Mike Pence's lady problem

[Hohn]

Most people I know are upset because true conservatives don't like silly, unenforceable laws that were passed strictly to pander to one segment of the electorate. This law will have no effect whatsoever on abortion. It's a feel good law for low information voters.

I wish you were wrong. But the reality is that the "R" side has it goodly share of lo-fo types that see these symbolic and useless expenses of political capital as actual accomplishments.

Heck, with the national RNC making "symbolic' repeals of Obamacare a million times, what do you expect? The "smart" ones in DC have indicated that empty symbolism is where it's at.

 

[jamil]

I disagree. One of the main purposes of law is to formally declare what you morals as a society are. EVERY LAW has a moral element to it.

And when the morals codified in law drift too far from those of the population, they tend to end up changed.

And society goes through a great upheaval as that change process unfolds.

The primary purpose of laws should be to protect individuals' rights. If the purpose of the law is to formerly declare society's morals, then you're only creating a system that regulates individuals behavior according to the whims of the people who make the laws.

 

[Twangbanger]

...Everytime we trust the Republicans with the small government car keys, we always find them steaming up the windows in the back of the car with the minister.

Now that's quote material, right there. I realize this is the kiss of death, but I'm going to have to rep you for that.

(This is going to hurt me almost as much as it's going to hurt you ).

One of you Site Members better immortalize this one, pronto.

 

[OutdoorDad]

I disagree. One of the main purposes of law is to formally declare what you morals as a society are. EVERY LAW has a moral element to it.

And when the morals codified in law drift too far from those of the population, they tend to end up changed.

And society goes through a great upheaval as that change process unfolds.

there is a law in Indianapolis that says the fence in the front of my home cannot be higher than 4'. And the privacy fence on the sides and back of my property cannot exceed 6'.

The moral objective of that legislation is lost on me.

 

[Trigger Time]

I was told at the BoD meeting in Greenwood by someone who is in the loop in Indianapolis (Chamber of Commerce, right country club, right alumni club, right neighborhood, inter alia) that Constitutional Carry was not pushed as Bosma "wanted to avoid the controversy".

Well, now, how's that plan working out for him?

They needed us and they threw us away and set themselves on fire, yet again.

Everytime we trust the Republicans with the small government car keys, we always find them steaming up the windows in the back of the car with the minister.

Brian Bosma is a damn idiot that shouldn't be leading even a girls scout troop.

 

[Cerberus]

Has anyone other than the lawyers amongst us read the bill?
https://iga.in.gov/static-documents/5/1/b/5/51b52d50/HB1337.05.ENRS.pdf

And any woman that would discuss her period with strangers, is no lady.

 

[Jludo]

I disagree. One of the main purposes of law is to formally declare what you morals as a society are. EVERY LAW has a moral element to it.

And when the morals codified in law drift too far from those of the population, they tend to end up changed.

And society goes through a great upheaval as that change process unfolds.

Morality as it relates to your relationship to others. Can't hurt anyone else, steal from them, etc. Murder is immoral as it negatively effects someone else. The difficult part about abortion is the debate over when a person becomes a person. That's what it all boils down to and I don't see that ever being resolved.

Things like gay marriage, drug legalization etc. are examples of morality that cannot and should not be legislated.

 

[Leadeye]

The primary purpose of laws should be to protect individuals' rights. If the purpose of the law is to formerly declare society's morals, then you're only creating a system that regulates individuals behavior according to the whims of the people who make the laws.

Laws and their interpretation today are sold for the purpose of making those who get the most benefit from them richer.

Always follow the money

 

[Jludo]

Laws and their interpretation today are sold for the purpose of making those who get the most benefit from them richer.

Always follow the money

Yea that greedy abortion doctor lobby.
Some laws, though few and far between, arent on the books for the financial benefit of anyone.

 

[Spear Dane]

It is equally easy to ask exactly why the pro-abortionists (a far more accurate word than their cutesy little euphemism) have their panties in such twist over this.

I'm not one and I don't like this. It's bs. It's far too intrusive, it's largely unenforceable, the idiots will spend OUR MONEY trying to defend an indefensible law and it blocks legitimate collection of fetal tissue for research into stem cells, which WILL revolutionize health care and save or transform lives, including yours or someone you love/know. Anything else?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Now that's quote material, right there. I realize this is the kiss of death, but I'm going to have to rep you for that.

(This is going to hurt me almost as much as it's going to hurt you ).

One of you Site Members better immortalize this one, pronto.

Can't we just have our smaller government without the Republicans throwing in the side of Jesus?

 

[Jludo]

Can't we just have our smaller government without the Republicans throwing in the side of Jesus?

That'd be a libertarian and no they aren't electable. Welfare state or Christian theocracy, pick your poison

 

[jamil]

That'd be a libertarian and no they aren't electable. Welfare state or Christian theocracy, pick your poison

So what? You tryin' to say the two-party system sucks or somethin'.

 

[bigbore]

Pence has been a big disappointment. Between this unenforcible abortion law and the whole RFRA mess Pence has shown he doesn't know how to pick a battle let alone win one.

 

[Libertarian01]

That'd be a libertarian and no they aren't electable. Welfare state or Christian theocracy, pick your poison

Ya know... In my lifetime I have now seen the election of the first black president, the social support of gay marriage, the decriminalization of marijuana by several states.

While I do agree that today my party has some work to do, I believe that in my hopeful lifetime the above statement will be turned on its head.

More and more people are showing massive frustration with their own parties as evidenced by the Trump and Sanders supporters. I believe there is hope for us, if not today then in a few tomorrows.

Regards,

Doug

PS - On the political note there are Libertarians that are both prochoice and prolife. However, we ALL agree that there should be no government funding for abortion overall.

 

[MisterChester]

Ya know... In my lifetime I have now seen the election of the first black president, the social support of gay marriage, the decriminalization of marijuana by several states.

While I do agree that today my party has some work to do, I believe that in my hopeful lifetime the above statement will be turned on its head.

More and more people are showing massive frustration with their own parties as evidenced by the Trump and Sanders supporters. I believe there is hope for us, if not today then in a few tomorrows.

Regards,

Doug

PS - On the political note there are Libertarians that are both prochoice and prolife. However, we ALL agree that there should be no government funding for abortion overall.

Have you ever watched pro-life and pro-choice libertarians debate the subject? Must say its one of the most interesting debates I've seen.

 

[jamil]

Ya know... In my lifetime I have now seen the election of the first black president, the social support of gay marriage, the decriminalization of marijuana by several states.

While I do agree that today my party has some work to do, I believe that in my hopeful lifetime the above statement ["Welfare state or Christian theocracy, pick your poison"] will be turned on its head.

More and more people are showing massive frustration with their own parties as evidenced by the Trump and Sanders supporters. I believe there is hope for us, if not today then in a few tomorrows.

Regards,

Doug

PS - On the political note there are Libertarians that are both prochoice and prolife. However, we ALL agree that there should be no government funding for abortion overall.

Doug, if it happens in your lifetime, I doubt the statement that replaces it will be much better. Because as long as we have a two-party system, where the entire political spectrum is primarily distributed into just two pigeon holes, the bases of both will always deliver candidates that represent two widely unpopular views. And most people will have to chose between the lest of two evils.

Until people can feel free to vote for the person who best represents their interests and values, it doesn't matter of the bases of both parties change ownership. Tomorrow's evils won't necessarily be the same Christian Theocracy vs Welfare state choices. They'll just be different.

Have you ever watched pro-life and pro-choice libertarians debate the subject? Must say its one of the most interesting debates I've seen.

Any links? I wouldn't mind seeing that.

 

[HoughMade]

.... which WILL revolutionize health care and save or transform lives, including yours or someone you love/know. Anything else?

Been waiting 20+ years for the amazing break thoughs from fetal stem cells. Adult stem cells have been quite useful.

 

[JTScribe]

It is equally easy to ask exactly why the pro-abortionists (a far more accurate word than their cutesy little euphemism) have their panties in such twist over this.

I asked my wife the same thing last night.

Is it because they like sex-selective abortions?

Killing kids with Downs?

Or the requirement to cremate remains so they can't profit on the parts?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Us gun folks could learn a thing or two from the pro-abortion and homosexual activists. I think if us gun owners could muster this level of "activism", we'd have constitutional carry, school carry, etc. done a long time ago.