On the Texas legislation

Post Reply
User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 21649
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 20 times

On the Texas legislation

Post by John Q. Public »

They passed 666 new pieces of legislation yesterday. They could have added one or dropped one but, no, they stuck with 666, which is kinda weird considering it's Texas.

No experience necessary to carry a gun. :yikes: There have to be exceptions to where you're allowed to carry but I haven't heard anything on that. Stuck to your dashboard is scary enough.

And the abortion law. 6 weeks. Have a late period and you have two weeks to figure out why and to deal with it. And as an end run around Roe, they made it a civil law instead of a criminal one. And anyone can turn you and anyone with knowledge of your abortion in. AND THE LAW SPECIFIES THAT THEY AREN'T RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY'S FEES, so the defendant and her Uber driver are SOL even if she was never pregnant. Which, I guess you'd have to somehow prove. And then there's your HIPAA rights, which is a whole 'nother can-o-worms. Maybe a good thing if your doctor can't disclose your treatment or maybe not.

Either way, this is Stasi **** and if it isn't overturned it could open the door for enforcement of any crazy, unconstitutional law the legislative majority might feel like passing at any given moment. Which is even scarier than the hothead next to you in traffic having a gun stuck to his dashboard.
Don't look at me, I just work here.
User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 21649
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: On the Texas legislation

Post by John Q. Public »

$50/yr. paywall so I didn't read the article, but this is an interesting point. They created a surveillance state for reproductive-age women. In a state that's getting bluer with every job move. That could have consequences.

Don't look at me, I just work here.
User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 21649
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: On the Texas legislation

Post by John Q. Public »

I saw a good explanation of why the SCOTUS "upheld" the abortion law:

The motion was for an injunction, and in order to enjoin someone, you need somebody to enjoin. Ordinarily that would be the state, but since this is a civil law and nobody's sued yet, there's nobody to enjoin. And I guess you can't enjoin a potential class or John Does 1-300,000,000. I imagine the case on the merits of the law is in the works as we speak but that could take more than a year to be settled. In the meantime, there could be an injunction as soon as someone sues, we'll see. And I guess we'll see how far reaching it is.
Don't look at me, I just work here.
User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 21649
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: On the Texas legislation

Post by John Q. Public »

Wow. Texans are less happy now than they were when they were freezing to death.
texas wrong direction.jpg
Source: https://texaspolitics.utexas.edu/blog/n ... ly-divided
Don't look at me, I just work here.
User avatar
ShiftyMutt
Posts: 2184
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:46 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: On the Texas legislation

Post by ShiftyMutt »

If TX had the same lame recalls laws California does, democrats could recall Abbott with a minority vote.
User avatar
ShiftyMutt
Posts: 2184
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:46 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: On the Texas legislation

Post by ShiftyMutt »

Draft Scott Kelly!

And here’s a little George Carlin ..

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 25544
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: On the Texas legislation

Post by Wabash »

This law has nothing to do with protecting children. For starters. There are no penalties for the men who fathered the children.

One of the best lines I have read over the years.

"If men could get pregnant. Abortion would be a sacrament."
Stay loose, and be a little afraid.

quando omni flunkus, mortati
User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 21649
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: On the Texas legislation

Post by John Q. Public »

Forget that it's an anti-abortion law. The far bigger problem is that it's a threat to the Constitution itself and to our system of laws. Pretending that it's only about abortion or women's rights only trivializes it.
Don't look at me, I just work here.
User avatar
ShiftyMutt
Posts: 2184
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:46 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: On the Texas legislation

Post by ShiftyMutt »

Can someone explain: Abbott says that “rape and incest are not excluded from the TX abortion law because ”they will arrest all the rapist”. How does he know who these rapists are UNLESS THEY RAPE SOMEONE? A murderer is innocent untill he kills someone. But then, y’know, IT’S TOO LATE!
User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 21649
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: On the Texas legislation

Post by John Q. Public »

Meanwhile, Mexico's Supreme Court just decriminalized abortion.

And nobody will host the Texas tattletale website because its purpose is to anonymously share information about third parties, which is against most everybody's rules, and is actually illegal in California and the EU.
Don't look at me, I just work here.
User avatar
ShiftyMutt
Posts: 2184
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:46 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: On the Texas legislation

Post by ShiftyMutt »

There is a theory that this is a push to increase the white population out of fear that white people are becoming the minority.
Which doesn’t make clear sense since abortion is more of a minority statistic. White women will still get abortions - somewhere. Perhaps now, in Mexico.
User avatar
ShiftyMutt
Posts: 2184
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:46 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: On the Texas legislation

Post by ShiftyMutt »

Oh, also (duh) keeping women at home, y’know to do their jobs. Because “those women are out there gettn’ educations and jobs-n-stuff and makn’ equal demands. We can’t have that! Back to the kitchen with them!”
User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 21649
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: On the Texas legislation

Post by John Q. Public »

Well, we have our first case. Or cases. Two (friendly) plaintiffs suing the same doctor. I'm not sure if the law accounts for multiple suits for the same "offense" but it should be interesting. Especially considering the plaintiffs might not put up much of a fight. :-k
Don't look at me, I just work here.
Post Reply