Look Out Brexit, Here Comes Vexit!

[white avenger]

Citizens of several counties in the state of Virginia are campaigning to secede from Virginia and instead join the adjacent state of West Virginia in protest to what they consider oppressive new gun control and abortion laws to be enacted by the Virginia State Legislature. Interestingly enough, the state of West Virginia, for those not familiar with U S history, was originally formed when that portion of what was then Virginia seceded from the state rather than join Virginia nad the other Southern states in forming the Confederate States of America in the 1860's, the ultimate results of which was, of course, the American Civil War.

 

[vampmogs]

*sigh* Americans and their guns. Well done to Virginia for taking the necessary steps to protect it's people and let's hope more people come to their senses overtime.

 

[Anyanka Bunny Slayer]

Citizens of several counties in the state of Virginia are campaigning to secede from Virginia and instead join the adjacent state of West Virginia in protest to what they consider oppressive new gun control and abortion laws to be enacted by the Virginia State Legislature. Interestingly enough, the state of West Virginia, for those not familiar with U S history, was originally formed when that portion of what was then Virginia seceded from the state rather than join Virginia nad the other Southern states in forming the Confederate States of America in the 1860's, the ultimate results of which was, of course, the American Civil War.

I wish them all the best!! 🤠

 

[Priceless]

I may not agree, but I believe in democracy and if this is the will of the people in a democratic society, then so be it.

Personally as a European I do not understand US gun laws and would ban all weapons. As for abortion, pro choice all the way bae-bee

 

[WillowFromBuffy]

I think there are too many secession going on. Borders are completely arbitrary, but they have some utility. If we keep moving borders, then we are going to realise just how arbitrary they are. I don't think that is a good thing.

America is a massive country. You could have the communist gather in one place and secede into their own state, and then you could have the gun nuts gather in one place, and the BLM people could form their own state with their own police, and the anti contraceptive people in one state (which would have to be big enough to facilitate some growth), etc. Of course, the people of these new state would continue to hate everyone from the other states, but they would also start to invent new scapegoats within their own communities.

In the gun nut state, they would be arguing whether teenagers should be allowed to ride their own loaded tanks to school and on what justifies the preemptive use of a flame thrower.

 

[AlphaFoxtrot]

All the Southern States have a culture clash between "Old Dixie," and the "Sunbelt" going on. It's the worst in Florida and Virginia. The problem is greater with Virginia because northern Virginia is the DC suburbs and is almost exclusively migrants from other states, whereas Southern Virginia is the deep South. It's not just standard rural versus urban, it's more like Catholics versus Protestants.

 

[white avenger]

*sigh* Americans and their guns.

The possession of which is a right acknowledged by our Federal Constitution, not granted by the whim of elected officials, as well as the right to life of babies capable of living outside the womb without medical assistance.

(Note: I have change my original post here because I realize that it might be offensive to some members)

 

[vampmogs]

It isn't just about guns, it's also about the State authorities bypass the Constitutional right of freedom from illegal search and seizure and the legalization of "aborting" a baby up to the third trimester, which is, in effect, murdering an infant capable of living outside the womb. The former amounts to retroactive criminalization of law abiding citizens and seizure of legally owned private property both violations of rights acknowledged, not granted, by our founding fathers at the beginning of our country, and the latter amounts to legalizing the murder of living babies.

Sorry I'm afraid I disagree. But from your paragraph it is clear we have VERY different political and moral views and we will find no middle ground. So I'd like to leave it there.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

If the Virginia bill gets passed it sets a very bad precedent. It's outrageous how many people would turn into "criminals" if the law was passed.

 

[Fuffy]

If the law passes, Vriginia residents won't be able to practice a constitutional right to protect themselves from tyranny, sad 🙁

 

[TriBel]

The possession of which is a right acknowledged by our Federal Constitution, not granted by the whim of elected officials, as well as the right to life of babies capable of living outside the womb without medical assistance.

I got the impression (from the BBC and CNN) it only applied in cases where there was severe risk to the mother's health or where the fetus/child was severely deformed or not viable - not where the child was capable of living without assistance. The big change seemed to be the number of signatures required from doctors (from 3 down to 1). Am I (they) mistaken? There were also some changes mooted to 2nd trimester abortions.

 

[Anyanka Bunny Slayer]

The possession of which is a right acknowledged by our Federal Constitution, not granted by the whim of elected officials, as well as the right to life of babies capable of living outside the womb without medical assistance.

(Note: I have change my original post here because I realize that it might be offensive to some members)

Whatever happened to birth control? If you know you're going to bang someone, use protection. How many "get out of jail free" cards does someone NEED? "Oh yeah. I might get pregnant...but hey! No problem! I can just skip over to the doctor and take care of that! Yippee!"

 

[Skanky Vamp]

I got the impression (from the BBC and CNN) it only applied in cases where there was severe risk to the mother's health or where the fetus/child was severely deformed or not viable - not where the child was capable of living without assistance. The big change seemed to be the number of signatures required from doctors (from 3 down to 1). Am I (they) mistaken? There were also some changes mooted to 2nd trimester abortions.

For the record the bill seeks to:

Eliminate the requirement that an abortion in the second trimester of pregnancy and prior to the third trimester be performed in a hospital.
Eliminate all the procedures and processes required to effect a woman's informed written consent to the performance of an abortion.
Eliminate the requirement that two other physicians certify that a third trimester abortion is necessary for the woman's health.
Eliminate the requirement that any such impairment to the woman's health would be substantial and irremediable.

So it's more than just changing the number of doctors needed. It's in essence saying that if a woman can get a doctor's signature saying the birth would cause her any temporary impairment then a 3rd trimester abortion is warranted.

 

[white avenger]

I got the impression (from the BBC and CNN) it only applied in cases where there was severe risk to the mother's health or where the fetus/child was severely deformed or not viable - not where the child was capable of living without assistance.

Essentially, that was one of the proposed reasons for the initial legalization of abortion in the U S, along wit cases such as rape, incest, or when the mother's health or well being was either put in danger, or she was judged to be mentally incompetent to raise a child, even with help. Sadly there do come those rare times when a choice has to be made whether to allow a baby to develop fully or save the potential mother's life. That is, unfortunately, a simple fact of life. It didn't take long, however, before it became just a form of retroactive birth control.

Once such a law is enacted, it can easily be reinterpreted even up to the point that the delivering physician can break the baby's neck within the birth canal. This is the problem wit just about any law. Once enacted. some judge somewhere can arbitrarily give a ruling totally changing the actual spirit of the original law.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

@Professor Walsh It is very rare here as well. Of course some could argue that that is partially because of the rules in place which limit them from happening in many states.

 

[ILLYRIAN]

Here's food for thought, that those folk who want abortions to be allowed might be allowing the babies that will become the adults who want to stop abortions from happening in the future?