Slashdot Mirror
US Citizens To Require ''Clearance'' To Leave?
jo7hs2 writes "The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has proposed a system which will in essence make it mandatory for you to have permission before leaving or entering the country, effectively putting everyone on a no-fly list unless the government says otherwise. Interestingly, the proposal does not seem to cover personal travel, only that on some sort of carrier like an airline or cruise vessel. While this certainly is concerning, it isn't exactly new, as a passport is already required for circumstances covered under the proposal."
permission for EVERY entrance and exit? Does the DHS even have the infrastructure to handle that?
If this assumption was made in error, and in fact the fetus is deserving of 'choice', a choice to live, then it is easily seen that Pro-Life would not in fact contradict the ideals of the Democrats which are civil liberties, economic equality and opportunity etc.
I am in fact one of those who adopt this platform. Liberal social issues, conservative moral issues. They do not contradict each other.
Lastly, I posit that women do have a choice, when they choose sex without appropriate contraception. Don't mention rape, because rape cases can be dealt with separately.
Lastly, I would present this solution to the abortion issue: A woman may have an abortion if at the time of conception, measures were taken to prevent conception by a government approved contraceptive device such as an IUD, except in cases of rape. Furthermore, such contraception will be made freely available to the public free of charge, by the government. Possibly including the distribution of the contraceptives in our public school system. (Notice I'm not a stock republican here)
Thus, the privileged to have an abortion, like driving a car, may be exercised only when certain requirements are met: namely, like insurance and a drivers test, you took reasonable steps to prevent pregnancy. If, as did my wife, you get pregnant while on an approved contraception, a woman may rid her self of the baby/fetus.
This is a compromise. It does not remove all abortions, and it does not remove the choice of women.
The power of this solution lies in its ability to move the debate into new ground. Conservatives will still want to stop abortion, but a large portions of abortions AND unwanted pregnancies would be prevented a,d this they could not say no too. Liberals may win smaller, but the give up less: however choice is validified by being coupled with a strong and established concept: Responsibility.
No choice without responsibility. No responsibility without choice.
Sounds like taxes and the Boston Tea Party.
A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.
Choice? Democrats traditionally is bout social programs...Eliminating poverty, civil liberties, etc.
The right to choose what you want to do with your own body is very much about civil liberties. The Government doesn't have the right to tell you that you can't put drugs into your body, it doesn't have the right to tell you that you have to wear a seat belt, it doesn't have the right to tell you what to eat and it certainly doesn't have the right to regulate when a woman can terminate a pregnancy.
Abortion is just a small part of that platform, whose inclusion is dependent upon an assumption, namely that the unborn is not losing a choice when the woman is given one. This is an assumption, or perhaps a reasonable loss for the greater good. If this assumption was made in error, and in fact the fetus is deserving of 'choice', a choice to live, then it is easily seen that Pro-Life would not in fact contradict the ideals of the Democrats which are civil liberties, economic equality and opportunity etc.
To my way of thinking it doesn't matter what the fetus is "deserving" of. The bottom line is that the Government can not force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term. The Government has no right to tell anybody what they can do with their body. Perhaps one day science will provide a solution to the problem (i.e: bringing a fetus to term with technology instead of the womb), but until that happens the Government has no place telling a woman that she must carry a fetus to term. It's her body and her choice.
Thus, the privileged to have an abortion, like driving a car, may be exercised only when certain requirements are met: namely, like insurance and a drivers test, you took reasonable steps to prevent pregnancy. If, as did my wife, you get pregnant while on an approved contraception, a woman may rid her self of the baby/fetus.
That's bullshit. The right to choose what to do with your own body is not a "privilege" like driving. And she needs to prove that she was using contraception? How exactly does she do that? You aren't a Democrat or a Republican. You are a fascist.
I'll say it again. It is a waste of time for the Democrats to court religious conservatives. And the day that the Democratic Party abandons choice from it's platform is the day that I start voting Green or Working Families. I'm male and I feel this strongly about it.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.