Interesting Poll On Pro-Choice/Pro-Life

Discussion in 'Religion and Ethics' started by Annie, Apr 26, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Not an 'unbiased' source, but they have the poll for all to read, which meets my criteria of 'readable'. Links at site:

    http://www.sba-list.org/index.cfm/section/news/page/pressreleases/id/63.html
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,552
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    Well...as you said, the poll is biased. But I absolutely think most people don't know what the holding of Roe was. It said nothing more than there is a line before which the right of the individual to chart her own course overrides the governmental interest in regulation. People get bogged down in the dicta of the decision.

    The rest of the poll doesn't come even close to approximating anything that I've ever seen elsewhere.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Right, or something. It did things, without legal standing. It will be overturned, but not stop abortion, at least not every state.
     
  4. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,552
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    It did nothing without legal standing. Standing relates only to the issue of whether a person asserting a claim in Court has the right to assert that claim.

    Constitutional analysis balances the rights of the individual against the rights of the state all the time.

    It may be overturned by Bush's court... but the Constitution is only as strong as the people defending it.

    Kind of "activist" for them to interfere with the precedent for the purpose of limiting individual freedom. On those occasions where the Court has seen fit to go against precedent, it has generally been to expand individual rights.
     
  5. dmp
    Offline

    dmp Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    13,088
    Thanks Received:
    741
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Enterprise, Alabama
    Ratings:
    +741

    that's the very reason why it should be over-turned - to EXPAND individual RIGHTS to MORE people; namely, people who have a RIGHT to be born.

    :)
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  6. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Read:

    http://www.nrlc.org/news/1998/NRL2.98/kmiec298.html


    http://members.aol.com/abtrbng2/roememos.txt
     
  7. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,552
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    Right...so one law professor from Pepperdine has a particular opinion?

    I think part of the confusion of so many people is that they don't understand there are two schools of Constitutional analysis. The traditional, accepted manner of construction, which is to ascertain the intent of the Constitution versus "literalists" who think they aren't supposed to do any analysis and just "apply the words of the Constitution".

    But that's not how the Constitution has been viewed even going back to the 1800's.
     
  8. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Let's see, the one professor writing on what the majority writer of Roe said...Hmmm, something is not computing...
     
  9. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,552
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    It's that his analysis is really irrelevant. The only thing relevant is the holding of the case.

    The guy from Pepperdine is telling his opinion about what went on around the case... pretty meaningless except from an agenda-driven perspective.
     
  10. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Sorry, but when the writer is writing of quotes from the person in question, which no one, not even yourself has argued, there is a problem. It was bad law from the beginning, which is why it will be overturned.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page