However, as I stated several times before in this thread, my examples were just examples from today, one day’s newspaper. Give me a week, or a month, and I will give you a forest, believe me.
I am a legislative researcher and I read laws and proposed laws every day, all day. It’s really really sad to see all the freedoms that are vanishing before our eyes, and most of you don’t even realize it until it’s all said and done.
Okay, I’m starting to get a little impatient here. Kindly give me three examples of freedoms that are vanishing before our eyes. Please attempt to choose actual freedoms that we actually have, as opposed to fictional freedoms that you personally wish we had, since things that don’t actually exist cannot be said to be “vanishing.”
I’ll wait here.
Awwww, more or less intelligent. That’s so kind… I feel myself tearing up.
I point out again. Without proof of his age, how do you claim knowledge? Or are you guessing as to his age?
I believe there are ways to prove it, but yes, our legal system assumes you have no real identity if you can’t prove it. (I have no cite for this, and am more than willing to retract my statement)
Should I be offended that you are suggesting that you’re the only one who cares?
I personally don’t like seeing children suffer, sorry to burst your bubble.
However, without proof of his age, fuck, without proof of his identity, why are you so certain as to who he is and how old he is?
Beyond that, it’s not just a lack of proof, according to your cite they think the birth certificate may actually be false.
Is he who he says he is?
Quite possibly.
But how do you know?
And I in turn would suggest that you re-read the article
In other words, in most cases a person must show that he is, personally, at risk if he returns. That he’s got a reasonable fear. Now, if he can’t prove who he is, he can’t prove who he is. Your own cite says he must produce evidence. He has not done that.
We can make guesses, and yes, try to treat him as humanely as possible while investigating. But honestly, what do you propose should be done without evidence, or in the face of possibly falsified evidence?
The point is, the random examples you used don’t prove anything.
A woman breaking a local ordinance isn’t in a fascist trap.
Homeowners not being allowed to break local zoning laws are not in a fascist trap.
Illegal immigrants without proof of identity aren’t in a fascist trap.
Etc…
If you want to talk about freedom in the US, why don’t you talk about Padilla or some such?
I believe his claims because it’s really hard to be an adult and pretend to be 13. A 13-year-old is a child, and looks like a 13-year-old and is generally smaller. Look at the photo in the article. He looks like a teenager to me. In my opinion, it is much more likely that he is a teenager and telling the truth. I have no reason to doubt him.
Oh and:
Soooo…people’s whose houses burn down or get robbed of or lose their “papers” are now non-entities? They don’t exist? Are they locked away? Eh, I don’t think so.
Well, I trust in the statements of this woman:
They should thoroughly investigate it, not just throw him in prison and forget about him. The article says:
Look, to me, I see these things as small erosions of freedoms. Apparently you disagree. Well come back to me when something like this happens to you or one of your loved ones. We’ll talk then.
In the meantime, I’m sick of going back and forth with you on this. You don’t believe the kid, you think he’s a liar and a faker, etc. and I don’t. Fine. But it’s not even in keeping with the topic of the thread (debating whether he is who he says he is or not) so let’s move on.
Poor logic.
No-reason-to-doubt is not support of his claim.
You say yourself, he looks like a teenager.
Last time I checked, 18 is a teen year. In addition, I am not always able to tell the age of people, I’ve thought 14 year olds were 17 or 18 and vice versa.
Are you prepared for the law to be based on guesswork?
You may not think so, but you’d still be dead wrong and uninformed. Sorry.
You are cherrypicking.
They performed a federal investigation.
You have no proof what-so-ever.
Which of you should I trust?
Yes, they lost track of his case.
How does this imply that they were limiting American freedoms?
Hell, how does this imply they did it on purpose?
Was it wrong? You betcha.
Does it count for a lessening of American freedoms? Not in this reality at least.
You can see whatever you want.
You still haven’t proven how this has a Goddessdamn thing to do with American citizens.
Wrong and intellectually dishonest to boot!
I have only said there is no proof.
Belief is irrelevant.
The courts don’t care what you think of the kid, and they don’t care what I think of the kid either.
Try to stick to the issue please.
No, I do think this has a direct bearing on the thread.
You claim that American freedoms are being limited because the legal system doesn’t give blind faith to an illegal immigrant’s claims.
I call bullshit on this.
You then attempt to reduce it to a matter of ‘opinion’.
You are missing the point. Other than the immaterial facts that you can still be executed by firing squad, gas chamber or hanging if you wish. Whether or not what is legislated is right is immaterial.
America is not founded on the motto “The Land Of The Free,” but “Government By The Consent Of The Governed.” The fact that we (with the exceptions of slaves and women, more on that later) always have and always will have the power, the freedom, the inalienable right to change our government when we feel it necessary will guarantee our freedom as long as there are people to fight for it when necessary. That is why, as you may have noticed, women can vote and we don’t have slaves. People recognized the errancy of the system and exercised their inalienable right to change it.
Your right to buy dildos has jackshit to do with your freedom.
Turned out nice again hasn’t it.
(1) Due process. The president may now declare you to be an “enemy combatant”, as he did Jose Padilla, whose case the 4th district court has refused to hear, and deprive you of the right to trial, to counsel, and to face your accuser.
(2) Search and seizure. Your home may now be searched without your knowledge or consent. What books you check out, what e-mail you read, and what websites you surf may be examined even if you are not suspected of committing any crime.
(3) Religious freedom. Your church and your tithes to it may now be examined if HSA declares that your pastor or congregation is “subersive”.
I agree.
Regarding Jodi… just because America may have coined the phrase, doesn’t mean it can still be used with relevance today (as America being The Land of the Free). The phrase really means nothing, and everyone knows that.
When I said “anyone else”, I meant that I don’t think America is any more free than a number of non-developing countries. i.e. America is on an even par with England, Aus, NZ…not any higher or lower.
I can send you a cute possum to live in your roof and wee through your ceiling if you like. 
If America is so free, how come you gotta fight for your right to party?
Ok where is the potato-eatin dumbfuck what started this thread? Is he going to return to his trainwreck, or did the Guinness-provided fortitude totally wear off?
Sam
Someone speechifying last night heralded the great notion of an American woman’s right to make decisions with respect to her body. What utter bullshit. She can’t decide to have sex with her body in exchange for money. She can’t decide to put a marijuana brownie into her body. She can’t even decide in some states to buy a dildo and insert it into her body. Okay, people, you can stop with the woman’s right to her body crap until you actually mean it. Thanks.
Don’t count me in with the “everyone” who knows that. “Land of the Free” is not (merely) a boast, it’s an aspiration, and a call to vigilance.
Fr’instance (sic), I’m really looking forward to this coming election. Now more than ever, it feels like my vote really will be a shot fired in defense of our self-proclaimed, beleagured but not-yet-buried liberties.
Hoo-wah!
Thanks for throwing those out there, Liberal. To further answer Jodi’s question, which was initially directed at me, I’ll put a few more out there. (Remember this was in response to my claim that as a legislative researcher, who reads laws and proposed laws all day every day, I see many freedoms being degraded, and Jodi asked for examples.)
Well the biggest ones would be: laws and proposed laws to ban gay marriage and to limit civil unions and other rights between domestic partners (Virginia, my home state). I see so many of these bills, it’s not even funny. I see even more bills concerning abortion issues, basically trying to make abortion illegal. They (legislators) try every conceivable way they can think of to get this through. Another one I particularily love is bills taking away people’s rights to sue for medical damages or to sue their health insurer for the insurer’s refusal to cover certain care.
Hear hear, Liberal. The notion that a woman can make decisions about her body is total bunk. For example, I see laws and proposed laws all the time trying to limit access to the morning after pill.
Hey Finn, I don’t care if he’s American or not. He’s a human being.
sorry I’m late…
“Gie us a fookin’ Newcastle!”
LIBERAL –
I’m going to concede this one, because the decision in Padilla was and is very troubling.
Cite for the assertion that this can be done even if you are not suspected of any crime?
“Examined”? Is there a cite that I can look at?
NYCTEA –
This is not an erosion of some existing right. Gay people cannot marry in your home state as it is. This is not a right that is “vanishing before your eyes.”
“Try”? Do you have some law that has succeeded? Or are you interpreting the fact that some people would attempt to limit certain rights as evidence that the country as a whole is actually limiting rights? Because legislators of all stripes try to change the law all the time. These unsuccessful attempts hardly mean rights are “vanishing before your eyes.”
Bills are not laws. Bills have zero legal effect. The fact that someone proposes that something be done does not mean it will be done and that – presto! – rights are “vanishing before your eyes.” But as far as that’s concerned, tort reform laws (including caps on damages and health care suits) are subject to judicial scrutiny for constitutionality and are not infrequently struck down precisely because they are held to violate patients’ due process rights. That’s hardly an example of rights vanishing before your eyes.
For a legislative researcher, you seem to have a pretty tenuous grasp on the difference between and bill and a law, and the legal effect of each. You also seem to be a little unclear on the difference between a person, representative, or party trying to do something, and that thing actually successfully being done.
What a stupid argument. A woman can’t use her hands to steal things, either, or use her mouth to defame people; that doesn’t mean the issue is one of “making decisions with respect to her body,” as opposed to theft or defamation. Prostitution is illegal, narcotics are illegal – for both men and women. To recast these into issues of bodily integrity is ridiculous. It also overlooks the obvious context of the argument regarding “an American woman’s right to make decisions with respect to her body,” which is not how the body is voluntarily used, but what medical/ surgical procedures may or may not be done on it, and who decides that.
Again, “proposed laws” are not the same as laws. What state has a law banning the morning after pill? Or are you just making stuff up?
Silly silly Jodi. Many of the bills of which I speak pass. Which means they are laws. And the ones that don’t pass are reintroduced. There are many laws restricting access to the morning-after pill, and many medical malpractice damage caps, and many laws restricting gay rights. I specialize in tort reform, medical and insurance industry issues, and have an education and career in legislative research. I know what I am talking about. I am up to my eyeballs in this stuff and my company tracks legislation from the day it is born to the day it is passed and signed into law.
Oh and Jodi, I never said freedom had to be a law that existed then was taken away for me to mourn it’s loss or restriction. Rights and freedom are fundamental and exist for all humans, whether or not the law says they exist. Just because gays could never marry before doesn’t mean the fact they can’t is not an anti-freedom.
The fact that most states have legislators who are actively working to try to limit or ban abortion or gay marriage scares the shit out of me, and bolsters my opinion that this is not the land of the free. I know you disagree with that, but your disagreement certainly isn’t going to change my opinion.
Well, I don’t have much to add to this discussion - I asked a question and it was ignored, and I actually think the US is quite “freeish” anyhow.
I did, however, want to point out that we here in Canada have polar bears. Watch yer back missy…
So, um. Do you have any cites for the claims that Jodi is refuting? Cus that would go a long way to bolster your arguement.
I’m just sayin…
I sure do. Here is a sampling of some emergency contraception bills just from this year. Have fun.
HI HCR 247 requests the Food and Drug Administration to approve over-the-counter access for emergency contraception in the United States of America. This bill was KILLED.
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessioncurrent/bills/HCR247_.htm
HI HR 179 requests the Federal Food and Drug Administration to approve Plan B allowing emergency contraception to be dispensed over-the-counter. This bill was KILLED.
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessioncurrent/bills/HR179_.htm
KS HCR 5023 urges the United States Congress to pass HR 3453, known as the RU-486 suspension and review act of 2003, which would effectively prohibit the use of RU-486 until the Comptroller General of the United States thoroughly reviewed the federal Food and Drug Administration’s approval process for the drug.
http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2004/5023.pdf
KY HB 87 provides that a practitioner may dispense an emergency contraceptive to women who may or may not be patients of the practitioner; provide that emergency contraceptives may be dispensed by a practitioner in compliance with standards adopted by the respective licensing authority for the practitioner; requires the Board of Medical Licensure to establish standards by promulgation of administrative regulations relating to emergency contraceptives; provides that the definition of “abortion” does not include emergency contraceptives; permits a physician assistant to prescribe and administer an emergency contraceptive to the extent delegated by the supervising physician and in compliance with administrative regulations promulgated by the Board of Medical Licensure; provides that “registered nursing practice” includes the preparing and giving of emergency contraceptives under specified standards; provides that an advanced registered nurse practitioner may prescribe and dispense an emergency contraceptive in compliance with standards established by the Board of Nursing through administrative regulation. This bill was KILLED.
http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/record/04rs/HB87/bill.doc
MD HB 203 authorizes a licensed pharmacist to dispense emergency contraception if the pharmacist has a collaborative practice arrangement with a licensed physician that is approved by the State Board of Pharmacy and the State Board of Physicians. This bill stipulates that the arrangement can be initiated by either the licensed pharmacist or the licensed physician, and it can incorporate the physicians patients and other physicians patients, subject to the two boards approvals. The arrangements will be valid for two years, and the State Board of Pharmacy and the State Board of Physicians are required to jointly develop and adopt regulations to implement the provisions of this bill.
http://mlis.state.md.us/2004rs/bills/hb/hb0203f.rtf
MD HB 204 establishes the Emergency Contraception Dispensing Program under the auspices of the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene which seeds to authorize qualified licensed pharmacists to dispense emergency contraception without a prescription to women who meet the standards set out by the department. This bill further authorizes the department to establish educational requirements for pharmacists to be certified under this program, along with continued educational requirement for the renewal of certification every three years. This bill was KILLED.
http://mlis.state.md.us/2004rs/bills/hb/hb0204f.rtf
MI HR 189 is a resolution to urge the United States Food and Drug Administration not to approve Plan B®, “the morning-after pill,” as an over-the-counter medication.
http://www.michiganlegislature.org/mileg.asp?page=smartlink&userid=&objName=2003-HR-0189
MO SB 1158 creates the Woman’s Right to Know Act. The bill provides that the Division of Maternal, Child, and Family Health shall raise public awareness of the existence and availability of emergency contraception. This bill was KILLED.
OH HB 126 prohibits persons from knowingly giving, selling, dispensing, administering, otherwise providing, or prescribing RU-486 (mifepristone) to another for the purpose of inducing an abortion in certain situations. An amendment filed in December 2003 discusses provisions for automatic suspension.
http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=125_HB_0126
VT HB 552 permits a pharmacist to dispense emergency contraception in accordance with a protocol developed by the pharmacist and a physician or other prescriber. This bill was KILLED.
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/2004/bills/intro/H-552.HTM
VA HB 1414 prohibits any public institution of higher education in the Commonwealth from making available the morning-after pill approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration in its delivery of health care services to students.
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?041+ful+HB1414H1
VA SB 594 requires health insurers, corporations providing accident and sickness subscription contracts, and health maintenance organizations, whose policies, contracts, or plans include prescription drugs on an outpatient basis, to include coverage for any prescribed drug or device approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for use as a contraceptive. This bill was KILLED.
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?041+ful+SB594
WV HB 2906 allows a pharmacist to initiate emergency contraception drug therapy in accordance with standardized procedures and protocols developed by the pharmacist and a licensed health care professional licensed to prescribe medications who is acting within his or her scope of practice. A pharmacist must complete a training program on emergency contraception, delivered by an American council on pharmaceutical education providers or another training program approved by the state board of pharmacy. The training program shall include, but is not limited to, conduct of sensitive communications, quality assurance, referral to additional services, and documentation. This bill was KILLED.
http://129.71.164.29/Bill_Text_HTML/2004_SESSIONS/RS/House/H_BILLS/HB2901-3000/hb2906%20intr.htm
WV HB 4589 authorizes collaborative pharmacy practice agreements between pharmacists and physicians. The bill provides that the agreement may allow the pharmacist, within his or her scope of practice, to conduct drug therapy management activities approved by the collaborating physician, within that physician’s scope of practice. This bill was KILLED.
http://129.71.164.29/Bill_Text_HTML/2004_SESSIONS/RS/House/H_BILLS/HB4501-4600/hb4589%20intr.htm
WI AB 979 requires a hospital, if it provides emergency services to an alleged victim of sexual assault and has obtained the victim’s consent, to provide her with medically and factually accurate and unbiased written and oral information about emergency contraception, orally inform her of her option to receive emergency contraception, and provide emergency contraception immediately to her if she requests it. Additionally, this bill asserts that a pharmacy must have a pharmacist present at all times to distribute contraceptive articles, including emergency contraception. … Also, This bill requires a school board to include instruction in all sexually transmitted diseases, and requires instruction relating to sexual exploitation, acquaintance rape, the legal consequences of sexual contact with a minor, and marriage and family responsibility, including financial responsibility. This bill was KILLED.
http://www.legis.state.wi.us/2003/data/AB-979.pdf