• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge finds NC "Choose Life" plate unconstitutioonal

You missed the entire point of the OP's lawsuit. It was not simply against the free use of the issued tag's opinion, it was against not having any equal opportunity to counter it. The state legislature accpted stating one political viewpoint (via state issued tags) and rejected the stating of the opposing political viewpoint (via state issued tags).


The point is glaringly obvious but why find the need to counter "Choose Life"? What's so bad about that?

Those who find an innocuous couple of words like "Choose Life" offensive, and go to court about it, should choose a more productive life themselves.
 
I kind of agree with them. If you are going to offer one side of a controversial issue on a license plate, you should probably be offering the other one.

Or we can rise above the intellectual level of a 5 year old who wants something just because his sibling got it too.

Honestly, it's a ****ing licence plate, it's not changing anyone's views. This is one of those "choose your battles" moments in life. It's the same thing as the whole 'freedom fries' debacle. Who ****ing cares? Why not spend your time on something that actually matters?

*edit* Rant not aimed specifically at you
 
Last edited:
Or we can rise above the intellectual level of a 5 year old who wants something just because his sibling got it too.

Honestly, it's a ****ing licence plate, it's not changing anyone's views. This is one of those "choose your battles" moments in life. It's the same thing as the whole 'freedom fries' debacle. Who ****ing cares? Why not spend your time on something that actually matters?

iLOL @ the Irony in your post.


The "Freedom Fries" idea also originated from a North Carolina politician and a region of North Carolina on the coast.
 
Those who find an innocuous couple of words like "Choose Life" offensive, and go to court about it, should choose a more productive life themselves.

People do not find words like "Choose Life" offensive, what they find offesive is that you cannot have "Pro-Choice" as well. What's so wrong about Pro-Choice or are you one of those that are "offended" if the government would allow that on plates?
 
iLOL @ the Irony in your post.


The "Freedom Fries" idea also originated from a North Carolina politician and a region of North Carolina on the coast.

Where's the irony? People wasting their time on stupid things...
 
People do not find words like "Choose Life" offensive, what they find offesive is that you cannot have "Pro-Choice" as well. What's so wrong about Pro-Choice or are you one of those that are "offended" if the government would allow that on plates?

Choose life is a pro-choice option/response.
 
Where's the irony? People wasting their time on stupid things...

The irony is that this thread is about an issue in North Carolina.......

And you brought up the Freedom Fries..... which is also something that kind of has most of its roots here in.... North Carolina.
 
The irony is that this thread is about an issue in North Carolina.......

And you brought up the Freedom Fries..... which is also something that kind of has most of its roots here in.... North Carolina.

Oh...and people complain about texas... :cool:
 
Good work - but not quite.
None of these lawshuits are predicated on a pro-gun rights argument; rather, they focus on improer actions by the government - that is, the government acting outside of its bounds - independent of any right to arms held by the plantiff(s).
 
People do not find words like "Choose Life" offensive, what they find offesive is that you cannot have "Pro-Choice" as well. What's so wrong about Pro-Choice or are you one of those that are "offended" if the government would allow that on plates?

So the pro choicers are actually anti life? How does Choose Life conflict with any pro choice message? Aren't the pro choicers also pro life?

I'm not offended by pro choice on license plates and would not go to court to sue someone if it was on a license plate. Life is just too damn short.
 
And if they were to allow Pro-Choice as well, there wouldn't be a problem.

Or people can stop acting like they are 5 years old.

The plate already does take a pro-choice stance. Choose life is a choice. What do you want, a license plate that says "choose death"? That would be the opposite in this case.

Honestly it's just a bunch of people whining about nothing, this isn't a equal rights issue. It's a bunch of people who do not realize that the plate already upholds the position of almost every single person in the US. It covers pro-choice, it makes a statement respecting life.
 
And if they were to allow Pro-Choice as well, there wouldn't be a problem.
I certainly wouldn't care, and would vote to allow it if I were in the position. At the same time, I don't think the state should be forced to make Pro-Choice (or any specialty plate) available.
 
Good work - but not quite.
None of these lawshuits are predicated on a pro-gun rights argument; rather, they focus on improer actions by the government - that is, the government acting outside of its bounds - independent of any right to arms held by the plantiff(s).

While I agree that the ACLU is not eager to defend/extend our 2nd amendment rights, it must, on occasion, do so. As you rightly point out, the ALCU has yet to attack CCW permits, and other "infringements" on the right to keep and bear (carry) arms, simply based on them being unconstitutional violations of the 2nd amendment. Sad that a civil liberties organization, eager to protect some rights does not see that the "bill of rights" did "prioritize" those rights (realtive to each other), but makes them equally important by placing them into the Constitution directly.
 
While I agree that the ACLU is not eager to defend/extend our 2nd amendment rights, it must, on occasion, do so.
You'd think - but its official position is that it will not.

Second Amendment | American Civil Liberties Union

Sad that a civil liberties organization, eager to protect some rights does not see that the "bill of rights" did "prioritize" those rights (realtive to each other), but makes them equally important by placing them into the Constitution directly.
One really must wonder why those who are so concerned about rights not listed in the constitution, save for court rulungs of the court, are so happy to ignore rghts that are listed specifically in the constitution, because they hold a position in direct opposition to the rulings of the court.
 
So the pro choicers are actually anti life? How does Choose Life conflict with any pro choice message? Aren't the pro choicers also pro life?

I'm not offended by pro choice on license plates and would not go to court to sue someone if it was on a license plate. Life is just too damn short.

I dont really see how "Choose Life" is in any way shape or form contradictory to the idea of pro choice.

By using the word CHOOSE, is already covers the fact that there is a choice.....

And by using the word LIFE, it is covering the moral high ground of your options.
 
Or we can rise above the intellectual level of a 5 year old who wants something just because his sibling got it too.

Honestly, it's a ****ing licence plate, it's not changing anyone's views. This is one of those "choose your battles" moments in life. It's the same thing as the whole 'freedom fries' debacle. Who ****ing cares? Why not spend your time on something that actually matters?

Well I'm not spending any of my time on it, but in a perfect world they should offer both sides. I don't think the government should be getting into the business of only sponsoring one side of highly controversial issues, even on something as unlikely to change someone's views as a license plate.
 
What kind of ***** ass cops are in your area.

Most cops here are NRA supporters themselves.

Canadian cops mainly since your not allowed to carry guns. If you do you'll be arrested. It's also a safety reason if a person possibly has a gun they are going to treat you with their safety in mind.
 
That's interesting. I have a "Prevent Domestic Violence" license plate. Is there a "Domestic Violence Rocks" plate out there somewhere?
Likely not.
Contact the ACLU and they will sue your state.
 
Well I'm not spending any of my time on it, but in a perfect world they should offer both sides. I don't think the government should be getting into the business of only sponsoring one side of highly controversial issues, even on something as unlikely to change someone's views as a license plate.

What's controversial about saying "Choose Life"? Who is against the concept?
 
Maybe the pro choice people could get their point across with bumper stickers. Something like "I got scraped at the Blue State Clinic". You have to PAY for a specialty plate, they can probably get theirs for free considering the government would be willing to pay for the procedure, particularly if they are underage.
 
Back
Top Bottom