Blues States banning travel to Indiana is an Act of War

[SwimExpert]

"Today, I direct all agencies, departments, boards and commissions to immediately review all requests for state funded or state sponsored travel to the State of Indiana and to bar any such publicly funded travel that is not essential to the enforcement of state law or public health and safety. The ban on publicly funded travel shall take effect immediately.

"New York State has been, and will continue to be, a leader in ensuring that all LGBT persons enjoy full and equal civil rights. With this action, we stand by our LGBT family members, friends and colleagues to ensure that their rights are respected."

Today, I, the Governor of New York, commission this Act of War (trade sanction) against the State of Indiana, as we stand by our allies (democrat voting block) against their Enemy (conservatives and constitutionalists).

I'm sorry that states rights makes you so angry.

 

[Skylar]

"Today, I direct all agencies, departments, boards and commissions to immediately review all requests for state funded or state sponsored travel to the State of Indiana and to bar any such publicly funded travel that is not essential to the enforcement of state law or public health and safety. The ban on publicly funded travel shall take effect immediately.

"New York State has been, and will continue to be, a leader in ensuring that all LGBT persons enjoy full and equal civil rights. With this action, we stand by our LGBT family members, friends and colleagues to ensure that their rights are respected."

Today, I, the Governor of New York, commission this Act of War (trade sanction) against the State of Indiana, as we stand by our allies (democrat voting block) against their Enemy (conservatives and constitutionalists).

I'm sorry that states rights makes you so angry.

It would be a much shorter list if you included those things that didn't.

 

[Gadawg73]

Georgia Republicans killed the Religious Freedom Act here. We ain't milk weak sissies afraid of the gay boogeyman. We have more important issues to address.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

"Today, I direct all agencies, departments, boards and commissions to immediately review all requests for state funded or state sponsored travel to the State of Indiana and to bar any such publicly funded travel that is not essential to the enforcement of state law or public health and safety. The ban on publicly funded travel shall take effect immediately.

"New York State has been, and will continue to be, a leader in ensuring that all LGBT persons enjoy full and equal civil rights. With this action, we stand by our LGBT family members, friends and colleagues to ensure that their rights are respected."

Today, I, the Governor of New York, commission this Act of War (trade sanction) against the State of Indiana, as we stand by our allies (democrat voting block) against their Enemy (conservatives and constitutionalists).

I'm sorry that states rights makes you so angry.

When a State joins the Union, it forfeits the right to inflict harm upon other members States and Territories in the Union. Otherwise, it's NOT A UNION

 

[SwimExpert]

"Today, I direct all agencies, departments, boards and commissions to immediately review all requests for state funded or state sponsored travel to the State of Indiana and to bar any such publicly funded travel that is not essential to the enforcement of state law or public health and safety. The ban on publicly funded travel shall take effect immediately.

"New York State has been, and will continue to be, a leader in ensuring that all LGBT persons enjoy full and equal civil rights. With this action, we stand by our LGBT family members, friends and colleagues to ensure that their rights are respected."

Today, I, the Governor of New York, commission this Act of War (trade sanction) against the State of Indiana, as we stand by our allies (democrat voting block) against their Enemy (conservatives and constitutionalists).

I'm sorry that states rights makes you so angry.

When a State joins the Union, it forfeits the right to inflict harm upon other members States and Territories in the Union. Otherwise, it's NOT A UNION

So, choosing to not spend taxpayer money in Indiana is "inflicting harm"?

 

[initforme]

So if a state boycotts another state, where is the harm? Are we not free to do business where we want? I've seen business boycotts my whole life. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. More often than not they don't work, so what is the big deal. As a customer, state's can decide if they don't want to do business with another state. There is no issue here.

 

[Skylar]

"Today, I direct all agencies, departments, boards and commissions to immediately review all requests for state funded or state sponsored travel to the State of Indiana and to bar any such publicly funded travel that is not essential to the enforcement of state law or public health and safety. The ban on publicly funded travel shall take effect immediately.

"New York State has been, and will continue to be, a leader in ensuring that all LGBT persons enjoy full and equal civil rights. With this action, we stand by our LGBT family members, friends and colleagues to ensure that their rights are respected."

Today, I, the Governor of New York, commission this Act of War (trade sanction) against the State of Indiana, as we stand by our allies (democrat voting block) against their Enemy (conservatives and constitutionalists).

I'm sorry that states rights makes you so angry.

When a State joins the Union, it forfeits the right to inflict harm upon other members States and Territories in the Union. Otherwise, it's NOT A UNION

Refusing to spend public funds on unnecessary travel is hardly an 'act of war'.

You went for your fainting couch a tad too early on this one.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Travels bans and economic sanctions and trade bans, this was our policy towards Cuba, Iran and many other hostile nations.

Indiana has committed no Act of War against the Blue States, why are the Blue States committing Acts of War against Indiana for how Indiana chooses to govern its own citizenry? This is a one of the States in our Union. These actions are INTENDED and PUBLICLY ADMITTED to be DESIGNED to make INDIANA SUFFER.

If an action with both design and intent to make a state suffer is NOT an Act of War, what is?

Travels bans on States that do not infringe on 1st Amendment Religious Freedom, what's next, trade embargoes and blockades of 2nd Amendment Open Carry States?

Where does this stop?

What is a State of War (according to John Locke)?
John Locke Second Treatise of Civil Government Chapter 3

CHAP. III.

Of the State of War.

Sec. 16. THE state of war is a state of enmity and destruction: and therefore declaring by word or action, not a passionate and hasty, but a sedate settled design upon another man's life, puts him in a state of war with him against whom he has declared such an intention, and so has exposed his life to the other's power to be taken away by him, or any one that joins with him in his defence, and espouses his quarrel; it being reasonable and just, I should have a right to destroy that which threatens me with destruction: for, by the fundamental law of nature, man being to be preserved as much as possible, when all cannot be preserved, the safety of the innocent is to be preferred: and one may destroy a man who makes war upon him, or has discovered an enmity to his being, for the same reason that he may kill a wolf or a lion; because such men are not under the ties of the commonlaw of reason, have no other rule, but that of force and violence, and so may be treated as beasts of prey, those dangerous and noxious creatures, that will be sure to destroy him whenever he falls into their power.

Sec. 17. And hence it is, that he who attempts to get another man into his absolute power, does thereby put himself into a state of war with him; it being to be understood as a declaration of a design upon his life: for I have reason to conclude, that he who would get me into his power without my consent, would use me as he pleased when he had got me there, and destroy me too when he had a fancy to it; for no body can desire to have me in his absolute power, unless it be to compel me by force to that which is against the right of my freedom, i.e. make me a slave. To be free from such force is the only security of my preservation; and reason bids me look on him, as an enemy to my preservation, who would take away that freedom which is the fence to it; so that he who makes an attempt to enslave me, thereby puts himself into a state of war with me. He that, in the state of nature, would take away the freedom that belongs to any one in that state, must necessarily be supposed to have a foundation of all the rest; as he that in the state of society, would take away the freedom belonging to those of that society or commonwealth, must be supposed to design to take away from them every thing else, and so be looked on as in a state of war.

I prefer an act of conscience. Isn't that what you all call it ?

 

[Syriusly]

Travels bans and economic sanctions and trade bans, this was our policy towards Cuba, Iran and many other hostile nations.

Indiana has committed no Act of War against the Blue States, why are the Blue States committing Acts of War against Indiana for how Indiana chooses to govern its own citizenry? This is a one of the States in our Union. These actions are INTENDED and PUBLICLY ADMITTED to be DESIGNED to make INDIANA SUFFER.

If an action with both design and intent to make a state suffer is NOT an Act of War, what is?

Travels bans on States that do not infringe on 1st Amendment Religious Freedom, what's next, trade embargoes and blockades of 2nd Amendment Open Carry States?

Where does this stop?

What is a State of War (according to John Locke)?
John Locke Second Treatise of Civil Government Chapter 3

CHAP. III.

Of the State of War.

Sec. 16. THE state of war is a state of enmity and destruction: and therefore declaring by word or action, not a passionate and hasty, but a sedate settled design upon another man's life, puts him in a state of war with him against whom he has declared such an intention, and so has exposed his life to the other's power to be taken away by him, or any one that joins with him in his defence, and espouses his quarrel; it being reasonable and just, I should have a right to destroy that which threatens me with destruction: for, by the fundamental law of nature, man being to be preserved as much as possible, when all cannot be preserved, the safety of the innocent is to be preferred: and one may destroy a man who makes war upon him, or has discovered an enmity to his being, for the same reason that he may kill a wolf or a lion; because such men are not under the ties of the commonlaw of reason, have no other rule, but that of force and violence, and so may be treated as beasts of prey, those dangerous and noxious creatures, that will be sure to destroy him whenever he falls into their power.

Sec. 17. And hence it is, that he who attempts to get another man into his absolute power, does thereby put himself into a state of war with him; it being to be understood as a declaration of a design upon his life: for I have reason to conclude, that he who would get me into his power without my consent, would use me as he pleased when he had got me there, and destroy me too when he had a fancy to it; for no body can desire to have me in his absolute power, unless it be to compel me by force to that which is against the right of my freedom, i.e. make me a slave. To be free from such force is the only security of my preservation; and reason bids me look on him, as an enemy to my preservation, who would take away that freedom which is the fence to it; so that he who makes an attempt to enslave me, thereby puts himself into a state of war with me. He that, in the state of nature, would take away the freedom that belongs to any one in that state, must necessarily be supposed to have a foundation of all the rest; as he that in the state of society, would take away the freedom belonging to those of that society or commonwealth, must be supposed to design to take away from them every thing else, and so be looked on as in a state of war.

LOL....you are so delusional.

 

[hangover]

Blues States banning travel to Indiana is an Act of War

Right wing religious nut jobs love the idea of a religious war in the U.S.. They want a war like the Muslim Sunni and Shia, "My Allah is better than your allah."

 

[Skylar]

Blues States banning travel to Indiana is an Act of War

Right wing religious nut jobs love the idea of a religious war in the U.S.. They want a war like the Muslim Sunni and Shia, "My Allah is better than your allah."

Blue states haven't banned travel to Indiana. The entire premise of the thread is blithering idiocy.