Right wingers are ALL for states' rights.......except......

[IsaacNewton]

I think the count now is around 200,000 jobs already created by the legal marijuana movement in all the various states and that is set to sky rocket as legal MJ businesses get up and running. The coal industry employees maybe 70,000 people total.

Republicans are job killers.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

But they sure sing a different tune when it comes to protecting voter rights .

What tune is that? Only citizens are allowed to vote. Only non-felons are allowed to purchase a gun. Both require (and should require) ID. What's wrong with that?

 

[jillian]

and the rules as to when they can do that have been pretty clear for a very long time. what they don't get to do is grant fewer rights in the states than the federal government grants. that's the rule.... or it has been until the federal bench was perverted by rightwingnut religious zealots.

So, do you have a problem with California having stricter gun laws than the Federal Government?

it doesn't. the only thing Heller prohibits is a total ban.

what is a problem are loonies who don't regulate guns allowing their guns into my state.

you're not one of those people who thinks someone crazy should be allowed to have a gun, are you? or a child molestor? domestic abuser? felon?

They are gun nuts . They’d have guns available out of vending machines . Gun rights!!!

But they sure sing a different tune when it comes to protecting voter rights .

or women's right to reproductive choice

or the right to be free of religion

or freedom of the press

or the 4th amendment

 

[jillian]

it doesn't. the only thing Heller prohibits is a total ban.

Apply that to other issues.

for instance?

still waiting.....

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

or women's right to reproductive choice

or the right to be free of religion

or freedom of the press

or the 4th amendment

Hey, not me. I am all for each of those.

 

[jillian]

or women's right to reproductive choice

or the right to be free of religion

or freedom of the press

or the 4th amendment

Hey, not me. I am all for each of those.

so again, to what do you think I'm not applying the rules as to when the fed law takes precedence

 

[Timmy]

But they sure sing a different tune when it comes to protecting voter rights .

What tune is that. Only citizens are allowed to vote. Only non-felons are allowed to purchase a gun. Both require (and should require) ID. What's wrong with that?

There are lots of ways to ID yourself . Every state requires ID in some form .Cons want to restrict ID to block legit voters .

Why would you not accept an old mans expired drivers license as an ID? He’s given up driving and doesn’t need a new ID.

Cons would refuse him the right to vote .

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

still waiting.....

Well, I don't agree with this, but the only thing Roe v. Wade (sort of) prohibits is a ban in the first 2 trimesters, right?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

There are lots of ways to ID yourself . Every state requires ID in some form .Cons want to restrict ID to block legit voters .

Why would you not accept an old mans expired drivers license as an ID? He’s given up driving and doesn’t need a new ID.

Cons would refuse him the right to vote .

Not me. I want everyone who has a right to vote, to vote. The expired ID refusal is complete bullshit. No one should be turned away for that.

 

[Timmy]

There are lots of ways to ID yourself . Every state requires ID in some form .Cons want to restrict ID to block legit voters .

Why would you not accept an old mans expired drivers license as an ID? He’s given up driving and doesn’t need a new ID.

Cons would refuse him the right to vote .

Not me. I want everyone who has a right to vote, to vote. The expired ID refusal is complete bullshit. No one should be turned away for that.

But that’s what happens . They are not “voter ID laws “ they are reallly “specific state issued voter ID laws” .

For example , a picture students ID from that states public university is not good enough to ID a voter!? Why not?

 

[jillian]

still waiting.....

Well, I don't agree with this, but the only thing Roe v. Wade (sort of) prohibits is a ban in the first 2 trimesters, right?

and yet red states have set up circumstances where there are no clinics available, where they make women wait, where they create obstacles and where they allow women to be harassed and abused when they avail themselves of their rights.

again, any state can give greater rights, but not less. states like Montana, north and South Dakota and Alabama and Texas have intentionally obstructed women.

 

[nat4900]

Or, he has some heavy private prison lobbyists riding his ass.

I'm sure that such is the case (Bootney, you have me :worried that you and I are agreeing....LOL)

Seriously, though, I have heard that many arrested undocumented aliens are NOT being sent back along the southern border......and I suspect that they are being detained a bit longer than usual PRECISELY to appease the private prison lobbyists' employers...........I hope that I'm wrong about this.

 

[nat4900]

How does a gun registry quash gun rights ?

Well, maybe some of these right wing gun owners don't want to be known as having a penchant for owning "pink" guns when they cross-dress?....lol

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

still waiting.....

Well, I don't agree with this, but the only thing Roe v. Wade (sort of) prohibits is a ban in the first 2 trimesters, right?

Wrong.

Roe is no longer guiding case law, Planned Parenthood v. Casey is, where the Court held that the states could not impose an undue burden on the right to privacy prior to viability.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

and the rules as to when they can do that have been pretty clear for a very long time. what they don't get to do is grant fewer rights in the states than the federal government grants. that's the rule.... or it has been until the federal bench was perverted by rightwingnut religious zealots.

So, do you have a problem with California having stricter gun laws than the Federal Government?

California’s gun laws conform with current Second Amendment jurisprudence, reflecting the will of the people of California – but conservatives disregard that will, and contest California’s Constitutional gun laws in Federal court.

Which would be fine if they were only consistent with what they perceive to be “states’ rights,” or the ‘will of the people.’

If the courts can invalidate a state’s gun laws because they are un-Constitutional, then conservatives should take no issue with the courts invalidating a state’s law prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying because such laws are likewise un-Constitutional.

But conservatives don’t.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Well, except when it comes to:

A woman's right to choose
Voting rights
Legalization of Marijuana
Drilling off-shore

(add your own "exceptions"...........)

Call it abortion rights, stop trying to soft sell it.
How does having to present an easily obtainable ID quash voting rights?
A lot of people on the right support state level regulation.
Doesn't a States control of waters end a certain distance off their shore, and the feds control the rest? hasn't it always been this way?

The consistently ignorant conservative.

There is no ‘right’ to an abortion; there is a right to privacy, however. And states violate that right to privacy when they seek to compel a woman to give birth against her will.

Requiring a certain type of ID to vote violates the right to vote because the citizen has already demonstrated he is eligible to vote when he first registered – requiring a registered, eligible voter to produce a form of ID he may not possess, or is unable to obtain, manifests as an undue burden to the right to vote.

Voter ID laws are partisan, enacted in bad faith by Republicans, and completely devoid of merit.

 

[martybegan]

Well, except when it comes to:

A woman's right to choose
Voting rights
Legalization of Marijuana
Drilling off-shore

(add your own "exceptions"...........)

Call it abortion rights, stop trying to soft sell it.
How does having to present an easily obtainable ID quash voting rights?
A lot of people on the right support state level regulation.
Doesn't a States control of waters end a certain distance off their shore, and the feds control the rest? hasn't it always been this way?

It is called the "right to choose" because the person has a choice of two alternatives: abort the pregnancy or carry it to term. I have a good friend who has had diabetes all her life, got pregnant in spite of an IUD, and decided to go ahead with the pregnancy despite her doctors' dire warnings.This caused a very dangerous situation both for her and the fetus, and she was quite torn up physically. She said that she has not regretted her decision, but that it wasn't for everybody. People make these choices based on their own thoughts and beliefs. They may consult with someone whose opinion they respect. This is not a matter for government.

Still nothing but words to make killing something more palatable.

I personally don't care about abortion, but I can't stand people using words to make bad things seem better.

I also hate Roe because its terrible constitutional law.

 

[martybegan]

Well, except when it comes to:

A woman's right to choose
Voting rights
Legalization of Marijuana
Drilling off-shore

(add your own "exceptions"...........)

Call it abortion rights, stop trying to soft sell it.
How does having to present an easily obtainable ID quash voting rights?
A lot of people on the right support state level regulation.
Doesn't a States control of waters end a certain distance off their shore, and the feds control the rest? hasn't it always been this way?

How does a gun registry quash gun rights ?

because that is never the end step with gun grabbers.

 

[martybegan]

Well, except when it comes to:

A woman's right to choose
Voting rights
Legalization of Marijuana
Drilling off-shore

(add your own "exceptions"...........)

Call it abortion rights, stop trying to soft sell it.
How does having to present an easily obtainable ID quash voting rights?
A lot of people on the right support state level regulation.
Doesn't a States control of waters end a certain distance off their shore, and the feds control the rest? hasn't it always been this way?

How does a gun registry quash gun rights ?

shhhhh.... the NRA tells them what to say.

Coming from a progressive lemming such as yourself, that is comical.

 

[martybegan]

Well, except when it comes to:

A woman's right to choose
Voting rights
Legalization of Marijuana
Drilling off-shore

(add your own "exceptions"...........)

Call it abortion rights, stop trying to soft sell it.
How does having to present an easily obtainable ID quash voting rights?
A lot of people on the right support state level regulation.
Doesn't a States control of waters end a certain distance off their shore, and the feds control the rest? hasn't it always been this way?

The consistently ignorant conservative.

There is no ‘right’ to an abortion; there is a right to privacy, however. And states violate that right to privacy when they seek to compel a woman to give birth against her will.

Requiring a certain type of ID to vote violates the right to vote because the citizen has already demonstrated he is eligible to vote when he first registered – requiring a registered, eligible voter to produce a form of ID he may not possess, or is unable to obtain, manifests as an undue burden to the right to vote.

Voter ID laws are partisan, enacted in bad faith by Republicans, and completely devoid of merit.

Please show me the words "privacy" in the constitution.

It violates nothing, there is no mention of registration processes in the constitution.