6 ms·

We have different states so people can agree to disagree. That's the whole point behind the "United States." The alternative to this is a further breakdown of A

by usrn 4y ago

We have different states so people can agree to disagree. That's the whole point behind the "United States." The alternative to this is a further breakdown of American politics. EDIT: I'm out of quota, here's my reply: We're disagreeing on the interpretation of human rights. You can't just assert that your interpretation is axiomatically right and the opposition can't possibly disagree with you, that's not how any of this works. We're arguing that you want to make murder legal, you can't just assert that it's not murder axiomatically. That's not a reasonable argument. Furthermore sodomy and immigration aren't enumerated in the Bill of Rights, I'm not sure where you got the idea that they were. This isn't a subversion of the Supreme court, this is it doing its job.

olliej 4y ago
You don't get to have differences of opinion as to who counts as a human deserving of equal rights. That's part of the reason for the Federal constitution and Bill of Rights taking precedence over state claims. The fact that conservative states have a stated goal of removing rights from women, PoC, LGBTQ, and immigrants in the US is what makes their intentional subversion of the Supreme Court so horrific.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  > The fact that conservative states have a stated goal of removing rights from women, PoC, LGBTQ, and immigrants in the US is what makes their intentional subversion of the Supreme Court so horrific. I’m no great fan of conservative politics, but this has no basis in fact.
  - olliej 4y ago
    Um? The conservative states have spent the last 50+ years trying to remove women's rights, they've repeatedly created "voter id" laws designed to prevent PoC from being able to vote, they're already - today - passing laws to allow schools to discriminate against and even bully LGBT kids, and they have aggressively restricted freedom of immigrants whenever they are given the opportunity. Holding up the occasional example of a minority who's actually done well, doesn't somehow undo the intentional assault on rights of people. The intentional subversion of the Supreme Court is also very clear. They deliberately blocked confirmation hearings for almost a year, and then replaced 3 justices, including a liberal one in what 2 weeks? just before the election, with extremely conservative ones. The Supreme Court now consists of an array of extremely conservative justices who were chosen for the primary purpose of revoking Roe v Wade, and from the draft it appears also the marriage equality rulings too as well. We know that they were selected for these specific purposes, because they lied under oath during their confirmations.
    - throwaway894345 4y ago
      Caricatures don’t make for very compelling criticism.
  - jleyank 4y ago
    Err, Florida vs Disney? Don’t say gay law? Mods to education to prevent anything that causes distress?
jleyank 4y ago
The states are laboratories argument is revealed as bs when the supremes rule “yeah, but Alabama is correct”. Are the HN audience that much more conservative, or are the trolls out or is this just reveal that the rating system is unconstrained and the HN moderators are watching the fun?
- usrn 4y ago
  I don't know what you mean by "yeah Alabama is correct." SCOTUS haven't banned abortion, just delegated^ the decision. How ignorant of US politics and law are you? Also my position isn't an extreme one and when you act like it is you push "normal" people towards extremes. It's getting bad and you've got to stop if you truly value the things you say you do. ^"Delegation" isn't really the right word since all of the Federal Government's power is delegated from the states to begin with. The point is that SCOTUS has (rightly) pointed out that regulating abortion is not among the powers delegated to the Federal Government. I feel like that bit of nuance might be lost on many of the people I'm arguing with here though.
jleyank 4y ago
But murder is legal in the us - states have the death penalty. So you’re merely choosing the not quite logical position that suits your politics. And we can go all slippery slope. If killing a non viable fetus is murder are you going to be accused if you don’t provide assistance to a pregger in distress when you are able to at no risk to yourself? Are companies going to release any product that might cause anything to happen to said non viable fetus? That rules out alcohol, smoking, various drugs, …. No sports, violent rides, preggers are going to be damned near cocooned. And does this liability end at the instant of birth or does it carry on once birth has occurred? If you permit malnutrition, is this a legal risk?
- usrn 4y ago
  Capital punishment isn't murder and again that's a state level decision. Maybe do a bit of reading before deciding you have reached the ultimate understanding of law and morality.
  - Zigurd 4y ago
    As it is administered in the US, capital punishment has in fact been murder in many cases.
    - usrn 4y ago
      Regardless, both murder and capital punishment are state level issues.
throwaway543593 4y ago
"You can't just assert that black people deserve the same rights as white people axiomatically. That's not a reasonable argument."

by usrn 4y ago

olliej 4y ago

You don't get to have differences of opinion as to who counts as a human deserving of equal rights. That's part of the reason for the Federal constitution and Bill of Rights taking precedence over state claims. The fact that conservative states have a stated goal of removing rights from women, PoC, LGBTQ, and immigrants in the US is what makes their intentional subversion of the Supreme Court so horrific.

throwaway894345 4y ago
> The fact that conservative states have a stated goal of removing rights from women, PoC, LGBTQ, and immigrants in the US is what makes their intentional subversion of the Supreme Court so horrific. I’m no great fan of conservative politics, but this has no basis in fact.
- olliej 4y ago
  Um? The conservative states have spent the last 50+ years trying to remove women's rights, they've repeatedly created "voter id" laws designed to prevent PoC from being able to vote, they're already - today - passing laws to allow schools to discriminate against and even bully LGBT kids, and they have aggressively restricted freedom of immigrants whenever they are given the opportunity. Holding up the occasional example of a minority who's actually done well, doesn't somehow undo the intentional assault on rights of people. The intentional subversion of the Supreme Court is also very clear. They deliberately blocked confirmation hearings for almost a year, and then replaced 3 justices, including a liberal one in what 2 weeks? just before the election, with extremely conservative ones. The Supreme Court now consists of an array of extremely conservative justices who were chosen for the primary purpose of revoking Roe v Wade, and from the draft it appears also the marriage equality rulings too as well. We know that they were selected for these specific purposes, because they lied under oath during their confirmations.
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    Caricatures don’t make for very compelling criticism.
- jleyank 4y ago
  Err, Florida vs Disney? Don’t say gay law? Mods to education to prevent anything that causes distress?

jleyank 4y ago

The states are laboratories argument is revealed as bs when the supremes rule “yeah, but Alabama is correct”. Are the HN audience that much more conservative, or are the trolls out or is this just reveal that the rating system is unconstrained and the HN moderators are watching the fun?

usrn 4y ago
I don't know what you mean by "yeah Alabama is correct." SCOTUS haven't banned abortion, just delegated^ the decision. How ignorant of US politics and law are you? Also my position isn't an extreme one and when you act like it is you push "normal" people towards extremes. It's getting bad and you've got to stop if you truly value the things you say you do. ^"Delegation" isn't really the right word since all of the Federal Government's power is delegated from the states to begin with. The point is that SCOTUS has (rightly) pointed out that regulating abortion is not among the powers delegated to the Federal Government. I feel like that bit of nuance might be lost on many of the people I'm arguing with here though.

jleyank 4y ago

But murder is legal in the us - states have the death penalty. So you’re merely choosing the not quite logical position that suits your politics. And we can go all slippery slope. If killing a non viable fetus is murder are you going to be accused if you don’t provide assistance to a pregger in distress when you are able to at no risk to yourself? Are companies going to release any product that might cause anything to happen to said non viable fetus? That rules out alcohol, smoking, various drugs, …. No sports, violent rides, preggers are going to be damned near cocooned. And does this liability end at the instant of birth or does it carry on once birth has occurred? If you permit malnutrition, is this a legal risk?

usrn 4y ago
Capital punishment isn't murder and again that's a state level decision. Maybe do a bit of reading before deciding you have reached the ultimate understanding of law and morality.
- Zigurd 4y ago
  As it is administered in the US, capital punishment has in fact been murder in many cases.
  - usrn 4y ago
    Regardless, both murder and capital punishment are state level issues.

throwaway543593 4y ago

"You can't just assert that black people deserve the same rights as white people axiomatically. That's not a reasonable argument."