Milestones

[Loxuru]

Here is where I get confused...
Yesterday's ruling basically boiled down to there is nothing in the constitution that gives the right to have an abortion. I think the founding fathers would have been more likely rolling over in their graves when R vs. W. was handed down, not when it was rescinded. Don't quote me but I think the 10th amendment states that if the constitution does not allow the feds to do something it goes to the individual states to decide.

Now let me say yesterday's decision does NOT outlaw abortions but leaves it in the states control. I'm sure there will be politicians on both sides of the issue that will end up shooting their political foot off over that!!!

I get your point about the 10th amendment first. I read it that any authority that is not explicitely assigned to the federal government by the constitution, is state matter. That aspect is currently overshadowed by the discussion of who has authority over one's own body.

 

[thehangingtree]

DP69:

Your latest purge of words and twisted 'argements' proves there really is nothing gained in this useless debate.
Maybe these celebrities could reach you - although I doubt it, most Trump devotees are head over heels into
bowing to their admired uhm leader.

Demona, your use of terms here prove there is 'nothing gained in this useless debate'.

I find it odd that R vs. W was admired by some but the Supreme Court is vilified when they say prior courts may have been mistaken.

By the way, in four years he was president, Trump made no moves to overturn R vs. W. And don't bring up his appointees. The ruling merely said the court has no right to establish this 'right'.

 

[thehangingtree]

I get your point about the 10th amendment first. I read it that any authority that is not explicitely assigned to the federal government by the constitution, is state matter. That aspect is currently overshadowed by the discussion of who has authority over one's own body.

Two different issues here. What the court can and cannot do is irrelevant to 'who has authority over one's own body.

R vs. W was around for almost 50 years on a single court decision. How come no one bothered to enforce it with a law?

 

[Demona]

Demona, your use of terms here prove there is 'nothing gained in this useless debate'.

I find it odd that R vs. W was admired by some but the Supreme Court is vilified when they say prior courts may have been mistaken.

By the way, in four years he was president, Trump made no moves to overturn R vs. W. And don't bring up his appointees. The ruling merely said the court has no right to establish this 'right'.

Hanging Tree

Not convincing - cannot be if you don't get vital points of what I argued. Cannot be if you try in a cheap way to turn and direct these point against me.
Maybe you better stay with hanging women and punish them, that's easier than politics.
One last wrd about Trump: >in four years he was president, Trump made no moves to overturn R vs. W.<
Ha-ha-ha, didn't he push his Reps to become the majority in this Supreme Court?
Ok, that shows how torn the USA are after but four years Trump. Not everything went his way, some
wanted changes to make the government of the United States less democratic and more of a voters
community for his re-election.
I for one I'm glad he's off the White House, now it's all about hindering him in making the run for
'presidency' once again and win a second time by his dubious methods! That would be a disaster
for the USA and for the entire human kind because then we can drop anti-climate change activities
and live up those last few years with full power smoking soft coal power plants in one big party!
... and free shoot outs, not to forget!
I'll go to Tibet into a monastery if that happens ...
Bye now
Demona

 

[thehangingtree]

Hanging Tree

Not convincing - cannot be if you don't get vital points of what I argued. Cannot be if you try in a cheap way to turn and direct these point against me.

Demona

Look, I have conceded this is a hot-button issue. I don't claim to have a solution. But there is a constitution here that says congress must write the laws or amend the constitution to add rights. It is up to the courts to determine if laws passed meet the constitutional mustard, not make new rights.

I am no more judging anyone no matter what side they are on. You seem to be pretty judgemental on the issue. Having an opinion is one thing. Changing things is ok too, but it takes a lot of work. I wish you well if you undertake that endeavor!

 

[Gibbs505]

Oh my, Gibbs!
Of course it is long since the Greek philisters no secret that on can argue everything into
a dead end and make it meaningless - that's exactly what you did with my comment.
And:
>In no state that I am aware of, does the police, who enforce the law, have a legal responsibly
to protect any of its citizens.<
That you should not tell me but the thousands of police men and women trying to do just
that when they seek out to take illegal non-insured vehicles driven by persons high on smokes
out of traffic / when they react to an emergency call by some neighbor encountering a solid
house fight or when they investigate a murder case etc.
But it seems we are living on different worlds, probably for you the climate change is something
that either doesn't exist or has been sent by China.
I would say we dump it here, I see no reason nor any good in proceeding.
Bye ...
D

Bye

 

[Demona]

HangTree
No, not even that. I regret already having allowed myself to be dragged into this debate.
The USA has forever had a follow up of capable presidents and such which were less than
a political figure - and cosequently were laughed about in the rest of the world.
Since I belong to that 'Rest of the World' My interest in the USA is limited to the question
if their politics may be dangerous to us or not and if I can order parts for my '71 Camaro
or not (then it would become really expensive)
I'm tired, that's your chance for gaining the last word in this debate, just one more posting,
you can do that, don't you?

Bye ,,
Demona

 

[thehangingtree]

HangTree
No, not even that. I regret already having allowed myself to be dragged into this debate.
The USA has forever had a follow up of capable presidents and such which were less than
a political figure - and cosequently were laughed about in the rest of the world.
Since I belong to that 'Rest of the World' My interest in the USA is limited to the question
if their politics may be dangerous to us or not and if I can order parts for my '71 Camaro
or not (then it would become really expensive)
I'm tired, that's your chance for gaining the last word in this debate, just one more posting,
you can do that, don't you?

Bye ,,
Demona

Never said the US was perfect. We have made many mistakes ranging back long before I was born but we also helped many of our friends along the way.

I don't have a standing on this issue. I don't agree with the 'no abortion crowd' nor do I agree with the 'pro-abortion anytime crowd'.

By the way, there has been a few times the US pulled the bulk of the effort a few times in history.

And if you have a '71 Camaro, we don't disagree on everything!!!

 

[Loxuru]

Two different issues here. What the court can and cannot do is irrelevant to 'who has authority over one's own body.

R vs. W was around for almost 50 years on a single court decision. How come no one bothered to enforce it with a law?

Apparently, it is all about the interpretation of the 14th Amendment.

About why R vs W was not enforced by law? Correct me if I see it wrong, but it looks like that in the US, court verdicts also seem to have some power of a law (isn't it that what is meant by the authority of 'the people' in the 10th Amendment)?

 

[thehangingtree]

Correct me if I see it wrong, but it looks like that in the US, court verdicts also seem to have some power of a law (isn't it that what is meant by the authority of 'the people' in the 10th Amendment)?

To a degree they do. A court couldn't order me to kill someone since that would violate other laws. But if a law allows them to issue fines for a traffic violation, then they are within their rights.

 

[Gibbs505]

Apparently, it is all about the interpretation of the 14th Amendment.

About why R vs W was not enforced by law? Correct me if I see it wrong, but it looks like that in the US, court verdicts also seem to have some power of a law (isn't it that what is meant by the authority of 'the people' in the 10th Amendment)?

It's called creating a precedent. Like when the Miranda decision came down, the police had to warn people about their right to remain silent no matter what their state or other laws said, It overrode all previous laws
BTW the court cannot create laws, they affirm or reverse prior decisions, declare constitutional or uphold legislation and can do this in whole or in part. Its a little complicated.

 

[thehangingtree]

BTW the court cannot create laws, they affirm or reverse prior decisions, declare constitutional or uphold legislation and can do this in whole or in part. Its a little complicated.

That, I think, was the problem of R. vs W. It overturned many states' abortion laws, in many cases those that did not prohibit abortions.

 

[Demona]

Folks, just one last cut out from press, with several comments of American VIP's in English - so you can read it

Halle Berry zu Abtreibungsrecht: "Waffen haben mehr Rechte als Frauen"​

(wue/spot) - Freitag


Der Supreme Court, der Oberste Gerichtshof der Vereinigten Staaten, hat ein in den USA landesweit geltendes Abtreibungsrecht gekippt - und hebt eine rund 50 Jahre alte Grundsatzentscheidung auf. Die einzelnen Bundesstaaten entscheiden somit künftig über ein Recht auf Schwangerschaftsabbrüche und können dieses stark einschränken. Mehrere Staaten hatten bereits im Vorfeld entsprechende Gesetze vorbereitet. Viele Bürgerinnen und Bürger zeigten sich entsetzt über die Entscheidung. Auch zahlreiche Prominente aus der Politik und der Medienwelt meldeten sich zu Wort.

Was der Supreme Court getan hat ist "BULLSHIT"​

Halle Berry (55) sei "schockiert". Was der Supreme Court getan habe sei "BULLSHIT". Die Schauspielerin schreibt bei Twitter: "Etwas muss unternommen werden! Waffen haben mehr Rechte als Frauen." Erst kurz zuvor hatte das Oberste Gericht das Tragen von Schusswaffen in der Öffentlichkeit als ein Grundrecht eingestuft. "Stoppt diesen Krieg gegen Frauen", fordert Berry. Man könne nicht nur darüber schreiben sondern müsse auch etwas dagegen unternehmen.

I’m outraged! What the supreme court has done is BULLSHIT. Something has to be done! Guns have more rights than women.
Stop this war on women & keep your laws off of our bodies. We have to ban together & NOT accept this! We can’t just post about it, we must DO SOMETHING about it
— Halle Berry (@halleberry) June 24, 2022

Auch der ehemalige US-Präsident Barack Obama (60) rief zu Protesten auf: "Schließt euch den Aktivisten an, die seit Jahren beim Zugang für Abtreibungen Alarm schlagen - und handelt." Bürgerinnen und Bürger sollten sich demnach örtlichen Protesten anschließen. Der Oberste Gerichtshof habe "die persönlichste Entscheidung, die jemand treffen kann, den Launen von Politikern und Ideologen" unterworfen. Damit habe er "grundlegende Freiheiten von Millionen von Amerikanern angegriffen".

Today, the Supreme Court not only reversed nearly 50 years of precedent, it relegated the most intensely personal decision someone can make to the whims of politicians and ideologues—attacking the essential freedoms of millions of Americans.
— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) June 24, 2022

Dem schloss sich etwa auch die Oscarpreisträgerin Viola Davis (56) an. Bei Twitter schrieb die Schauspielerin, dass sie am Boden zerstört sei: "Nun, mehr denn je, müssen wir unsere Stimme und unsere Macht nutzen!" Zudem zitiert sie mit "Wir, das Volk..." die drei ersten Worte der US-Verfassung.

And so it goes….Gutted. Now more than ever we have to use our voice and power! WE the people……https://t.co/8gFi0AbNSQ
— Viola Davis (@violadavis) June 24, 2022

Entscheidung ein "tragischer Fehler"​

Barack Obamas Ehefrau, die ehemalige First Lady Michelle Obama (58), schrieb unter anderem, dass sie "untröstlich" darüber sei, dass viele Menschen im ganzen Land ihr Grundrecht verloren haben, "fundierte Entscheidungen über ihre eigenen Körper zu treffen". Sie spricht davon, dass diese "entsetzliche Entscheidung" des Gerichts "verheerende Folgen haben wird und besonders für die jungen Menschen, die diese Last tragen müssen, ein Weckruf sein muss."

My thoughts on the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. pic.twitter.com/9ALSbapHDY
— Michelle Obama (@MichelleObama) June 24, 2022

Die Sängerin Taylor Swift (32) sei "zutiefst verängstigt", dass sich das Land nun an diesem Punkt befinde. Nach vielen Dekaden des Kampfes der Menschen habe die heutige Entscheidung Frauen der Rechte auf ihre eigenen Körper beraubt.

I’m absolutely terrified that this is where we are - that after so many decades of people fighting for women’s rights to their own bodies, today’s decision has stripped us of that. https://t.co/mwK561oxxl
— Taylor Swift (@taylorswift13) June 24, 2022

US-Präsident Joe Biden (79) sprach unterdessen von einem aus seiner Sicht "tragischen Fehler" des Supreme Courts und der "Verwirklichung einer extremen Ideologie". Dies sei "grausam", wenn man etwa bedenke, dass Einkommensschwache in vielen Fällen davon besonders hart getroffen werden. Es sei "meiner Ansicht nach ein trauriger Tag für das Land" und er wolle "alles in meiner Macht stehende tun, um das Recht von Frauen in Bundesstaaten zu schützen, wo ihnen aufgrund der heutigen Entscheidung Konsequenzen drohen".

Seems I'm not the only one who believes this what the Supreme Court had decided was a very bad decision.
With compliments
Demona

 

[Loxuru]

Marsrover has discovered the first piece of garbage on the surface of Mars.

It is a piece of foil, a part of the thermal blanket of its own descent stage, but it was unexpectedly found about 2 kilometers from where the stage had impacted. Has it drifted away so far during landing, or has it been blown by Mars wind remains uncertain.

 

[Darkprincess69]

Marsrover has discovered the first piece of garbage on the surface of Mars.

It is a piece of foil, a part of the thermal blanket of its own descent stage, but it was unexpectedly found about 2 kilometers from where the stage had impacted. Has it drifted away so far during landing, or has it been blown by Mars wind remains uncertain.

The winds on Mars can be very fast but they lack any real power because the air density is so low. Having said that, a lightweight piece of foil might be able to be carried a fair distance by the winds under some circumstances by my feeling on this is that it was probably blasted most of the distance by the jet thrust of the skycrane that lowered the rover down to the surface.

Of course the skycrane itself flew off in order to crash into the Martian surface well away from the landing site, so that's an even bigger chunk of garbage waiting to be photographed (in fact I'm pretty sure that the crash site has already been imaged from orbit but don't quote me on that)

Given the number of probes that we've sent to Mars over the years, there's a huge amount of potentially salvageable hardware just lying around on the surface

 

[montycrusto]

The winds on Mars can be very fast but they lack any real power because the air density is so low. Having said that, a lightweight piece of foil might be able to be carried a fair distance by the winds under some circumstances by my feeling on this is that it was probably blasted most of the distance by the jet thrust of the skycrane that lowered the rover down to the surface.

Of course the skycrane itself flew off in order to crash into the Martian surface well away from the landing site, so that's an even bigger chunk of garbage waiting to be photographed (in fact I'm pretty sure that the crash site has already been imaged from orbit but don't quote me on that)

Given the number of probes that we've sent to Mars over the years, there's a huge amount of potentially salvageable hardware just lying around on the surface

It’s all waiting for Matt Damon to come along and upcycle it into something useful

 

[Eulalia]

Nah - Rover's Artificial Intelligence is surely sufficient for it to smuggle a Mars Bar in its pocket to enjoy on the trip - it's just a bit careless with the wrapper!

 

[Hugin&Munin]

Nah - Rover's Artificial Intelligence is surely sufficient for it to smuggle a Mars Bar in its pocket to enjoy on the trip - it's just a bit careless with the wrapper!

And now imagine the inhabitants of Mars are collecting all the remains of electronics and other landed parts, building an earth rover from them, which is supposed to determine whether there really is "intelligent" life on earth!!!

 

[Darkprincess69]

And now imagine the inhabitants of Mars are collecting all the remains of electronics and other landed parts, building an earth rover from them, which is supposed to determine whether there really is "intelligent" life on earth!!!

I fear that they're going to be gravely disappointed

 

[Loxuru]

And now imagine the inhabitants of Mars are collecting all the remains of electronics and other landed parts, building an earth rover from them, which is supposed to determine whether there really is "intelligent" life on earth!!!

I wish them a lot of luck, if they will gather American, Soviet/Russian and Chinese space garbage, combine it, and try to make something workable out of it!