Things Falling Apart: BAD SIGNS

[GOT_BUD?]

What's going to be really fun is when the SC overturns Roe v Wade, it eliminates the "right to privacy", which Judge Alito claims doesn't exist in the Constitution...

It centers around the 14th Amendment due process clause which was argued in 1973 that this gave someone a 'right to privacy'. In Alito's draft he talks about 'enumerated rights' of which the 'right to privacy' is not anywhere in the constitution. Some constitutional scholars argue that the reason we don't have a gun registry or that you don't have to register all your guns with the government is explicitly due to the rulings in RvW and this precedent of 'right to privacy'...this has been argued multiple times in courts, where gun advocates argue the 14th Amendment due process clause is the 'right to privacy' and why it's never been ruled in favor of any sort of gun registry. Overturning RvW is more about the interpretation of the 14th Amendment and this 'right to privacy' then abortion. It is the same exact arguments that exist in the Planned Parenthood vs. Casey decision...

So again...maybe these GOP folks want to think twice about what could happen if RvW is overturned, really meaning the idea of 'right to privacy' goes away. RvW and PP v Casey are the ONLY supreme court cases where this precedent of 'right to privacy' exist...

 

[Brother Nature]

Moving along to another bad sign...

Recently the son of Ferdinand Marcos (former infamous ruler of the Philippines) who goes by the nickname "Bongbong" was just recently elected as the newest President of the Philippines. Now I don't mean this as a dig on the newly elected President, he may turn out to be a decent President that's nothing like his Fater. I just bring it up because I feel it's a bad sign when someone who goes by the name "BongBong" becomes the leader of a country.

What 'Bongbong' Marcos' victory means for the Philippines

The sharpest opinions on the debate from around the web

theweek.com

Literally anyone would be better than the murderous piece of shit Duarte. Sadly those in charge of previously colonized countries seem to take a lot of inspiration from their previous conquerors.

 

[h.h.]

So does the constitution give us the rights we believe it does or does it take the rights away that aren’t listed?

 

[GOT_BUD?]

It's supposed to limit the power of the government. But if it's not explicitly stated, then it's whatever the Feds want it to be

According to Justice Thomas (2007) there's "no general right to privacy."

So how long until landlords start putting cameras up inside their housing?

 

[armedoldhippy]

What's going to be really fun is when the SC overturns Roe v Wade, it eliminates the "right to privacy", which Judge Alito claims doesn't exist in the Constitution...

i've never understood the "head in the sand" approach that many "legal scholars" take RE the "rights" we have. MANY of them are not enumerated in our constitution simply because they were so obvious! the right to self defense being a prominent one. the vast majority of our rights (enumerated or not) were handed down through English common law, self defense being one of them. is it codified? no, because EVERYONE fucking KNEW it was a right. the right to privacy is no different. allowing citizens to live their lives as they wish without intruding on the rights to live as others wish is as central to freedom as we can get. but the religious right insists that EVERYONE live their lives as THEY want you to because of their beliefs. nobody is forcing these alleged "Christians" to live any other way than how they desire, but they insist on the right to say "no" to those that do not suck up their religious dogma. "YOU can't do that because WE don't believe in it". pardon my French, but...exactly where the fuck is the limit on their "desire" to make us behave like them? fuck 'em ALL...

 

[h.h.]

Property “rights” are not natural rights, thus the quagmire.

 

[audiohi]

 

[moose eater]

So does the constitution give us the rights we believe it does or does it take the rights away that aren’t listed?

9th amendment addresses non-enumerated rights, and fairly well states that not all rights were enumerated.

The Bill of Rights was more intended as a restriction on authority of government than on the People.

 

[armedoldhippy]

It's supposed to limit the power of the government. But if it's not explicitly stated, then it's whatever the Feds want it to be

According to Justice Thomas (2007) there's "no general right to privacy."

So how long until landlords start putting cameras up inside their housing?

let's start with installing them in 6 of the SC justices bathrooms & bedrooms. no "right to privacy" indeed! they'll spot one as soon as the cameras are hooked up...

 

[h.h.]

It's supposed to limit the power of the government. But if it's not explicitly stated, then it's whatever the Feds want it to be

According to Justice Thomas (2007) there's "no general right to privacy."

So how long until landlords start putting cameras up inside their housing?

9th amendment addresses non-enumerated rights, and fairly well states that not all rights were enumerated.

The Bill of Rights was more intended as a restriction on authority of government than on the People.

Rights overlap. The 9th is an attempt at a guarantee. It’s fairly safe to say that your right to privacy ends when you have a room full of hot goods yet it can be disputed. If you have my stuff, I’m going into your house. As O.J. found out though, it’s worst than murder.

 

[HempKat]

if he got his nickname from his fave hobby, maybe it will turn out okay. the last guy promoted the vigilante murder of anyone suspected of dealing or using drugs...

I think in the story I quoted it says this but I might have read it in a different story. Anyway one story said he planned to still be as hard on drugs as Duterte except he won't be killing people for it. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say his nickname isn't from his fave hobby, at least not the one you had in mind.

 

[HempKat]

Well one of the latest problems facing the public these days has revealed the hypocrisy of the Right who want to protect babies by banning abortion. The recent shortage of baby formula now shows that the only babies those wanting to ban abortion care about are American babies, the rest can just starve to death for all they care. This has been demonstrated by the fact that after learning that even though there is a baby formula shortage the Federal Government makes sure that any illegal babies that ends up in it's care are provided with formula (as is required by law once the babies fall under the Federal Government's care) those on the Right would have you believe that the Biden Administration is evil for providing illegal babies with formula while the parents of American born babies struggle to find baby formula on the shelves at their local stores. They would rather that formula go to American babies first. Unfortunately this overlooks some important facts, mainly that the number of illegal babies the Federal Government is obligated to care for numbers in the low thousands while the number of American born babies they would rather the formula go to first numbers in the millions. Which means the Formula the Federal government has to feed illegal babies would be insufficient to provide for American born babies and it would leave the illegal babies with nothing. It also overlooks that solving this problem falls not on the responsibility of the President who just enforces laws but rather on Congress to make laws. Laws to break up the monopolies of 3-4 companies that supply all of the US. Laws that currently prevent us from importing formula from Canada and laws to tighten up regulations that allowed Abbot Labs (the supplier of about 40% of US baby formula) to let contaminants into it's most recent batches of formula forcing a recall that is the main cause of the shortage in the first place.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...a-shortage-gop-immigrant-children/9757889002/

 

[h.h.]

Before formula babies didn’t eat.

 

[armedoldhippy]

this bullshit about not allowing imports of food & drugs from friendly countries that we trust with everything else has to be addressed. i don't think Canada has a problem with unsafe drugs or contaminated food, and these "protectionist" bullshit laws are nothing more than the govt gifting a near-monopoly to well-connected non-competitors in those industries. it has GOT to stop...

 

[HempKat]

this bullshit about not allowing imports of food & drugs from friendly countries that we trust with everything else has to be addressed. i don't think Canada has a problem with unsafe drugs or contaminated food, and these "protectionist" bullshit laws are nothing more than the govt gifting a near-monopoly to well-connected non-competitors in those industries. it has GOT to stop...

Exactly, I mean the only reason for not allowing imports of formula from Canada is to benefit the 3-4 US companies that supply the entire US market. The way I heard it, it sounded like that restriction might have gone into place during that period of time where Trump was using trade policies as a weapon to punish countries he was upset with but baby formula is to specific a market item for it to be part of that. So the more likely scenario is that Abbott Labs and or the other 2-3 big formula makers slipped some money into some congressional pockets to get them to put that restriction in place. Really what needs to happen is what Bernie has be saying for years, we need to find a way to keep corporate money out of politics. Of course it will likely never happen since the people that benefit from that money are the same people who would have to make the laws to block it.

 

[HempKat]

Before formula babies didn’t eat.

I know you were being sarcastic, obviously babies were fed the natural way from their mother's breasts. Unfortunately that is no longer a safe option due to all the crap we've introduced into the typical American diet. Back when babies could safely feed from their mother's or a willing breast milk donor most people were still eating safe whole foods free from steroids, toxins from pesticides, antibiotics, and all the other stuff in today's processed foods

 

[armedoldhippy]

I know you were being sarcastic, obviously babies were fed the natural way from their mother's breasts. Unfortunately that is no longer a safe option due to all the crap we've introduced into the typical American diet. Back when babies could safely feed from their mother's or a willing breast milk donor most people were still eating safe whole foods free from steroids, toxins from pesticides, antibiotics, and all the other stuff in today's processed foods

my wife breast-fed both of our boys. she was pretty careful about her diet while that was going on however. lots of veggies, whole milk etc. breast milk straight from the tap is pretty damn tasty...

 

[Cannavore]

saying the quiet part out loud...

 

[Doctor M]

What's going to be really fun is when the SC overturns Roe v Wade, it eliminates the "right to privacy", which Judge Alito claims doesn't exist in the Constitution...

Don't worry bro states will exist where you can still kill babies for convience and hide behind rape and incest.

 

[h.h.]

I know you were being sarcastic, obviously babies were fed the natural way from their mother's breasts. Unfortunately that is no longer a safe option due to all the crap we've introduced into the typical American diet. Back when babies could safely feed from their mother's or a willing breast milk donor most people were still eating safe whole foods free from steroids, toxins from pesticides, antibiotics, and all the other stuff in today's processed foods

It’s still a good option for new mothers. Along with a healthier diet. It’s hard to switch off of formula if not already breastfeeding though.
Goats milk used to be an option.