Game Over, Hillary

[ScreamingEagle]

The rabid right should destroy the court because you can't stand the idea of not having control? because you want government to legislate your relationship with another person and force them to do what you want?

So you don't believe in "control" or "legislating relationships"? Isn't that exactly what Law is ALL ABOUT? Methinks you are in the wrong profession...

 

[doeton]

Hold on there....didn't Jesus show his disciples how to fish so they could provide? I think he was a fly fisherman also.

touche' and i completely agree...we should be teaching people to help themselves.

 

[Shogun]

what compromise? giving you a veto? LMAO .

The rabid right should destroy the court because you can't stand the idea of not having control? because you want government to legislate your relationship with another person and force them to do what you want?

yah...right.

thanks for fully making my point. Maybe you should be out appealing to that supposed majority that you, Ravi and Larkin seem to think you represent.


You are no better than your right wing counterpart, Jill. thats a fact.

 

[doeton]

thanks for fully making my point. Maybe you should be out appealing to that supposed majority that you, Ravi and Larkin seem to think you represent.


You are no better than your right wing counterpart, Jill. thats a fact.

"The Polls Speak: Americans Support Abortion

by Celinda Lake

Despite what anti-abortion activists and politicians would have you believe, the majority of Americans continue to support a woman’s right to a legal abortion — as they have done consistently for the past 15 years. Polls show that those who strive to abolish a woman’s right to the full range of family-planning services are fundamentally out of step with American opinion. "


source (the reputable Ms. Magazine)
http://www.msmagazine.com/summer2005/polls.asp

 

[Ravi]

"The Polls Speak: Americans Support Abortion

by Celinda Lake

Despite what anti-abortion activists and politicians would have you believe, the majority of Americans continue to support a woman’s right to a legal abortion — as they have done consistently for the past 15 years. Polls show that those who strive to abolish a woman’s right to the full range of family-planning services are fundamentally out of step with American opinion. "


source (the reputable Ms. Magazine)
http://www.msmagazine.com/summer2005/polls.asp

lol! Ms. Magazine! This ought to earn a few "bitches" from Shog.

 

[doeton]

guess misogynie hasn't gone mainstream yet shogun...

 

[Dogger]

You mean the "private right" to eviscerate unborn babies?

Privacy involves much more than the right to an abortion. If you don't believe me, read this brief excerpt from Antonin Scalia's dissent in Lawrence v. Texas (quoted here).

Is Scalia wanting to criminalize any of your hobbies? That's the kind of nonsense you get from a moralistic right-wing Court.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Privacy involves much more than the right to an abortion. If you don't believe me, read this brief excerpt from Antonin Scalia's dissent in Lawrence v. Texas (quoted here).

Is Scalia wanting to criminalize any of your hobbies? That's the kind of nonsense you get from a moralistic right-wing Court.

Rights? We do not have any rights if the State can declare that a few beds in a Temple are proof of rape. No rights if the State can declare that because someone in your religion may molest children no one in your religion can have children. No rights at all when the State can seize our children because of " authoritarian policies ".

 

[AllieBaba]

"btw where's the "social justice" in killing babies?"

right next to the leaving em in poverty, without health care, n packing em off to war.

alway love to hear about more concern for the unborn than the born...

Always love to hear about how people think it's their choice whether another's life is worth living or not.

 

[Shogun]

"The Polls Speak: Americans Support Abortion

by Celinda Lake

Despite what anti-abortion activists and politicians would have you believe, the majority of Americans continue to support a woman’s right to a legal abortion — as they have done consistently for the past 15 years. Polls show that those who strive to abolish a woman’s right to the full range of family-planning services are fundamentally out of step with American opinion. "


source (the reputable Ms. Magazine)
http://www.msmagazine.com/summer2005/polls.asp

Voters self-identify as “pro-choice” over “pro-life” by a double-digit margin.
In 2004, 52 percent of voters identified themselves as pro-choice, 41 percent pro-life, according to Gallup Poll trend data. Although the margins have fluctuated slightly, the pro-choice position has remained dominant since 1996, and in the past four years there has been very little change in public opinion.


I could pick this apart blindfolded.

Hey, if I ask you if you are for or against killing babies would your answer of "against" mean much outside of how I framed the question to illicit a particular response?



ms. magazine.

 

[Shogun]

lol! Ms. Magazine! This ought to earn a few "bitches" from Shog.

feel free to block me anytime

I could point out how laughable is Ms. magazine as a source but why give you another reason to believe that testicles are out to control you?

 

[Dogger]

Rights? We do not have any rights if the State can declare that a few beds in a Temple are proof of rape. No rights if the State can declare that because someone in your religion may molest children no one in your religion can have children. No rights at all when the State can seize our children because of " authoritarian policies ".

Are you saying that Roe v. Wade and Lawrence v. Texas were correctly decided?

 

[Shogun]

guess misogynie hasn't gone mainstream yet shogun...

Apparently, since Ravi's definition amounts to anything that says no to a woman, it's already here.

equality is sexist, you know. Killing baby humans? well thats just vaginal prerogative.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Are you saying that Roe v. Wade and Lawrence v. Texas were correctly decided?

I am saying that everyone has the same rights or no one has any. And I have already agreed that so long as the Supreme Court ruling stands it is the law of the Land.

 

[Shogun]

Privacy involves much more than the right to an abortion. If you don't believe me, read this brief excerpt from Antonin Scalia's dissent in Lawrence v. Texas (quoted here).

Is Scalia wanting to criminalize any of your hobbies? That's the kind of nonsense you get from a moralistic right-wing Court.

abortions are HOBBIES?

and, in light of this blank check shit from the hard left, Scalia isn't any worse.

 

[Ravi]

feel free to block me anytime

I could point out how laughable is Ms. magazine as a source but why give you another reason to believe that testicles are out to control you?

Why would I block you? You crack me up.

 

[Dogger]

abortions are HOBBIES?

and, in light of this blank check shit from the hard left, Scalia isn't any worse.

What a vile attempt to distort my quote. You really are a worthless piece of shit.

Scalia listed these as areas the state should be able criminalize: "State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity".

He did NOT include abortion in that list. So when I asked, "Is Scalia wanting to criminalize any of your hobbies?", only a putrid, disturbed person would read that list to include abortion.

I'm looking out for your rights too, goat fucker.

 

[Yurt]

abortions are HOBBIES?

and, in light of this blank check shit from the hard left, Scalia isn't any worse.

one has to scratch their head over the "right" of abortion in light of the state's concern that a child be forced medical care, even if such care is against the parent's religious beliefs. ironically, many who are for abortion are against the death penalty...

scalia brings an interesting point in his dissent:

Thus, while overruling the outcome of Bowers, the Court leaves strangely untouched its central legal conclusion: “[R]espondent would have us announce … a fundamental right to engage in homosexual sodomy. This we are quite unwilling to do.” 478 U.S., at 191. Instead the Court simply describes petitioners’ conduct as “an exercise of their liberty”–which it undoubtedly is–and proceeds to apply an unheard-of form of rational-basis review that will have far-reaching implications beyond this case. Ante, at 3.

I begin with the Court’s surprising readiness to reconsider a decision rendered a mere 17 years ago in Bowers v. Hardwick. I do not myself believe in rigid adherence to stare decisis in constitutional cases; but I do believe that we should be consistent rather than manipulative in invoking the doctrine. Today’s opinions in support of reversal do not bother to distinguish–or indeed, even bother to mention–the paean to stare decisis coauthored by three Members of today’s majority in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. There, when stare decisis meant preservation of judicially invented abortion rights, the widespread criticism of Roe was strong reason to reaffirm it:

 

[Yurt]

What a vile attempt to distort my quote. You really are a worthless piece of shit.

Scalia listed these as areas the state should be able criminalize: "State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity".

He did NOT include abortion in that list. So when I asked, "Is Scalia wanting to criminalize any of your hobbies?", only a putrid, disturbed person would read that list to include abortion.

I'm looking out for your rights too, goat fucker.

what a joke

 

[Larkinn]

thanks for fully making my point. Maybe you should be out appealing to that supposed majority that you, Ravi and Larkin seem to think you represent.

None of us represent the majority. Why? There is no majority. There is no consensus on abortion. Thus it should be left up to individuals to decide for themselves and not legislated.

You are no better than your right wing counterpart, Jill. thats a fact.

Actually its an opinion.