Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Joe Biden Presidency thread *Please read OP - Threadbanned Users Added 4/5/21*

Options
1…457458460462463…683

Comments

  • Options
    #13772
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,768 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247053#Comment_119247053

    1 is mentioned in the constitution there, the other is not.


    While you certainly no more about the American constitution than a US supreme court Judge with decades of practice, on this you are wrong.


    Whether you support abortion or not, it is disingenuous to conflate the 2 in that framework they have



  • Options
    #13773
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247205#Comment_119247205

    Show me where the right allowing any idiot the right to carry guns on the street is in the Constitution, please.



  • Options
    #13774
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,768 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247236#Comment_119247236

    The right to bear arms.


    I don't like it but it is there



  • Options
    #13775
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247267#Comment_119247267

    If you're going to quote the 2nd Amendment, do it properly instead of twisting it.

    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

    A 'well regulated Militia' =/= any Tom, Dick or Harry, but because the Constitution is so vague, it leaves it open for these interpretation.

    Answer me this, do you think women should be allowed to have their liberties deprived?



  • Options
    #13776
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,768 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247295#Comment_119247295

    It is mentioned so the interpretation that some bollox can walk down the street with an assault rifle is there. Whether we like it or not or whether others take that legal position on it or not.


    Abortion is not mentioned in any way.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #13777
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247353#Comment_119247353

    Assault rifle isn't mentioned in the Constitution at all, so why do you get to interpret it that way?

    Abortion isn't mentioned, but the right to not have laws which deprive you of life, liberty or property without due process is.

    Are you saying women shouldn't be allowed access to safe, informed medical healthcare? That goes against the 14th Amendment. That is literally the definition of depriving them of their liberties.

    If you read Alito's opinion he doesn't even dispute this. His reasoning is essentially that abortions weren't happening when the 14th Amendment was written, so it doesn't count. It's absolute bollocks and there isn't anybody here who can sit up and defend how backwards that is.

    Looks like you only want to interpret the Constitution when it suits you, when really you're completely out of your depth. You say abortion isn't mentioned in the Constitution but you say that it can be interpreted to mean that 'assault rifles' (as you said) can be carried on the streets by any prick.



  • Options
    #13778
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,768 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247382#Comment_119247382

    Assault rifles are arms, change it for hunting rifles. It can be interpreted that way. It has been for decades now, 40 years ago, it wasn't.


    Due process refers to legal recourse.


    The Judges just said that it is not an issue that can be decided at a federal level, it's a State issue. That is the legal framework they have to work within.


    Some of those Judges may not like that but they are not there to like things.


    Either amend the constitution or change at State level.


    They are the legal options.



    You can suppose all you want, not like it and be outraged but what is your practical, real world plan to change it.



  • Options
    #13779
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247406#Comment_119247406

    And abortion is healthcare. Healthcare is a liberty.

    Are you getting this yet or do I need to spell it out to you more?



  • Options
    #13780
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,768 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247410#Comment_119247410

    Health care is not a liberty. Maybe it should be..


    In some cases abortion can be on medical grounds, in general it is not. Again though, it is hard to see a legal argument on that grounds.



  • Options
    #13781
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,163 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247419#Comment_119247419

    The original SCOTUS decision was correct.


    The difference this time is that the court has been packed with Christian wing nuts. It’s been a concerted effort by the fundamentalists for the last 40 years to get the right people in place.


    Its absolutely nothing to do with the constitution. It’s a battle of ideas. The nut jobs won.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #13782
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,305 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Assault rifle isn't mentioned in the Constitution at all, so why do you get to interpret it that way?

    Per SCOTUS: "Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment . We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997) , and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001) , the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding."

    If you read Alito's opinion he doesn't even dispute this. His reasoning is essentially that abortions weren't happening when the 14th Amendment was written, so it doesn't count. It's absolute bollocks and there isn't anybody here who can sit up and defend how backwards that is.

    I agree that Alito's methodology doesn't seem fantastic, though in this case I've not read it yet. That doesn't make the original case's methodology any better.

    Interestingly, the ruling strongly in favour of firearms rights does open up a possibility for abortion legislation. There are more than a couple of us who are in favour of both firearms rights and abortion. Now that SCOTUS has put a pretty solid ruling in place on guns, there is less to fear from electing a pro-abortion legislator (At state or federal level), who may also be anti-gun.

    Post edited by Manic Moran on


  • Options
    #13783
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,330 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119248526#Comment_119248526

    Not at all sure how it’s Bidens fault he never had a pick for the Supreme Court before KBJ. And she’s replacing a retiree at the end of the session, so she’s not even seated yet.



  • Options
    #13784
    Christy42
    Registered Users Posts: 7,948 ✭✭✭Christy42


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119248573#Comment_119248573

    I feel like the post is look how much the right have f'd things up even with Biden as president.



  • Options
    #13785
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,254 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119248526#Comment_119248526

    Tf is the Brandon presidency?

    Your level of disingenuity and misinformation can be tracked along the rate of inflation. What did Biden have to do with said rate of inflation? Did he cause that same rate rise here? Did Biden invade Ukraine? Did Biden appoint those Conservative judges to the supreme Court?

    Please supply answers to those questions



  • Options
    #13786
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119248287#Comment_119248287

    So the SCOTUS can say the 2A can include any and all arms since then, but this doesn’t apply to the 14A?

    You just proved my point. They’re making it up as they go along to suit their own views.



  • Options
    #13787
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,330 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119248586#Comment_119248586

    That’s sort of the reality of the situation.

    Part of Trumps agenda was to fill those seats and part of his original expectation was that they would give him the authority to stay in power. The best he got was Clarence Thomas voting to block evidence that implicated his wife.

    IMHO, the think tanks and dark money that hand selected them, paid off their debts and paid for the votes to get them on the bench, was never interested in Trump. In 2016, Trump was always the means to the end: getting a Republican to name the next justice (or three). That calculus was going to happen with or without Trump, before the primaries were even decided. The ultimate goal was always overturning roe and installing Republican theocrats. No way were they gonna go down with Trumps sinking ship, it was all about yesterdays ruling 49 years in the making.



  • Options
    #13788
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,163 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119248526#Comment_119248526

    Abortion: Trumps picks on the SCOTUS

    Inflation: The result of inflationary economics, turbo charges by the Trump tax cut.

    War in Europe: Putin invaded after 4 years of appeasement.


    LOL my arse.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #13789
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,305 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119248625#Comment_119248625

    That's a bit of a leap, though. Defining what constitutes an arm, a tangible object, is a much less controversial question that defining intangibles on a subject on which the population has some very divided opinions.

    That's why the courts tend to defer to legislatures on those intangibles, if the legislators do their jobs and actually make those decisions.



  • Options
    #13790
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,425 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247443#Comment_119247443

    That'd be RCC right-wing zealots - Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Alito, Roberts, Barrett. If there were any doubt, look at the crowing concurrence from Thomas and what he wants to see repealed. "Maybe" Gorsuch is "just" an evangelical but he's fairly sly about his religious beliefs.


    At least next time they'll be able to skip the confirmation hearings. Doesn't matter what a candidate says.



  • Options
    #13791
    AbusesToilets
    Registered Users Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119246823#Comment_119246823

    This view conveniently ignores the unrepresentative nature of Congress and many State assemblies, due to disenfranchisement efforts, and the Courts role in creating that.

    Part of a continuous effort to erode democratic protections and entrench minority rule at State and National level.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #13792
    eire4
    Registered Users Posts: 6,664 ✭✭✭eire4


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119253363#Comment_119253363

    It also ignores the fact that when the constitution was written in the 18th century women were essentially second class citizens. They could not vote and had all but zero direct input into the writing of the constitution.



  • Options
    #13793
    landofthetree
    Registered Users Posts: 2,331 ✭✭✭landofthetree


    https://www.rte.ie/news/2022/0628/1307204-texas-migrants/


    Biden should resign immediately. He promised to fix the border problem. He promised a visa to everyone who wanted to live in America.



  • Options
    #13794
    extra gravy
    Registered Users Posts: 22,625 ✭✭✭✭extra gravy


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119260396#Comment_119260396

    Were you calling on his predecessor to resign when this was happening on his watch? I thought the borders were wide open thanks to Joe, why would people need to be smuggled?



  • Options
    #13795
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,163 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119260396#Comment_119260396

    Biden promised no such thing.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #13796
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,254 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119260531#Comment_119260531

    If only those posters applied their own forgetfulness of recent past events as a measure of dementia as they did to Biden



  • Options
    #13797
    Dyr
    Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119260531#Comment_119260531

    "But...But...Trump"



  • Options
    #13798
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,254 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119262595#Comment_119262595

    But.... but... comparison with closest example



  • Options
    #13799
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,330 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Yes I’m sure somehow, some way, building that wall would have prevented the trucks from just coming through the port of entry.



  • Options
    #13800
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,163 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119262755#Comment_119262755

    Ultimately, yes. But how do you measure how well he’s doing? Curious.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #13801
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,305 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119262873#Comment_119262873

    I strongly suspect that the X-ray machines which every vehicle (as of 2021) is supposed to go through is likely to have picked up on the truck if it were loaded with people. This was almost certainly a bunch of folks who had made it across the border, and boarded the truck on the US side.

    image.png


    Untitled Image




Advertisement