Florida State Seminoles

[hedge]

"I guess the question is, what is the true Libertarian view on abortion from a federal perspective?"

Abortion is a tricky issue even for libertarians. Like the rest of the population, it pretty much depends on when you think there's a real person with real rights hanging out in the womb. If you think that's at conception, then even a libertarian would be against legalizing abortion, b/c you'd be fucking with someone else's rights...

[Bklyn]

Where does a woman's rights end in the process? Are the courts ready to make a judicial decision that basically codifies the inequality of women to men?

[Owlman]

Where does a woman's rights end in the process? Are the courts ready to make a judicial decision that basically codifies the inequality of women to men?

Alito, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas are. Kennedy was ready to overturn Roe in 1991, but after Souter joined the court, O'Conner, Souter and Kennedy formed a trio who forged a middle ground, which is limiting it as long as it's not an undue burden.

Kennedy and Ginsburg are unlikely to make it past the next 4 5 years meaning the next President will have in this hands the ability to ban abortions or keep it the status quo. If it goes back to the state, Georgia, Oklahoma, Miss, Ala, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, Tenn, S. Carolina and I think Florida already have laws on the books that elective terminations will be immediately banned.

[sardis]

I don't know, I can only tell you that libertarians have a belief that you have some say in the state government and if you don't like the laws of your state you can choose to move to one that is more in line with your values - so moving issues to the state level specifically not addressed in the constitution is less intrusive than a federal mandate.

That is one of the things I really like about Ron Paul. Personally the guy doesn't like gays, abortion or anything else that a 71 year old man of his generation wouldn't care for but he so strongly believes in personal liberty that he would never consider some social mandate. I believe he finds Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachman more repugnant than the other candidates because they have no qualms about these types of federal mandates, believing they know whats best for everyone.

Sometimes that belief works against him, such as his views on civil rights. I'm sure he personally thinks it is morally wrong to deny a man or woman entrance to a public establishment based on their race, religions or any other factor, but his personal liberty beliefs take precedent over that. He believes , for example, that if you decide to open up a diner, then you can decide who you want to serve or not serve. Its *YOUR* diner. I think he fully understands the dangers of that to a nation as a whole but still believes that protecting individual property is key to individual rights.

Barry Goldwater - the man that inspired Ronald Reagan, held similar believes and voted against the 1964 civil rights act primarily because the law dissolved individual property owner rights. Of course Goldwater got the nomination and was killed in the election, even Gingrich was espousing that he was a Rockefeller republican in the late 80's because Goldwater's stance was considered toxic to progressive republicans. That mindset gave way to the neocons - who are 1. big government. 2. War hawks. 3. Social "conservatives" which really is an oxymoron

One thing I hate is that you never own your property in this country. Once you pay off your house, you will still be held responsible for property taxes which means you can never be a truly free resident in this country.

So if a state infringes on the rights of its citizens even though that state has ratified (agreed to) those constitutional rights the feds should not intervene?

[aTm]

Arian Foster says he's going to vote for Ron Paul

[eCat]

I don't know, I can only tell you that libertarians have a belief that you have some say in the state government and if you don't like the laws of your state you can choose to move to one that is more in line with your values - so moving issues to the state level specifically not addressed in the constitution is less intrusive than a federal mandate.

That is one of the things I really like about Ron Paul. Personally the guy doesn't like gays, abortion or anything else that a 71 year old man of his generation wouldn't care for but he so strongly believes in personal liberty that he would never consider some social mandate. I believe he finds Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachman more repugnant than the other candidates because they have no qualms about these types of federal mandates, believing they know whats best for everyone.

Sometimes that belief works against him, such as his views on civil rights. I'm sure he personally thinks it is morally wrong to deny a man or woman entrance to a public establishment based on their race, religions or any other factor, but his personal liberty beliefs take precedent over that. He believes , for example, that if you decide to open up a diner, then you can decide who you want to serve or not serve. Its *YOUR* diner. I think he fully understands the dangers of that to a nation as a whole but still believes that protecting individual property is key to individual rights.

Barry Goldwater - the man that inspired Ronald Reagan, held similar believes and voted against the 1964 civil rights act primarily because the law dissolved individual property owner rights. Of course Goldwater got the nomination and was killed in the election, even Gingrich was espousing that he was a Rockefeller republican in the late 80's because Goldwater's stance was considered toxic to progressive republicans. That mindset gave way to the neocons - who are 1. big government. 2. War hawks. 3. Social "conservatives" which really is an oxymoron

One thing I hate is that you never own your property in this country. Once you pay off your house, you will still be held responsible for property taxes which means you can never be a truly free resident in this country.

So if a state infringes on the rights of its citizens even though that state has ratified (agreed to) those constitutional rights the feds should not intervene?

the federal governments responsibility is to enforce and support the rights and responsibilities laid out by the constitution.
Abortion, marriage, entitlements, etc are not constitutional mandates.

If an individual state created laws against the constitution, that would be addressed at the federal level. Not sure what would happen if a majority of states had the same unconstitutional law.

[hedge]

They change the constitution...

[eCat]

or a civil war

as you can imagine, many libertarians don't have such a favorable view of Lincoln as the rest of the nation

[hedge]

Goddamn carpetbagging jew...

[Owlman]

the federal governments responsibility is to enforce and support the rights and responsibilities laid out by the constitution.
Abortion, marriage, entitlements, etc are not constitutional mandates.

That's a matter of semantics. First, there is a General Welfare Clause in Article I of the Constitution. Second, the primary reason for the Constitution as opposed to the Articles of Confederation was commerce and entitlements are squarely rooted in the Commerce clause and spending clause of the Constitution (and while not mandated by the Constitution are arguably covered by the General Welfare Clause of the Constitution). Marriage has long been considered a fundamental right that is guaranteed by our Constitution (the definition of marriage though is changing).

As for Elective Terminations, the Supreme Court found that it is a fundamental right under our federal constitution based on the traditional historical belief that people have the individual right to control their bodies.

Now, all that being said, there are arguments that the federal govt should not be involved in these areas (most are not saying that they could not cover these areas, which is a different argument).

On another note, the Confederacy was against state's rights and put this in their Constitution. They very much objected to the Northern States refusing to return their property against federal law.

[eCat]

I came to the depressing realization today

Its Saturday night and every place I want to go is closed.

Costco, the Surplus Warehouse, the Home Emporium

20 years ago I wasn't even going out for another 3 hours.

[Jungle Rat]

I hear that. And the weekends started on Thursday.

[hedge]

I just want to lay down on the couch and watch TV. Goddamn, why not do heroin? What have I got to lose? A re-run of International House Hunters?? Just kill me now...

[hedge]

On a brighter note, I just got my Ted Nugent for President bumper sticker in the mail...

[Bklyn]

Tell me about it. 10 years ago I would not have been able to tell you a Saturday Night Live sketch that was recurring (I did catch the show, on occasion, if I was staying home that night and put my company to sleep...heh), let alone could I tell you what was on TV during PrimeTime on a Friday or Saturday night.

I also only had soy milk, Grey Goose, condiments, Patron, Mango juice, sliced pineapple or watermelon and ice cubes in my fridge/freezer (not sure if that was good or bad).

Nowadays if you see me outside after 8pm on a Saturday night, then I'm running errands for La Presidente. I won't lie, I miss those days a bit. My kids do a good job of keeping those memories as only small nostalgic moments.

[Bklyn]

Speaking of that...I went to a joint alumni event with my alma mater and Harvard on Thursday night. Some woman started chatting me up and gave me her business card. She's a staff member of the Knicks organization. She invited me to come out to watch a game, in a suite, with a guest.

Not sure if she saw the ring, or not.

So, when I left the event, I tossed the business card before I forgot and absentmindedly kept it in my jacket pocket. My wife has the ability to sniff out anything, large or small. She probably felt a disturbance in The Force as soon as Knicks woman started talking to me.

It's not worth getting swagged out at MSG with the possibility of having all hell break loose at the Ponderosa. Of course, my boy who was there with me was calling me crazy for not keeping the card and getting the hookup with free tickets. Easy for him to say; he doesn't have the threat of WWIII hanging over his head, though, like I do.

[Hizzy III]

On the other hand, I hit a 35-degree turn at 85 mph this afternoon, despite the rain. It's all in how you go about spending your leisure time.

Although, I agree with Hedge; Int'l House Hunters is boring as hell. Some ex-patriots bitch-whining about the cabinets not being close enough to the refridgerator or the foyer being two inches longer than they had prefered.


Fuck you both with a gardening hoe.

[10ac]

And Storage Wars is repeating repeats.....Someone shoot me.

[It's me Karen]

Same here. It's 9:14 and in my day I would have been just arriving at a bar before the band. Ahhh.

I so have to laugh at this from Bklyn:

So, when I left the event, I tossed the business card before I forgot and absentmindedly kept it in my jacket pocket. My wife has the ability to sniff out anything, large or small. She probably felt a disturbance in The Force as soon as Knicks woman started talking to me.

[eCat]

And Storage Wars is repeating repeats.....Someone shoot me.

I read the Yuuuuup dude is demanding significantly more money for next season or he walks.

They get paid about $10K per episode now

He is an idiot - all those guys have significantly increased their personal wealth since that show has started.