will also try to pass laws giving the fetus the right to stay in the state to avoid travel to a state where abortion is legal. Various things will be criminalized. And so on.

Can a fetus still smoke a Cuban?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Like I said when Clinton lied under oath, you get a pass where the law is unjust.

Solves those pesky tax problems for me!

(ETA - you don't own a crossbow, do you?)

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by bilmore
Thanks. It scares me to think that, in a hundred years, our current take on abortion is going to be equated, morally, with the pro-slavery position.

I wouldn't worry about that.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
Can a fetus still smoke a Cuban?

Every so often you post something that leads me to question how well you and your family are adapting to life on our planet.

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
Otherwise, I think it mostly moots the whole issue for both parties, if the country could just a rational status quo on solid ground.

Hello

If you think that one serious anti-abortionist will stop for one second at the Court allowing the individual states to make abortion decisions, you are seriously, seriously naive. True anti-abortionists don't give a shit about federalism. They're preventing murders. To them, the overturning of Roe v. Wade is not the repeal of the declaration that laws banning abortion are illegal, but rather the affirmative declaration that abortion is illegal. Anything less is failure; anything else leaves blood on the hands of the Court.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Where does this line of thinking lead you? It obviously has nothing to do with the rights of the fetus, which couldn't care less how it came into being. Abortion rights for victims of rape, and those whose birth control failed, but not others? Does a father who tells the mother that he had a vasectomy have to pay more in birth control?

It doesn't lead me anywhere, other than that I cannot buy into abortion rights on the basis of the burden on the mother (exceptions for rape, incest, etc.)

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
How can this country punish you for going to, say, Brazil and smoking a Cuban if it's legal there?

The same way they can punish US citizens for torture in countries that otherwise tolerate it.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
I sincerely doubt it. If 20 states move towards outlawing abortion, this issue goes away. Pro-choice Californians (assuming they are the controlling majority) get to tell the pro-lifers to move to Indiana or Utah. I'm not even sure the 20 pro-Life states are Republican, once the whole abortion issue gets obviated by allowing state control.

While I've seen countless arguments over the abortion issue, those that actually wax nostalgic for the situation prior to Roe are relatively few and far between. Good work.

Your argument also seems to suggest that geographical mobility is easy as pie. Sure, it's easy enough for us rich lawyers to move to Indiana, Utah, or CA (at least theoretically). But it may not be so easy for everyone on the economic strata to do so, and that's part of the reason why (as it was before Roe) an underground, illegal, and unsafe cottage industry would likely spring up in those 20 or so states.

So, no, I'm not so sure that the issue would "go away."

[bilmore]

Originally posted by baltassoc
If you think that one serious anti-abortionist will stop for one second at the Court allowing the individual states to make abortion decisions, you are seriously, seriously naive. True anti-abortionists don't give a shit about federalism. They're preventing murders. To them, the overturning of Roe v. Wade is not the repeal of the declaration that laws banning abortion are illegal, but rather the affirmative declaration that abortion is illegal. Anything less is failure; anything else leaves blood on the hands of the Court.

This is probably true. The abolitionists certainly weren't content to leave the Northern states free while the Southerners kept their slaves.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by bilmore
Can a fetus still smoke a Cuban?

I think it depends on how difficult it is to pull the trigger.

Improbable, yes, but armament technology marches forward inexorably, does it not?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Per this, a new Treasury Department ruling says that U.S. citizens cannot consume Cuban cigars anywhere in the world, something which Eugene Volokh apparently says they can do. WTF? How can this country punish you for going to, say, Brazil and smoking a Cuban if it's legal there?

Which, sebby, suggests that your faith in being able to fly away from local abortion laws may be misplaced.

2. Similarly, it's illegal to sexually exploit children overseas. So much for that Thai vacation . . .

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TRAVEL/10/12....ap/index.html

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Gattigap
I think it depends on how difficult it is to pull the trigger.

Improbable, yes, but armament technology marches forward inexorably, does it not?

I had to read that one twice.

Then I spit coffee.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
The same way they can punish US citizens for torture in countries that otherwise tolerate it.

Thanks for trying to help, but that really doesn't alleviate my jurisdictional nonplussedness (hi dtb!).