(June 26, 2022 at 3:35 pm)TheJefe817 Wrote: She was also exploring the possibility of dispensing machines for abortion drugs on federal land such as parks if those were at some point banned by states.

lol, can you just imagine the shitfit that would give these Christofascisti?

(June 26, 2022 at 7:47 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(June 26, 2022 at 3:35 pm)TheJefe817 Wrote: She was also exploring the possibility of dispensing machines for abortion drugs on federal land such as parks if those were at some point banned by states.

lol, can you just imagine the shitfit that would give these Christofascisti?

I know I'm twisted, but I just laughed out loud at the thought of Clark Griswold and the kids going to look at the Grand Canyon and stopping at the soda machine, where they accidentally dispense Mifepristone instead of a Coke.

(June 26, 2022 at 1:59 pm)TheJefe817 Wrote:

(June 26, 2022 at 12:47 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Probably, and she’d be arrested and charged with murder if she went back to Texas.

Boru

I was on a Zoom this morning where someone brought up something I had not thought of.  Military bases are federal land, so could there be an executive order to allow the procedures there (ie: Fort Hood in Texas), which would supercede state law?  What about national parks?  Native American land?

Fort Hood? The most dangerous army base in America Fort Hood? The only place I can think of to be the site of multiple separate mass murder incidents Fort Hood?

(June 26, 2022 at 12:45 pm)Jehanne Wrote:

(June 26, 2022 at 12:29 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Abortion travel bans.  You're welcome for the nightmare fuel.

If a woman who lived in Texas wanted an abortion, would it be illegal for her to move to a different state, establish residency and then get her abortion?

Not the point. No, simply traveling to another state is not illegal. But with the vigilante law, in the incubator of one state's laws where any citizen who catches wind that you are seeking an abortion, or find out someone is about to help you leave the state, they can be arrested and sued if they don't make it out of the state and get discovered. 

The other thing is, and again, economics. Even if someone has family or friends in another state, they don't always have the financial means to leave. No different in pre WW2 history during the rise of Hitler. It wasn't just Jews that had to worry. It was the threat of invasion were other countries citizens saw the writing on the wall, but could not escape in time once the dominos started to fall.

Boru,

This is not a codification, it is another erosion on oversight and accountability. 

We are talking about a climate where running President scapegoated and vilified political rivals to win the first time. A candidate who scapegoated and vilified war heros to win. A candidate who scapegoated and vilified entire races to win. Then while in office, standing next to a brutal dictator shit all over his own intel on the national stage. Constantly vilified peaceful protestors, and the media, even to the point where one of his own party members assaulted a reporter. Undermined our law enforcement institutions, constantly purging and firing anyone not blindly loyal to him, replacing them with sycophants. Then sold a big lie that caused a needless waist of court time, and incited an insurrection.

And just so you know, Texas just passed a resolution declaring Biden was not the legally elected President. Now don't get pedantic with me, I know a resolution is fist waving and not a bill turned into law. But it still sets up a dangerous climate selling the idea that if you do not like an outcome, you can work to obstruct or destroy the system to the point your party because the only power. 

This isn't a codification, it is another slow chipping away at accountability. If the GOP valued accountability they would have done what Nixon's GOP would have done if Nixon had not stepped down. So no, I do not trust the GOP, they have proven to be not interested in preserving our institutions or our Republic.

(June 27, 2022 at 12:25 am)Rev. Rye Wrote: Fort Hood? The most dangerous army base in America Fort Hood? The only place I can think of to be the site of multiple separate mass murder incidents Fort Hood?

I suspect he mentioned it because it's closest major base to him. Perhaps it's better to focus on his point than get twisted around the wheels of the base's history.

Or do you actually think that any place that has suffered a mass shooting or a rape/murder is unfit to dispense birth-control or provide abortion services?

(June 27, 2022 at 10:45 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(June 27, 2022 at 12:25 am)Rev. Rye Wrote: Fort Hood? The most dangerous army base in America Fort Hood? The only place I can think of to be the site of multiple separate mass murder incidents Fort Hood?

I suspect he mentioned it because it's closest major base to him. Perhaps it's better to focus on his point than get twisted around the wheels of the base's history.

Or do you actually think that any place that has suffered a mass shooting or a rape/murder is unfit to dispense birth-control or provide abortion services?

Correct.  It was just a reference to an example I thought most people would be familiar with.  There are other bases/federal sites closer to me, but that was just the largest one regionally.

As a sidenote, I visited there a few years ago with a service member.  I'm still apparently alive.

It's a no-go (at present) anyway. The Hyde amendment bars that use of federal funds except in the case of rape or incest (which is actually an -expansion- on it's original blanket ban).

Biden renounced his previous support for that amendment and campaigned on a promise to work to have it repealed in it's entirety.

(June 27, 2022 at 10:50 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: It's a no-go (at present) anyway.  The Hyde amendment bars that use of federal funds except in the case of rape or incest (which is actually an -expansion- on it's original blanket ban).  

Biden renounced his previous support for that amendment and campaigned on a promise to work to have it repealed in it's entirety.

I'm asking, because I'm certainly no constitutional lawyer, but would simply providing a patch of ground and saying "go for it" violate that?  Without any additional funding changing hands?

It's a good question - but the federal dollars appropriated for that base - as in the space itself- are an obvious angle to challenge any such plan - and let's be honest...if the nuts around a base make abortion illegal..they're not going to look too fondly on the federal government guarding an abortion shop in their state with federal troops. At best, any attempt to continue to provide access to this service while bans are in effect is just painting a big red x on where to make the next restricting challenge.