• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mayor Pete truth telling

Crakhobarbie said:
I'm very impressed with Pete here and agree with him 100%.

Click to expand...

It's not about "liberty". It's about the Constitution and the rule of law...and the courts are the final arbiters of those two.

If one believes the Constitution and the rule of law are not promoting liberty, then it is incumbent upon the legislature to present bills for a vote that give the courts something to rule on.
 
I question his decision making.
 
Pete like most all politicians is very supportive of rights he agrees with but is willing to restrict rights he does not disagree with. If Pete is serious about protecting rights then he needs to change his positions on a few issues. Aside from that it’s the same old song and dance in an election year
 
Mycroft said:
It's not about "liberty". It's about the Constitution and the rule of law...and the courts are the final arbiters of those two.

If one believes the Constitution and the rule of law are not promoting liberty, then it is incumbent upon the legislature to present bills for a vote that give the courts something to rule on.
Click to expand...
The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides a fundamental "right to privacy" that protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose whether to have an abortion.
 
Chillfolks said:
Pete like most all politicians is very supportive of rights he agrees with but is willing to restrict rights he does not disagree with. If Pete is serious about protecting rights then he needs to change his positions on a few issues. Aside from that it’s the same old song and dance in an election year
Click to expand...
Which rights ( that Pete doesn't agree with) has Pete restricted?
 
tshade said:
He is one smart sucker.............and that is why Trumpers hate him, aside from the fact he is gay.....
Click to expand...
What a contradiction detailed in one sentence. Impressive
 
Crakhobarbie said:
The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides a fundamental "right to privacy" that protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose whether to have an abortion.
Click to expand...
I can see that that is your opinion. Unfortunately, you are not a judge.

So it goes...
 
Chillfolks said:
Pete like most all politicians is very supportive of rights he agrees with but is willing to restrict rights he does not disagree with. If Pete is serious about protecting rights then he needs to change his positions on a few issues. Aside from that it’s the same old song and dance in an election year
Click to expand...

I mean isn't that how literally everybody works?
 
Mycroft said:
I can see that that is your opinion. Unfortunately, you are not a judge.

So it goes...
Click to expand...
A religious Judge who has chosen to force the tenets of his faith on everyone? The first amendment to the US Constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"... I guess the conservatives on the SC missed that part.
 
Crakhobarbie said:
A religious Judge who has chosen to force the tenets of his faith on everyone? The first amendment to the US Constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"... I guess the conservatives on the SC missed that part.
Click to expand...
Can you point to the Supreme Court Judge's ruling that references religion?

btw, the Supreme Court is not Congress.
 
Mycroft said:
Can you point to the Supreme Court Judge's ruling that references religion?

btw, the Supreme Court is not Congress.
Click to expand...
Any law that codifies life beginning at conception is religious in nature. In this case, it is purely a Christian belief, not supported by science, philosophy or several other religions. If there ever was an example of violating the Establishment Clause, this surely is it.

The Supreme Court is obligated to strike down such laws as unconstitutional. It's as simple as that.

From Roe:

Texas urges that, apart from the Fourteenth Amendment, life begins at conception and is present throughout pregnancy, and that, therefore, the State has a compelling interest in protecting that life from and after conception. We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.

Has any of that changed? Of course it hasn't.

By the same token, there is no difference between conception and 6 weeks, as Texas now codifies. Pure theocratic tyranny. Highly unconstitutional.

The Court is corrupt.
 
Crakhobarbie said:
I'm very impressed with Pete here and agree with him 100%.

Click to expand...

He's a good man. I loved when he was on paternity leave all the right-wing thugs that took shots at him for being a "mommy" or missing work to take care of the kid.. as if people don't work from home these days.
 
Chillfolks said:
Pete like most all politicians is very supportive of rights he agrees with but is willing to restrict rights he does not disagree with. If Pete is serious about protecting rights then he needs to change his positions on a few issues. Aside from that it’s the same old song and dance in an election year
Click to expand...
Correction: He's interested in protecting rights THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS agree with.. he's not interested in taking away rights like the American Taliban, aka/Republicans.

You're welcome.
 
Michael Cole said:
Any law that codifies life beginning at conception is religious in nature.
Click to expand...
Wrong. It's science...not religion.

So, this incorrect statement makes the rest of your post utter nonsense.

Michael Cole said:
In this case, it is purely a Christian belief, not supported by science, philosophy or several other religions. If there ever was an example of violating the Establishment Clause, this surely is it.

The Supreme Court is obligated to strike down such laws as unconstitutional. It's as simple as that.

From Roe:

Texas urges that, apart from the Fourteenth Amendment, life begins at conception and is present throughout pregnancy, and that, therefore, the State has a compelling interest in protecting that life from and after conception. We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.

Has any of that changed? Of course it hasn't.

By the same token, there is no difference between conception and 6 weeks, as Texas now codifies. Pure theocratic tyranny. Highly unconstitutional.

The Court is corrupt.
Click to expand...
 
Mycroft said:
Wrong. It's science...not religion.

So, this incorrect statement makes the rest of your post utter nonsense.
Click to expand...
Do you agree with the Supreme Court’s decision allowing states to make it a crime for a woman to have an abortion if they become pregnant as a result of rape or incest? 
 
Chillfolks said:
Pete like most all politicians is very supportive of rights he agrees with but is willing to restrict rights he does not disagree with. If Pete is serious about protecting rights then he needs to change his positions on a few issues. Aside from that it’s the same old song and dance in an election year
Click to expand...
Can’t believe I agree with a progressive….. Pete sounds like your average run of the mill politicia. Say what you need to get elected. Flip flop If needed.
 
Who woulda thought that when the chips were down @Mycroft would support the average Republican position.

Any shockers there? Lol, I guess he stopped talking about hard drives and bullshit so he gas to talk about whatever FOX tells him to talk about now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom