SCOTUS Getting Shade Over Roe v Wade

[Hlaalu Agent]

The thing is.

Soldiers are federal property. And if the military really wanted to one could claim that abortions keep the federal property from, insert X reason, and have them be a thing.

And no state can overrule what the mikitary base says, and state rules do not apply on a military base if the base commander says so.

Vice versa as well.
For instance, Texas is a constitutional carry state.
Can't do that on the base. No sheriff can override the base.

All I am saying is states have no legal rights on a military base and vice versa.

I am pretty sure that you abolished slavery. Treating anyone as chattel seems unamerican, and goes against what I assume to be the premise of a volunteer military.

And now I understand why your founding fathers didn't want a standing army- it is shit like this. The military becomes a political power on its own and a tool for oppressing your citizenry. Or for ambitious generals to see power...I really don't want to see someone casting the die in my lifetime (well, in a western country).

Well, maybe states should assert their rights and use as much lawfare as possible to put your military in its place. Which is, the defender of your nation and its people (and DEMOCRACY), not to interfere with the domestic politics of your nation.

 

[Bacle]

The thing is.

Soldiers are federal property. And if the military really wanted to one could claim that abortions keep the federal property from, insert X reason, and have them be a thing.

And no state can overrule what the mikitary base says, and state rules do not apply on a military base if the base commander says so.

Vice versa as well.
For instance, Texas is a constitutional carry state.
Can't do that on the base. No sheriff can override the base.

All I am saying is states have no legal rights on a military base and vice versa.

Except the issues isn't that the bases are Fed property, which is what you are harping on, and more that the Feds have no laws on abortion to fall back on to justify any position they take, because abortion laws are state level laws.

Thus, there is no law governing abortion on military bases, because there is no Fed law for them to lean on anymore, now that Roe is gone.

This is a grey limbo that I do not think the military has an easy answer for, because until/unless a Federal level law is passed about abortion, base commanders and JAG have nothing but state level laws to work with to make decisions.

And when the Feds have no laws on a subject, as in this case, it does default to the states. I mean I guess the military could decide to default to whatever the law is for the District of Colombia as a Federal city/jurisdiction, but I kinda doubt that's what is going to happen.

Bacle, there are two ways I see this.

Either they're going to allow abortions on Federal Land* or they're going to ship people to other states to get the procedure. They can't just roll up to an abortion clinic or a hospital in the state, get an abortion, laugh, and drive off. That's not how it works. Primarily because it would be illegal for those care providers to do it.


*And if you have a problem with that, that's fair, but you first need to address the issue of Federal Land, what are its limits, and where it should be located before you complain that they do things you don't like on Federal Land. Federal Land belongs to the Feds, even if it's located within your state.

This is less about Fed vs state land, and more that since there are no longer any Federal-level laws regarding abortion, that means all laws regarding it default to the state level.

This is a rather unique situation where the military and Feds have no laws to look to for legal guidance, because the only laws that address the subject are state-level laws now. Which is where the issue of state-level laws being applied to military personnel on base 9because the have no Fed laws on the matter now) could come into play.

But you are right they will probably just ship any female service member to a state where there aren't restrictions to have an abortion preformed, to dodge jurisdictional issues altogether.

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

I am pretty sure that you abolished slavery. Treating anyone as chattel seems unamerican, and goes against what I assume to be the premise of a volunteer military.

And now I understand why your founding fathers didn't want a standing army- it is shit like this. The military becomes a political power on its own and a tool for oppressing your citizenry. Or for ambitious generals to see power...I really don't want to see someone casting the die in my lifetime (well, in a western country).

Well, maybe states should assert their rights and use as much lawfare as possible to put your military in its place. Which is, the defender of your nation and its people (and DEMOCRACY), not to interfere with the domestic politics of your nation.

Hell, the Founders didn't even want Federal intelligence Networks as they felt that any active, permanent spy agency would invariably end up hopelessly corrupt and disloyal. Amassing power for itself, and its own sake.

And so wanted all intelligence agencies to be privately funded, volunteer forces and solely active during war time.

 

[Simonbob]

Guys, let it go. The military is not under conventianal law, there are very big differences between the freedom of the civilian and those within.

In the military, you must do some things. Must. It's not slavery, but it's much closer than you get outside, and that's part and parcel of being in. That's the nature of the beast.

 

[Cherico]

We're all better off this week than last week.

 

[lloyd007]

I do love the whole, "We're so fkn progressive that our 'healthcare' will reimburse a $4k vacation to a blue state for abortion!" raft of companies that just lined up to stick it to the SCOTUS / Pro Life.

No ya ain't... you're either lying through your teeth or you're so woke you're gonna go broke really damned quickly once your workers really realize you've turned into a game show giving away free trips.

 

[nemo1986]

I do love the whole, "We're so fkn progressive that our 'healthcare' will reimburse a $4k vacation to a blue state for abortion!" raft of companies that just lined up to stick it to the SCOTUS / Pro Life.

No ya ain't... you're either lying through your teeth or you're so woke you're gonna go broke really damned quickly once your workers really realize you've turned into a game show giving away free trips.

If that is true I expect a lot of these requests popping up every year by the same people. Never doubt someone's ability to find loopholes in any procedure to milk the company.

 

[Simonbob]

Well, @Zachowon, you were right in that I hadn't looked at the text of the statement itself.

I've done that now. It tells me two things.

1) At best, the SecDef doesn't know what the federal laws on abortion are, and based on the dog whistle language, doesn't care.

2) He's the political appointee, and as such, I was wrong. When generals start saying such things, I'll be right.


It's still not a good sign, but not nearly as bad as I though.

 

[lloyd007]

If that is true I expect a lot of these requests popping up every year by the same people. Never doubt someone's ability to find loopholes in any procedure to milk the company.

Every year? I expect more than a few to try it every month since unlike, say, the 'welfare babies' of yesteryear, here it's not having a kid.

 

[Ixian]

Oh this will end well...

I think it's just General Woke putting his foot in his mouth. Even if the military plans to continue allowing women serving to get abortions, they can't very well do it in states which have no abortion clinics.

Which means they'll be flying those women to states that do have abortion clinics. So it seems like it isn't so much the Pentagon plans to ignore the SC ruling, and more they don't understand what reversing Row v Wade actually did.

Completely forgot about Base Hospitals, well that'll be a shit show.

 

[Battlegrinder]

I do love the whole, "We're so fkn progressive that our 'healthcare' will reimburse a $4k vacation to a blue state for abortion!" raft of companies that just lined up to stick it to the SCOTUS / Pro Life.

No ya ain't... you're either lying through your teeth or you're so woke you're gonna go broke really damned quickly once your workers really realize you've turned into a game show giving away free trips.

Oh no, I think they're very serious. Maternity leave is about $8000, sometimes more. They'd much rather pay for some plane tickets.



One would think that principled feminist would maybe have an issue with that, but even Ginsburg was like "nah, we gotta allow the baby murder, otherwise it'll slow down women's ladder climbing".

 

[strunkenwhite]

That's a public statement of support for one side of politics, as well as pretty blatently saying they'll mostly ignore a decision handed down by one of the arbiters of "federal law", otherwise known as the Supreme Court.

That's unashamely political, Zach. It's picking a side, and it's pretty open about it.

Look, if there was a quiet change, where women in the service could get short transfers for "medical reasons", and they didn't make a big deal of it, I wouldn't like it, but I wouldn't complain much. It wouldn't be choosing a side, and it wouldn't smack of ignoring laws they don't like.

This is not something reasonable like that. Not even close.

It is picking a side, but it's not ignoring the decision. Like, imagine a highway going from A to B. You're king of the highway. You decide you don't want anyone going from A to B, so you put up a roadblock. I want to go from A to B, and I know of a side road, so I use that instead. I'm not ignoring your roadblock—smashing through it on the highway. I'm getting around it.

 

[Hlaalu Agent]

It is picking a side, but it's not ignoring the decision. Like, imagine a highway going from A to B. You're king of the highway. You decide you don't want anyone going from A to B, so you put up a roadblock. I want to go from A to B, and I know of a side road, so I use that instead. I'm not ignoring your roadblock—smashing through it on the highway. I'm getting around it.

No, it really isn't. It is more like trying to avoid a border checkpoint, so you can smuggle in illicit goods. Yes, you are getting around it, but unlawfully and immorally.

 

[strunkenwhite]

No, it really isn't. It is more like trying to avoid a border checkpoint, so you can smuggle in illicit goods. Yes, you are getting around it, but unlawfully and immorally.

Some are advocating for that. Not the Secretary of Defense.

 

[Sergeant Foley]

I wonder if the "insurrectionists" yelling in the background will spend, what was it? A year and a half or so of solitary confinement? It'll be interesting to see how hard (ha ha) or light the authorities will be on these "insurrectionists".

The jackassery of the Arizona Democrats continues

 

[Zachowon]

Lol, no they can't say that at all. This logic explicitly would allow the military to just take servicemen's children and forcibly induct them into the military at birth. Or experiment on them. Or give them away to their pedophile bosses.

Sweet fuck, I knew you were shill, but I never thought you were this much a dog of the military.

Soldiers can be charged with damaging federal property for attacking another soldier.
Article 108 of the UCMJ, and within the explanation federal property is things or personnel.

The soldier os government property. The government owns them.

for insyance if you live in a house off post as a soldier, you can still have your command come and check on you eithout a warrant. Because that is how it works.

the military isnnot the civilian world. On base the UCMJ is the law of the land.


Fun fact: Adultery is s crime in the military andnis punishable.

Well, @Zachowon, you were right in that I hadn't looked at the text of the statement itself.

I've done that now. It tells me two things.

1) At best, the SecDef doesn't know what the federal laws on abortion are, and based on the dog whistle language, doesn't care.

2) He's the political appointee, and as such, I was wrong. When generals start saying such things, I'll be right.


It's still not a good sign, but not nearly as bad as I though.

It is not as bad comepeltly correct.

It isn't good but isn't horrible as people are saying

 

[Bacle]

Fun fact: Adultery is s crime in the military andnis punishable.

Oh please, that's a farce and a half given how there are on-base prostitution rings among 'Army Wives', and how often spouse's cheat while their SO is deployed.

And if you dare cheat back, then there goes your pension and benefits, which the initially adulterous SO can now take and use as they wish.

Don't pretend this doesn't happen either, because I know someone who it did happen to.

 

[Bacle]

Okla. lawmaker offers 'tongue-in-cheek' response to abortion bill: mandatory vasectomies

TULSA, Okla. (KTUL) – A Democratic state representative introduced a "tongue-in-cheek proposal" to mandate vasectomies for males in Oklahoma. Rep. Mickey Dollens, the minority whip, brought up the idea last week on the House floor in response to the Republican-led Oklahoma Legislature passing...

ktul.com

I would invite you to co-author a bill that I'm considering next year that would mandate that each male, when they reach puberty, get a mandatory vasectomy that's only reversible when they reach the point of financial and emotional stability," Dollens told fellow lawmakers.

"If you think that's crazy, then I think that maybe you understand how 50% of Oklahomans feel, as well," he continued.

he acknowledged the idea was “tongue-in-cheek” and intended to "fight fire with fire" against the GOP’s “extreme” anti-abortion bills, which he contends are politically motivated.

“The party of so-called limited government and personal freedom has become the party of an intrusion,” he said in his MSNBC interview.

“I’ll be on the record to say I don’t believe that government should regulate anyone’s reproductive system,” Dollens said.

Dollens, speaking to fellow lawmakers last week, said birth control, family planning, sex education and increasing wages would make a difference in reducing unwanted pregnancies.

This is the sort of response I kinda expected from Dems who want to up their profile, while pushing unConstitutional and illegal bills out of spite about Roe going the way of the dodo.

 

[Zachowon]

Oh please, that's a farce and a half given how there are on-base prostitution rings among 'Army Wives', and how often spouse's cheat while their SO is deployed.

And if you dare cheat back, then there goes your pension and benefits, which the initially adulterous SO can now take and use as they wish.

Don't pretend this doesn't happen either, because I know someone who it did happen to.

UCMJ Article 134: Adultery - Bilecki Law Group, PLLC

Adultery is a serious offense under article 134 of the UCMJ. Find out the details of this military article, and how you can fight it.

www.bileckilawgroup.com

UCMJ Article 134: Bigamy - Bilecki Law Group, PLLC

Have you been charged with bigamy under Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice? Contact us today!

www.bileckilawgroup.com

People don't press charges often is why.

But again, you dint actually know ow the UCMJ....

Article 134: Pandering and Prostitution Defense | Bilecki Law Group

If you have been accused of pandering and/or prostitution, an experienced military defense attorney from Bilecki Law Group, PLLC can help you. Contact us today!

www.bileckilawgroup.com

Because when word spreads and the cops get called the rings are caught.

Did your buddy call MPs?
No?

 

[Bacle]

UCMJ Article 134: Adultery - Bilecki Law Group, PLLC

Adultery is a serious offense under article 134 of the UCMJ. Find out the details of this military article, and how you can fight it.

www.bileckilawgroup.com

UCMJ Article 134: Bigamy - Bilecki Law Group, PLLC

Have you been charged with bigamy under Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice? Contact us today!

www.bileckilawgroup.com

People don't press charges often is why.

But again, you dint actually know ow the UCMJ....

Article 134: Pandering and Prostitution Defense | Bilecki Law Group

If you have been accused of pandering and/or prostitution, an experienced military defense attorney from Bilecki Law Group, PLLC can help you. Contact us today!

www.bileckilawgroup.com

Because when word spreads and the cops get called the rings are caught.

Did your buddy call MPs?
No?

He was deployed when shit happened, and didn't find out till he got back; at which point he cheated himself once or twice to get back at her.

Which got him kicked out, his cheating SO got all his benefits besides the VA (despite the fact she divorced him and married who she was cheating on him with), and nothing happened to the guy who had an affair with his SO while my buddy was deployed.

So yeah, the USMJ is completely at the whim of base commanders and such when it comes to this stuff, and the law is not applied equally to all parties, even when they are caught breaking it.