• Ongoing coronavirus / COVID-19 discussion: how is the pandemic affecting your community, workplace, and wellness? 🦠

    Working from home? So are we. Come join us! Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no social distancing.

Why South Dakota is Going to Sublevel 666 of Jack Chick's Version of Hell #1

Dan

Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
18,546
Points
69
Why South Dakota is going to sublevel 666 of Hell

The South Dakota House of Representatives have approved a bill that would ban abortion in the state. The bill would outlaw abortion unless a mother's life is in danger, with no exceptions for rape victims or women that would have permanent serious health problems by giving birth.

The bill passed the House 54-15.

Not only are they blatantly ignoring firmly established Supreme Court precedent (Roe v Wade), they are wasting the taxpayers money defending a bill that will definitely be struck down.

I'd write more to express my outrage, but words fail me right now. What next ... Race-based restrictive covenants become legal again in Mississippi? Missouri relegalizes slave ownership? Georgia passes a bill to make the Southern Baptist faith the state religion? Let's just all regress to 1850, and give a middle finger to the Supreme Court and the Constitution in the process.
 

SkeLeton

Cyburbian
Messages
4,853
Points
26
The bill would outlaw abortion unless a mother's life is in danger, with no exceptions for rape victims or women that would have permanent serious health problems by giving birth.
Uh... If the mother could have permanent serious health problems due to giving birth, wouldn't that be considered risking the mother's life?

What's the fuzz about baning abortion? Afterall it is illegal to kill people, right?

Oh and if it's a rape victim, there's this thing called Day After Pill, thank you!
 

Queen B

Cyburbian
Messages
3,179
Points
25
I am with you on this Dan. How could they possibly do that.

But you know politicians think they are God Like and they think they can't be touched.

I just feel bad for those women caught in the middle of it. It is a trying enough position to be in without a public political display.
At least they can still cross state lines until this gets straightened out!
 

Rumpy Tunanator

Cyburbian
Messages
4,473
Points
25
SkeLeton said:
What's the fuzz about baning abortion? Afterall it is illegal to kill people, right?

Oh and if it's a rape victim, there's this thing called Day After Pill, thank you!
Sure, killing people is illegal (unless in the name of self-defense), but killing yourself is not......The point is, its a woman's body and it should be her choice of what she does to it. The same goes for drug addicts, alcoholics such as myself...NOT, eating to much fast food, etc. Pretty soon the govt. is going to try to tell me when and when not, I can piss. B-)
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
19,985
Points
49
Skel, I am right there with ya…

Both Science and Religion state that life begins at conception. It is that simple, furthermore, currently 1/3 of today’s teen population in the united states does not exist because of abortion.
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,463
Points
29
Are you so sure that "religion" states that life begins at conception? Which religion? Not all do.
 

Habanero

Cyburbian
Messages
3,241
Points
27
I couldn't agree more Dan.

As far as the rape comment Skel, I think you may need to take a step back and think about what you're saying. Rape victims often do not come forward out of fear and/or shame, rape is not always commited by a stranger, and that pill was not readily available for many many years. To that end, if life starts at conception per science and religious findings wouldn't the morning after pill in fact be a type of abortion which you are so against?

The problem with prohibiting abortion is you'll wind up with women dying from a back alley abortion performed by a whack doctor. To be in a situation qwhere the decision to end a pregnancy came up would be emotionally taxing, but then to be judged for life altering decisions by people not in your shoes? It's really sad and unfortunate people can think they know what's best for everyone and try to force their morality issues on others.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
19,985
Points
49
OK my bad, most Christian religions do. As for the morning after pill, I don't support that either. Many Physiologists will agree that women who have been rapped, and then have had an abortion have more psychological and emotional issues, than those who do not have an abortion.
 

SkeLeton

Cyburbian
Messages
4,853
Points
26
Habanero said:
As far as the rape comment Skel, I think you may need to take a step back and think about what you're saying. Rape victims often do not come forward out of fear and/or shame, rape is not always commited by a stranger, and that pill was not readily available for many many years. To that end, if life starts at conception per science and religious findings wouldn't the morning after pill in fact be a type of abortion which you are so against?
Hum...Did I say I believed that life started with conception? No, and If it were, condoms would be abortive too.
To me, life starts in implantation, when the embryo starts to develop, before that it's just a proto-embryo, a bunch of cells that could die easily; hence the day after pill is not actually abortive, unless taken after implantation.
 

The Irish One

Member
Messages
2,267
Points
25
Kang and Kodos

"Abortions for none!" "Booo!"
"Abortions for all!" "Booo!"
"Abortions for some... and little American flags for everybody else!" "YAY!"
 

Habanero

Cyburbian
Messages
3,241
Points
27
SkeLeton said:
Hum...Did I say I believed that life started with conception? No, and If it were, condoms would be abortive too.
To me, life starts in implantation, when the embryo starts to develop, before that it's just a proto-embryo, a bunch of cells that could die easily; hence the day after pill is not actually abortive, unless taken after implantation.
sorry, that should've said Skis for that portion.

michaelskis said:
OK my bad, most Christian religions do. As for the morning after pill, I don't support that either. Many Physiologists will agree that women who have been rapped, and then have had an abortion have more psychological and emotional issues, than those who do not have an abortion.
Oh, okay, well as long as there was a study done. 8-! A study done by a man about the effect of abortion vs carrying your rapists child doesn't mean jack in the real world. Until a man is raped, pregnant, and faced with the decision (and no, it's just a tad harder than deciding on wheatabix or cheerios) of ending a pregnancy they shouldn't have the right to tell me what is best for me.
 

The Irish One

Member
Messages
2,267
Points
25
Until a man is raped, pregnant, and faced with the decision (and no, it's just a tad harder than deciding on wheatabix or cheerios) of ending a pregnancy they shouldn't have the right to tell me what is best for me.
My sentiments exactly.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
19,985
Points
49
Habanero said:
A study done by a man about the effect of abortion vs carrying your rapists child doesn't mean jack in the real world.
I was told that the study was done by someone who was completing their Ph.D. as their final research project. Oh did I mention that she was a female and a former rape victim who gave her baby up for adoption? I will see the person that told me about this weekend, and I will see if I can get a copy of the report from them.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
19,985
Points
49
I also want to mention that everyone here may express his or her own opinion, and I welcome that. I do not look down on anyone for there opinions in any manor. I do not hate people that are pro choice, or think in ways that differ from me.

I just know what I believe, and what I have read, and even what people who are close to me have experienced.
 

Habanero

Cyburbian
Messages
3,241
Points
27
michaelskis said:
I was told that the study was done by someone who was completing their Ph.D. as their final research project. Oh did I mention that she was a female and a former rape victim who gave her baby up for adoption? I will see the person that told me about this weekend, and I will see if I can get a copy of the report from them.
Okay, let me rephrase that, a study done by a woman about what is best for my situation because it was what was best for her, or a gaggle of other woman, does not mean my right to make a decision should be infringed upon nor do I think I should be judged (not that you are, but in general) for having to make those decisions.
It's not like they're taking away a woman's right to dye her hair, the decision to end a pregnancy, for whatever reason, is such a personal one that the decision should only be made by the person, or people, intimately involved.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
19,985
Points
49
Habanero said:
Okay, let me rephrase that, a study done by a woman about what is best for my situation because it was what was best for her, or a gaggle of other woman, does not mean my right to make a decision should be infringed upon nor do I think I should be judged (not that you are, but in general) for having to make those decisions.
It's not like they're taking away a woman's right to dye her hair, the decision to end a pregnancy, for whatever reason, is such a personal one that the decision should only be made by the person, or people, intimately involved.

It was not a study of what was best for her, being that it was a study done so that she could get her Ph.D. and being such a controversial topic, and imagine that her professors tried to convince her to use a scientific method. It is true that every paper written on emotional or psychological situations are as controversial as the topics them selves, but it is one, of what I am guessing there are more, studies done on this topic.

As for the decision, if it is true that life begins at conception, then the unborn child should have a much larger say in it then even the mother does. I understand the whole it is the woman’s body, she should have the right to do with it what she wants as long as it does not negatively affect any other person, what about the baby? There is a big difference between changing hair color *which I am all for* and destroying a life.

Let me ask you this? What good does abortion do when it is not a medical emergency that risk the mothers life? I also want to say that I respect you, and everyone else in this thread for having courage to stand up for what you believe in.
 

DecaturHawk

Cyburbian
Messages
880
Points
22
Michaelskis, I applaud you for your courage. It takes guts to admit you are pro-life on this forum when its obvious that such people are just a bunch of nutjob Christian whackos who want to take us back to 1850. After all, our imperial Supreme Court has ruled on this issue, and those Jack Chick lovin' prolifers in South Dakota oughta just shut up and live with American pro-abortion culture.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
19,985
Points
49
DecaturHawk said:
....its obvious that such people are just a bunch of nutjob Christian whackos who want to take us back to 1850.
Thank you, I am just happy that not all of us are trying to take anyone back to 1850. Those people tend to get on my nerves at times.

As for what South Dakota, if the general population does not want it, then the house of reps will get replaced, if the do, then the house will remain in tact for a while.
 

Habanero

Cyburbian
Messages
3,241
Points
27
michaelskis said:
As for the decision, if it is true that life begins at conception, then the unborn child should have a much larger say in it then even the mother does. I understand the whole it is the woman’s body, she should have the right to do with it what she wants as long as it does not negatively affect any other person, what about the baby? There is a big difference between changing hair color *which I am all for* and destroying a life.

Let me ask you this? What good does abortion do when it is not a medical emergency that risk the mothers life? I also want to say that I respect you, and everyone else in this thread for having courage to stand up for what you believe in.
The good may not be something pro-choicers would consider good, but for some that is the only choice to make. What if having a child for economic reasons was not possible? I know the arguement for adoption is there but some don't even have the money to buy maternity clothes or take the time off work to get to a doctor's appointment. I wouldn't say it's always the best choice but for some they may feel it is their only choice. Knowing that my situation is not like everyone else's I couldn't think for an instant I should be able to make that decision for someone else. Walk a mile in their shoes and you may understand why they have made the decision.
This isn't to say I think it should be taken lightly and honestly I have even known women my age to use it as birth control. Scary but true- my insurance right now fully covers an abortion for any reason but does not fully cover birth control. I would prefer a more balanced system where birth control is the first option and it's readily available to everyone. I could even see myself supporting a pro-choice campaign if it was to support education, birth control options, availbility, and full coverage on medical plans while still allowing a woman after those options are exhausted to decide what is best.
 

Rumpy Tunanator

Cyburbian
Messages
4,473
Points
25
michaelskis said:
As for the decision, if it is true that life begins at conception, then the unborn child should have a much larger say in it then even the mother does. I understand the whole it is the woman’s body, she should have the right to do with it what she wants as long as it does not negatively affect any other person, what about the baby? There is a big difference between changing hair color *which I am all for* and destroying a life.
Only at an open-meeting and not at a closed door-meeting.

It all depends on your choices, doesn't it? If I had the choice to choose (and I don't), I would probally choose pro-life, but at the same time I would support another's decision for pro-choice. Its the persons choice, not mine, but let them decide for themselves. Its also the woman's right, not the man's.


michaelskis said:
Let me ask you this? What good does abortion do when it is not a medical emergency that risk the mothers life? I also want to say that I respect you, and everyone else in this thread for having courage to stand up for what you believe in.
Where to start with this? For starters, a child not brought into the world that will end up not cared for (and don't start on adoption unless you've had experience with it) and mis-treated by un-fit parents. Rape victims who may not want to deal with the pulling, emotional scars of birth. Burden to social resouces for incompetent mothers and people such as the donor (yeah, I know I'll catch hell for this) who continue to produce offspring that they cannot support, but let the system, AKA, your tax dollars fund. Etc, etc, etc.

I also respect everyones opinions here, and thats the beauty of this country (for the most part), the freedom of choice.
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
[lie]Oh, Boy abortion...what a fun topic. I'm glad you brought it up Dan[/lie]

Judging from the prior posts, I'm betting we all leave the emotional baggage behind and argue the subject with cool logic for the duration of this thread. Yes, we are all going to leave our religion, or lack of one, behind and argue if human life should be destroyed for the convenience of the host body.

OK, so if the State Government of Vermont should have the right to allow gay couples to marry why can’t one of the Dakota Territories have the right to outlaw abortion in their state? Can't we allow states to make laws that may offend sophisticated planners and other urbanites? Or should we allow the city council of Greenwich Village, NY to set national law. After all one of America's chosen may someday get stranded during a flight layover in Nebraska and need a quickie vaginal lumpectomy before departing on the next flight to Prague.

Roe v. Wade was simply judicial activism and everyone with an IQ over 50 knows it. There is no right to privacy in the constitution. There should be, but there isn’t. So basing your argument on the Supreme Court said it is OK is goofy. The Supreme Court is less that credible out here in flyover country.

Basing your decision on your personal brand of God and his writings is just as nuts. If my God is right then I should be able to kill all that disagree with my God. Heck, My GOD, according to some of the writings attributed to him, wants me to kill Abortion Doctors, Planners and Jerry Springer and yet I don't kill anyone. Wild isn't it. (I'm actually in favor of any religion that harms Mr. Springer a little bit.)

Why don’t we ask ourselves if we want to live in a culture where a life could come second, behind a teenager's convenience? Most abortions are because someone finds the results of their sexual activity darn inconvenient. The rape and mother’s life exceptions are just that. They are exceptions and not a rational basis for allowing the other (just guessing here) 90% a reason to kill a child conceived out of being to lazy to run down to the Walgreen’s for a rubber. Was that too candid?

When the abortionistas decided that they needed to be able to spirit a 12 year old girl away from her family and offer her the choice of an abortion without letting her parent's even know she was pregnant you lost any hope of winning me over. Abortion is just a small part of a heniously destructive agenda.

My Position: Go ahead and kill your baby for whatever reason you can rationalize in your own mind. Tell everyone how courageous you were and how it is your body and your right. But don't expect me to embrace you. I reserve the right to believe you murdered a baby.

Now, let the flames fly. :f:
 

Rumpy Tunanator

Cyburbian
Messages
4,473
Points
25
el Guapo said:
[lie]Oh, Boy abortion...what a fun topic. I'm glad you brought it up Dan[/lie]Basing your decision on your personal brand of God and his writings is just as nuts. If my God is right then I should be able to kill all that disagree with my God. Heck, My GOD, according to some of the writings attributed to him, wants me to kill Abortion Doctors, Planners and Jerry Springer and yet I don't kill anyone. Wild isn't it. (I'm actually in favor of any religion that harms Mr. Springer a little bit.):
El Guapo, opinions, opinions, opinions.... My whole point rests behind the fact and guarentees, of which this country has provided and stated as being factual....and constitutional..

Yes if you want an abortion, do it, its your right and private choice, should it be. Nobody's God is right, if they all were, we wouldn't be in this whole conflict/mess that nobody wants to ultimately deal with right now.......

Think of those gunners in "Easy Rider" EG, riding the wave of freedom, only to be struck down...
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
19,985
Points
49
Let me start by saying El Guapo, you rock....

Ok, as for the freedoms you say that are given to us... first of all, people die for the freedom what you and I have. Second, if the supereme court decided tomorrow that the killing of anyone who got on your nerves would be permitted, would you be ok with that? (Ok other than springer.. I think we all agree that we can do with out him).

We are all human, including the Supreme Court Justices .. they voted in what the believed in at the time. Do you think that every decision that they made has always been right? I know that I make the wrong choices every day of my life. *just look at my plea for help with the current women problem in the other thread. I have only been Catholic for about two years now, and I don’t agree with everything that they teach... it is kind of like my mom, I respect her, love her, and honor her... but I don’t always agree everything. But I have believed that the killing of innocent un-born babies is wrong. I would love to see exact stats of how many have been the result of rape, compared to those who as El Guapo put it... too lazy to run down to the corner wal greens for a rubber. I do not think that teens should be having sex... but I think that if they do... they should be protected. We live in a society where everyone else is to blame... hell some one posted a law suit against Janet Jackson for the half time show because it caused her “emotional suffering” I say get in line lady, I was emotional because I she was not in my living room doing that. I think that people need to start to think about the consequences before they allow actions to happen.
 

Dan

Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
18,546
Points
69
Rumpy: were you in Buffalo during the Spring of Life some years ago?

In the 1990s, Buffalo was a hotbed of pro-life activism. Hardly a week went by when there wasn't a protest or clinic blockade of some sort, and many of the city's residents displayed pro-life signs on their lawn. The city's collective old-school pre-Vatican II beliefs made it an ideal front in the natinal battle regarding abortion.

In 1992, Buffalo's then-mayor Jimmy Griffin actually invited groups of anti-abortion protestors to the city; it was called "Spring of Life," and it was UGLY. It made the city look like a fundamentalist backwater. I had to drive past many protest sites, where some people in the assembled crowd would always bang on the hood of my car, yelling "STOP KILLING BABIES!" or something like that.

Buffalo's pro-life movement became much less visible after 1998, when someone living a couple of blocks from my parents was killed ... a gynecologist named Bernard Slepian. Plans for a giant St. Louis-like arch as a memorial to fetuses are mostly dead.
 

Rumpy Tunanator

Cyburbian
Messages
4,473
Points
25
Dan said:
Rumpy: were you in Buffalo during the Spring of Life some years ago?
Buffalo's pro-life movement became much less visible after 1998, when someone living a couple of blocks from my parents was killed ... a gynecologist named Bernard Slepian. Plans for a giant St. Louis-like arch as a memorial to fetuses are mostly dead.

Operation Rescue was here again once James Charles Kopp was caught and brought back to Buffalo. Only this time good old man winter kept the nuts at bay.

The arch is dead for good.

They still protest outside of the womens center on Main St though. I was doing field work and seeing how I couldn't stop in the street in some areas, I would drive on the sidewalk and park. I think the protesters thought I was going to run them down.
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
Dan,
Yes, both sides have their idiots. The Aboritionistas have the "I want to be able to abort my baby right up until the moment the head crowns during birth." The pro-lifers have the "Ghhaaaddd has tooooold meeeeee toooo killlllla the baby killllllers." Neither side is without sin to get biblical on you all. If I were forced to pick a side, I'd join the zealots on the side of life. But I’ve not been forced to do so, so far. I'm actually glad that people still feel they can affect public policy by protesting, even the other side.

What strikes me as weird is how, with an almost religious-like fervor, the Pro-Choice side embraced Roe and that it has become the central precipt of Liberalism. They get just as glassy-eyed and foamy at the mouth about Roe as I do about the 2nd Amendment.

BTW- Why did you equate Pro-Lifer's with racists in your first post? Watch out or I'll drag the Nazi's into this thread.

michaelskis
Thanks for the kind words. I myself am a lapsed Catholic. Like many ex-Catholics I have basic moral issues with the Church's teachings. For instance here are some areas where I differ from the Church's teachings:
1. I believe that the death penalty needs to be used to remove dangerous, violent and murderous people from our society forever. A person murdered or raped by someone that was formerly in jail for murder or rape is a sign of a government/society not doing its fundamental job. The ONLY way to keep someone from repeating a murder is to kill them.
2. I believe that birth control in almost all its forms is [martha]a good thing[/martha], and that when properly used allows people to better care for the children that they decide to produce.
3. I believe that sometimes a war is just and necessary.
4. I believe that women should have equal status in the Church, and everything that position implies.
5. I believe that when one of your staff preys on children it isn't a good idea to cover his ass. It is best to feed him to the rabid crowd lusting for his blood.
6. I think that openly gay clergy should be allowed to serve.
7. I don't think the celibacy rule is good for the clergy or the parishioners.

On the other hand there are many places where I agree with the Church. I think the Church is an overall force for good. But I came to my position on abortion not via the church, but through reflection and much thought. I don’t think I have ever used religion as a crutch for any argument I have ever made here on Cyburbia. The pro-choice gang is welcome to research that fact.
 

Dan

Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
18,546
Points
69
el Guapo said:
Yes, both sides have their idiots. The Aboritionistas have the "I want to be able to abort my baby right up until the moment the head crowns during birth." The pro-lifers have the "Ghhaaaddd has tooooold meeeeee toooo killlllla the baby killllllers." Neither side is without sin to get biblical on you all.
'Tis true. I've always held a little bit of contempt towards those that think this is the most inportant issue facing the country today. If we focused all the attention that we're collectrively giving abortion on universal health coverage, today we might not be the last industrialized country in the world without it.

My POV, with the caveat that I know that I probably have been aborted if the procedure was readily available in 1965: it's not the government's place to determine if a fetus is a living being or not. It is, but it isn't ... it will always be one of those grey areas that probably won't or shouldn't ever be resolved. I'm pro-choice, with reservations. I don't believe in unlimited abortions, but I do believe in unlimited privacy; no parental notification or authorization, no mandatory state-required pro-life speeches from doctors, no waiting periods. Abortions shouldn't be performed in the second or third trimester, unless it the mother's life or permanent health is threatened, or the child would be born with severe physical or functional birth defects.

I don't like the thought of abortion, but it should be an option to those that need it. To prevent abortion, though, there needs to be ready access to birth control. Abstinence is not an option; kids will have sex, and spending money on thousands of PSAs that plead "don't do it!" will have a greater monetary and social cost than just making birth control more widely available.

This POV would probably PO those on both sides of the fence; the pro-lifers who don't believe that abortion should be prohibited period, even if the mom and the child would both both die during childbirth, and the pro-choice feministas who believe that late term third-trimester abortions should be permitted for the hell of it.

I wasn't trying to equate this to racism, but rather the blatant ignoring of Supreme Court decisions and case law. Sure, it's the heartland, but it's one country; it's a threat to the union if states could pick and choose which Supreme Court decisions they want to lobey. If that was the case, the Court becomes redundant, and the Constitution becomes a meaningless document. Let me put this another way ... do you think that Massachusetts should be permitted to pass a law outlawing all private ownership of firearms? Should Ohio be permitted to pass a law permitting state seizure of privately owned land without compensation?
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
19,985
Points
49
I would like to state that I completely agree with much of what you said. I also would like to state that if the life of the Mother or the Child is in jeopardy, then by all means it should be done. I further agree that this is not the biggest issue in America, and that this is more or less a result of actions and choices. I don’t approve of teens having sex, but if they are then they should have some preventative measures available to them. The thing that bothers me the most about abortion is that it is almost as common as going to McDonald’s for some of these women.

I will also agree that it might not be the best choice for the state to pass a bill that is opposite of what the Supreme Court says, but I do think that the Supreme Court should put serious limitations it.

Dan, you have a family right? Now think about all those people that you have influenced and have helped, and all your kid’s friends and the impact that your kids have had… and that their kids will have in this world. Now, imagine if your parents decided that they did not want you do be born…. (you your self mentioned that if it was legal in 1965, you might be here.)
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,463
Points
29
I think Dan has pretty much summed up my position as well. I don't like abortion, but I also understand where it might happen. And, as my earlier posted link brings out, the religious arguments are not as clear cut as some of the pro-life crowd might think.

El Guapo: You have a fascinating collection of opinions on major issues. Nobody could ever accuse you of blindly following one "side." (That's a compliment, btw)
 

Dan

Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
18,546
Points
69
michaelskis said:
Dan, you have a family right? ... (you your self mentioned that if it was legal in 1965, you might be here.)
I'm single. Also adopted; my parents couldn't have children of their own.

I don't think I'm going to have children, because I know enough about my biological family to realize that there are a lot of hereditary traits I don't want to burden my children with. There's a long story involved, which would probably go into the greeting card thread after I collect my thoughts.
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
BKM said:
El Guapo: You have a fascinating collection of opinions on major issues. Nobody could ever accuse you of blindly following one "side." (That's a compliment, btw)
BKM
Thanks. :)

Dan
I see many of your points. I believe that abortions as a result of rape, incest, and to save the life of the mother are COMPLETELY Moral. No problems for me there. And I can give you the long train of thought that brought me to that position, but you don't have the time nor do I.

As to passing laws that violate the Constitution; it is truly in the eye of the beholder isn't it? Law is not a firm science like physics. Law is whatever the law wranglers want us to believe it is. It is shifting ground and the main battlefield of politics. Thus it is not a stable thing over time. It shifts like the desert. Thus, I tend to hang my hat and ethics on Natural Rights. They don't change. Spooky - he just wrote something nutty!!

Once the Constitution was redefined by the revisionists to outlaw a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment I gave up on the US Supreme Court. Its all winks and nods.
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,463
Points
29
EG: You need to go BEYOND Natural Rights and join the Natural Law Party. There are some Iowa planners here who could give you full information on them. They even LIKE urban planning-of a sort :)
 

giff57

Corn Burning Fool
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
5,436
Points
33
BKM said:
EG: You need to go BEYOND Natural Rights and join the Natural Law Party. There are some Iowa planners here who could give you full information on them. They even LIKE urban planning-of a sort :)

Yes, I could hook you up.
 
Top