The whole "not pro-life" thing isn't terribly meaningful. Pro-life refers specifically to one side of the abortion debate and nobody ever claimed that the label, by itself, says anything outside the context of abortion. Compare the term "pro-choice" and ask how many of the people who employ it support positions of maximum individual freedom and autonomy outside the context of abortion. Do they support an individual's choice to own a firearm? School choice? A merchant or artisan's choice not to provide services for gay weddings? Maximal deregulation of all industries? In most cases, probably not, and they have reasons for all those stances, and they all fit together into a more or less coherent worldview, but just saying, "Aha! You support paternalism in this or that respect, so you're not really in favor of 'choice' at all!" will earn you some rolled eyes and possibly a rude gesture.Turnabout is fair, and I accept your point that I'm increasing isolated politically.
They could try, but it wouldn't stick. State laws don't have jurisdiction outside their own borders. Pretty sure that's firmly established.
They could try, but it wouldn't stick. State laws don't have jurisdiction outside their own borders. Pretty sure that's firmly established.
If that's the case, I wonder how a State Government implementing such laws thinks how it can prosecute women (and their 'assistants') who would go 'clinic-shopping' outside their own state.
You're goin' to be an Independent, Rusty? :o
You're goin' to be an Independent, Rusty? :o
I've never voted, or contributed $ to re-elect a president.
Regardless, I've started labeling myself as an independent in surveys and polls this year.
You're goin' to be an Independent, Rusty? :o
I've never voted, or contributed $ to re-elect a president.
That's (predominantly) out of the citizens' hands here. IIRC, political parties elected in Parliament receive donations from the State respective to the percentage of votes they received in the last ballot. Private citizen gifts are of course possible, but personally I never saw the point of that.Regardless, I've started labeling myself as an independent in surveys and polls this year.
Any particular reason you wish to participate in such surveys and polls?
My 'political color' isn't something I entrust to such semi-anonymous entities.
Is there a law in the US that an official in office can't be prosecuted as long as he stays in office?
Because I reckon a number of those elected officials are still in Congress or Senate or whatever.
That said, you are more likely to be likely to be "polled" with the intent of persuading you by the wording of the questions or adding you to a donor's or volunteers list based on your answers. As it happens, I happen to live in what is probably the key county in a swing state, so sometimes candidates and political action committees actually care what I think.
Is there a law in the US that an official in office can't be prosecuted as long as he stays in office?
Because I reckon a number of those elected officials are still in Congress or Senate or whatever.
It only applies to the president, to keep him from being tied up in murder trials for everything the USA does, or people think it does. The same reason we don't recognize the authority of the World Court.
As for the rest of them, I quite agree they should be called to account and held responsible. But, because of free speech provisions, and the fact that the Republicans are likely to be petty and vindictive towards the FBI or prosecutors that dare to call them out, and the unlikeliness of getting an entire jury to convict in a polarized environment- they're being pretty cautious. I expect most of them will get away with what they did, but it isn't over yet.