NC's pre-abortion-ultrasound law violate's MD's 1st Amendment rights, court finds

[Zorkorist]

I'm not the one 17 trillion dollars in debt.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

Ayn Rand was a pro-choice atheist.

Are you still stuck on abortion? lol? Abortion?

Or God?

Jeese, I thought you were sentient.

-John


Between post #24 and here, post #52, fully 19 of the 28 posts are yours, including one stretch of 4 straight. This is excessive, annoying, and disruptive, and must stop. We have had this discussion with you before. Please, you must stop.

Perknose
Forum Director

 

[brycejones]

Are you still stuck on abortion? lol? Abortion?

Or God?

Jeese, I thought you were sentient.

-John

Why don't you go start a thread to rant about government regulation in general instead of hijacking this one?

 

[brycejones]

I'm not the one 17 trillion dollars in debt.

-John

No but you're the one posting worthless drivel here.

 

[Jhhnn]

No but you're the one posting worthless drivel here.

Zork gets hammered every night & comes here to post drunken assertions of Faith because it's a place where he can get away with it.

He's just noise in the signal.

 

[smackababy]

Ehhhh the principle ("The First Amendment not only protects against prohibitions of speech, but also against regulations that compel speech,”) either stands or it doesn't. Your argument sounds like "the right to free speech is constitutional, unless it's hate speech or something else I don't value".

Fern

One could argue that misinterpreting, misrepresenting, or otherwise omitting the contents and effects of your product isn't protected under the first amendment. The Miranda warning is also "against" the first amendment in that it forces police to speak, but it does so to protect the rights of those in custodial custody by informing them of their 4th and 5th amendments. Interestingly enough, if you wish to invoke the right to remain silent, you must state it unambiguously that you are evoking that right.

The Supreme Court striking down this absurd law that is attempting to circumvent laws making abortion legal is a good thing.

 

[Bowfinger]

Zork gets hammered every night & comes here to post drunken assertions of Faith because it's a place where he can get away with it.

He's just noise in the signal.

Indeed, and unfortunately, he is a lot of noise. Fully half of the last 30-some posts are his. Most are completely off topic, and none contribute anything notably intelligent or valuable. It is useless neffing, serving only to disrupt the thread and inflate his post count. Even ignoring him won't really help due to sheer volume.

 

[Bowfinger]

That's why laws requiring that Miranda Rights be given are unconstitutional. Wait, what?

Fern

Sorry, Fern, that's a poor example. First, it's setting a standard for agents of the state in the performance of their job responsibilities. That inherently has zero to do with free speech rights. Second, it doesn't really force officers to say anything. It simply advises officers that unless a defendant is advised of his rights, any statements made may be disqualified as evidence. The officer is free to ignore this -- he won't be prosecuted for failing to provide Miranda rights -- but his arrests are likely to be unproductive.

 

[Bowfinger]

Yeah, where the hell are my cigarette commercials???

The courts have long held that the bar for regulating commercial speech is much lower than the bar for noncommercial speech.

 

[Atreus21]

"I am required by law to inform you that this is an attempt to collect a debt."

We can force people to buy insurance or pay a penalty for the good of the collective. But forcing them to describe a baby on an ultrasound so that a mother might have second thoughts before its evisceration? Gentleman, let's have some propriety here.

 

[sandorski]

"I am required by law to inform you that this is an attempt to collect a debt."

We can force people to buy insurance or pay a penalty for the good of the collective. But forcing them to describe a baby on an ultrasound so that a mother might have second thoughts before its evisceration? Gentleman, let's have some propriety here.

She has already had more than second thoughts. Quit being an asshole and stop using the Government to force your Assholism on women you don't even know.

 

[ElFenix]

That's why laws requiring that Miranda Rights be given are unconstitutional. Wait, what?

Fern

why would the first amendment apply to state actors doing state actions against private citizens?

 

[sandorski]

why would the first amendment apply to state actors doing state actions against private citizens?

...and it''s merely Informative and not Coercive.

 

[smackababy]

She has already had more than second thoughts. Quit being an asshole and stop using the Government to force your Assholism on women you don't even know.

This idiotic idea that a women hasn't thought about this is just beyond stupid. "Give her a second thought!" As if women are just like "welp, preggers again; better see about that 35th abortion!"

...and it''s merely Informative and not Coercive.

Except, it is forcing actions to be performed. A women isn't require to know which organs are formed to make an informed decision on whether or not to terminate a pregnancy. If this were something like forcing doctors to provide educational material on alternatives, it would be different. This is nothing but an attempt to shame women even more for having an abortion, in order to continue to fight a rule that happened 60 years ago.

 

[ctbaars]

"welp, preggers again; better see about that 35th abortion!"
I've seen that first hand. Not 35th though.

 

[Atreus21]

She has already had more than second thoughts. Quit being an asshole and stop using the Government to force your Assholism on women you don't even know.

Viewing your child in the flesh is probably a lot more jarring than imagining the child in the abstract.

 

[sandorski]

Viewing your child in the flesh is probably a lot more jarring than imagining the child in the abstract.

It's not a Child.

 

[smackababy]

"welp, preggers again; better see about that 35th abortion!"
I've seen that first hand. Not 35th though.

While, I'm sure some people are callous enough to do that, it certainly isn't the majority and forcing a picture of the fetus upon them isn't going to sway that.

This isn't something taken lightly by the vast majority people.

 

[Brainonska511]

This isn't something taken lightly by the vast majority people.

No it isn't something people take lightly, but that won't stop people from characterizing it as such in every thread on abortion.