Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (235884)	5/11/2022 10:14:50 AM
From: Sam	Respond to of 356340

He is being intentionally stupid. Or maybe unintentionally so--I don't know. Only he knows for sure.... The intent is obvious. Back in Jim Crow days, there were all sorts of laws like that. They didn't prevent black Americans from voting: they just had a literacy test--which blacks never passed, not because they couldn't read but because the clerk declared it so no matter how well they read. Or a poll tax. Or a jar of jelly beans. Southerners are experienced in this kind of "law". re: Allowing a private citizen to sue someone isn’t a state travel ban. If you're being literal about it, sure. I have see no one remotely propose stopping women from leaving the state for an abortion or any other purpose. That would not be practicable. But it would be effectively a travel ban if you either prosecuted the women when they returned home or could punish an out of state provider such that they would no longer offer their services.

To: Lane3 who wrote (235884)	5/11/2022 1:32:19 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 356340

>> NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A Louisiana House committee voted Wednesday to make abortion a crime of homicide for which a woman ending her pregnancy could be charged, along with anyone helping her. You understand this is one wackjob proposing an idiotic law, right? Even one of the nitwits who voted for it admitted the law could not stand scrutiny. People do this shit. democrats do it on other topics. Abortion will continue to be widely available even if some states outlaw it. Excitable nutjobs need to take a few deep breaths.

To: Lane3 who wrote (235884)	5/11/2022 1:59:41 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 356340

>> But it would be effectively a travel ban if you either prosecuted the women when they returned home or could punish an out of state provider such that they would no longer offer their services. As was the case with Sam's claim, I think you would have to classify your suggestion as extremely speculative, and stop-gap in nature. Over time, it is necessary that we have reasonable state laws that encourage women to make good choices before engaging in sexual activity, and if an unwanted pregnancy may have occurred, get to a drug store immediately thereafter. Permitting unrestricted abortion is not the way you encourage that behavior. Sometimes I think abortion is something you want in the law not because it is essential but because it is a talking point or something you can claim as your own. It is a W. The problem is that it is counterproductive law. Aside from the tenuous legal foundation on which it was apparently built to begin with. We need for women to move forward and avail themselves of contraceptives. Like grownups. You [collectively] seem to want to keep women "strung out" on this archaic, barbaric surgical procedure that literally became law when the preferred technology for dealing with breast cancer was radical mastectomy for millions of women. It is stupid. Medical technology has advanced. There are better, cheaper, less invasive techniques available today. Why don't you want to encourage their use?