There is STILL no State that seeks to ban contraceptives.

[DontBeStupid]

Yes, in fact. I can.

ObamaCare.

Ah. So is that why so many judges have found it Constitutional.

Also found UNConstitutional... You seem to have forgotten that...

Typical...

"So many" have found it Constitutional.

"A couple" have not.

There's a difference there.

 

[Dr.House]

Ah. So is that why so many judges have found it Constitutional.

Also found UNConstitutional... You seem to have forgotten that...

Typical...

"So many" have found it Constitutional.

"A couple" have not.

There's a difference there.

Last I heard it was even on rulings... Got evidence to the contrary?

Doesn't matter really, once it was ruled unconstitutional, those states that participated in that particular lawsuit are legally allowed to say "**** you" to 0bamacare...

Facts, son...

 

[Maple]

There is STILL no State that seeks to ban contraceptives.

Yeah. It's obvious.

Yeah. It undercuts the current liberal Democrat Parody talking pointless.

But yeah. It's still true.

No state does ban contraception, but Santorum says it's up to the states to do it. I hardly think so as it tramps all over individual rights.

 

[Greenbeard]

Doesn't matter really, once it was ruled unconstitutional, those states that participated in that particular lawsuit are legally allowed to say "**** you" to 0bamacare...

The states' "victory" in the Eleventh Circuit found the individual mandate to be unconstitutional but severable. The law still stands.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It doesn't matter--we have a GOP candidate in Rick Santorum that is continually stating the the U.S. Supreme Court was wrong in it's 1965 decision to slap down the Connecticut statute that did ban contraceptives.

This.

"Conservatives" talk a lot about being small government. How any of them can support a guy who thinks married couples should not be allowed to plan when they have kids is beyond me.

How any liberal idiot can support the incumbent who daily tramples upon what the Constitution plainly DOES say is beyond all reasonable people.

Non Sequitur literary device alert.

 

[PredFan]

No. I'm arguing that the Federal government, regardless of what branch, does not have the authority to prevent the States from legislating in areas that the Constitution doesn't prevent them from legislating in.

I really dont think the argument is that difficult to comprehend.

So ... you think our Federal Constitution, nor any State's Constitution, does not prevent any state legislature from banning contraception within that state?

I havent mentioned any state constitutions. But the Federal government has not been granted any authority concerning birth control. The 10th Amendment States that any authority not given to the Federal government is retained by the States. Therefore, there is nothing unconstitutional in the US Constitution about a State banning birth control.

Now a State Constitution, might explicitly ban it or allow it. Ive specifically stated that multiple times. Ive also stated multiple times that I no of no person or state that would support banning birth control. Nor would I. I think it would be an incredibly stupid law. But just because a law is stupid, doesn't mean it's unconstitutional at the Federal level.

Are we really that ignorant of the fact that we have a government that divides power between the Federal and State governments? I thought this was common knowledge. Why on earth is it so offensive to acknowledge that the Federal Government has no say and it's up to the States? Why is it so offensive to expect people to participate in their local government and support good legislation and oppose bad legislation?

You really want to abrogate your rights to make decisions to some unelected judges?

There it is right there.

 

[PredFan]

There is STILL no State that seeks to ban contraceptives.

Yeah. It's obvious.

Yeah. It undercuts the current liberal Democrat Parody talking pointless.

But yeah. It's still true.

No state does ban contraception, but Santorum says it's up to the states to do it. I hardly think so as it tramps all over individual rights.

What right is that? What part of the Constitution gives anyone the right to contraception?

Go ahead and look.

 

[Greenbeard]

What right is that? What part of the Constitution gives anyone the right to contraception?

Go ahead and look.

A "right to contraception" is not the right you're looking for here.

Griswold v. Connecticut

 

[teapartysamurai]

We get it. This is why Stephanopolus peppered Romney with the "can states ban birth control."

This is why Obama is trying to force free birth control on Catholic Hospitals and how to force insurance companies to pay for it.

You want to convince people with the fictitious fear that Republicans want to ban birth control.

So, here's the thing.

Give me ONE EXAMPLE of a Republican Gov, President, Congressman, etc, EVER banning birth control and you will have your argument.

Until then, this is all just BS fear mongering by a desperate president who can't run on his own record, because his own record SUCKS.

So, bring it. Give us the examples.

My guess is, there will stuipid quotes of Santorum from six years ago. There will be NO EXAMPLES OF Republicans trying to ban birth control. There will be total silence. OR there will be just the usual sputtering from outraged liberals because no one should ever dare pin them down on their total preposterous lies.

Bring it libs. I'm waiting. I know I won't get a straight answer.

PS, ABORTION IS NOT BIRTH CONTROL. That's infanticide. There are plenty of methods of birth control that prevents conception.

You know why you libs have changed the subject to birth control. You have lost the argument on abortion. Most people are against it now.

You started the subject, so don't change it, because someone's pinned you down on it. BIRTH CONTROL. Give us the examples.

I'm waiting, but I won't hold my breathe.

 

[Liability]

This.

"Conservatives" talk a lot about being small government. How any of them can support a guy who thinks married couples should not be allowed to plan when they have kids is beyond me.

How any liberal idiot can support the incumbent who daily tramples upon what the Constitution plainly DOES say is beyond all reasonable people.

Non Sequitur literary device alert.

Nice of Wry Catcher to announce his presence.

 

[Liability]

There is STILL no State that seeks to ban contraceptives.

Yeah. It's obvious.

Yeah. It undercuts the current liberal Democrat Parody talking pointless.

But yeah. It's still true.

No state does ban contraception, but Santorum says it's up to the states to do it. I hardly think so as it tramps all over individual rights.

PARTIAL Credit.

IT is correct to say that no State does it.

It would be more fully correct to note that there is no evidence that ANY state even wants to do so.

There is more than one view on the issue of the alleged Constitutional "right to privacy."

Mocking Santorum's views may be fun, but standing alone it doesn't constitute a refutation of what he actually has said.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

There is STILL no State that seeks to ban contraceptives.

No there isn't. It's just a ruse to try and distract people from the fact that Obama is a shitty president and can't run on his record so the Democratic Party has to manufacture emotional issues to get people to support them again.

 

[Liability]

There is STILL no State that seeks to ban contraceptives.

No there isn't. It's just a ruse to try and distract people from the fact that Obama is a shitty president and can't run on his record so the Democratic Party has to manufacture emotional issues to get people to support them again.

Agreed.

The incumbent HAS been a shitty President; and this caterwauling about a hypothetical issue -- one that has no basis for concern in reality -- is obviously just a liberal Democrat pretext to steer the conversation toward some crap which they hope they can use as propaganda fodder.

 

[Oddball]

No. I'm arguing that the Federal government, regardless of what branch, does not have the authority to prevent the States from legislating in areas that the Constitution doesn't prevent them from legislating in.

I really dont think the argument is that difficult to comprehend.

So ... you think our Federal Constitution, nor any State's Constitution, does not prevent any state legislature from banning contraception within that state?

I havent mentioned any state constitutions. But the Federal government has not been granted any authority concerning birth control. The 10th Amendment States that any authority not given to the Federal government is retained by the States. Therefore, there is nothing unconstitutional in the US Constitution about a State banning birth control.

Now a State Constitution, might explicitly ban it or allow it. Ive specifically stated that multiple times. Ive also stated multiple times that I no of no person or state that would support banning birth control. Nor would I. I think it would be an incredibly stupid law. But just because a law is stupid, doesn't mean it's unconstitutional at the Federal level.

Are we really that ignorant of the fact that we have a government that divides power between the Federal and State governments? I thought this was common knowledge. Why on earth is it so offensive to acknowledge that the Federal Government has no say and it's up to the States? Why is it so offensive to expect people to participate in their local government and support good legislation and oppose bad legislation?

You really want to abrogate your rights to make decisions to some unelected judges?

Bingo.

We have no federal alcohol prohibition, yet still have dry counties scattered about the several states.

 

[Liability]

See, the thing is about that, you can't point to one single thing Obama has done or said that "tramples upon what the Constitution plainly DOES say".

Whereas with Santorum, he can't shut up about how few rights he thinks women have!

Yes, in fact. I can.

ObamaCare.

Ah. So is that why so many judges have found it Constitutional.

and others have not.

And no matter what some lower Court judges have said, the matter has not yet reached the SCOTUS.

In the meanwhile, maybe YOU need to have some judge tell you when a law violates the Constitution.

Not everyone is so handicapped.

But I agree, you ARE indeed