Posted on 09/14/2005 6:23:27 PM PDT by HHKrepublican
"Why do you think democRATS are losing all the elections now. They have aborted over 43 million voters."
They know this. That is why they want convicted felons to vote.
What's always puzzled me is that since government can promote what they want, why have they never given women more financial incentives to have children? They could solve this problem in a "New York minute." How about really big bonuses, or tax breaks for women who marry--AND have children. Or ---since they're so successful at taxing cigarettes out of existence, how about a really onerous tax on the abortion procedure with an exorbitant copay for women who have it done at taxpayers expense, since their offspring won't contribute to SS, or other societal contracts? Oh, yes, forgot we don't have a social contract.
Catherine Crier used to be a Dallas, TX judge. When Reagan won office by a landslide, there were thousands of Dems in TX who suddenly switched parties. We now look at all Republicans in TX with a jaded eye. Imagine it's the same in other states. The proof is in the pudding. Crier just made a stinking pudding.
"undue burden" What is the burden on the kid whose skull is crushed up and sucked out?
I think you meant "precedent" as opposed to president.
Roe vs Wade by abortionists has always been construed to mean abortion on demand, anytime and anywhere. Nearly every court (activist) decision has reaffirmed that view, whether it deals with laws overturning parental consent or partial birth abortion literally seconds prior to the actual birth taking place. John Roberts has repeatedly voiced his support for stare decisis and past precedent, much more vehemently than reaffirming the constitution and original intent interpretation.
I am still shell shocked by two more activist rulings yesterday.... the ruling in CA that the pledge is unconstitional for 3 school districts in CA based on past precedent by the 9th Court of Appeals, the overturning of Michigan law on banning partial birth abortions except in cases of the health or life of the mother, which the friggin judge ruled were vague & unclear.
I predict that John Roberts will be confirmed by the Senate, and I predict that his ruling on 3 highly volatile activist cases will be as follows....
1) The 8th Court of Appeals overturning the NEBRASKA state constitutional marriage amendment.... I predict Roberts will rule in favor of the 8th Court of Appeals to overturn the NE state marriage amendment, which in effect will negate all state marriage amendments and de facto legalize same sex marriage. Some time afterwards the SCOTUS will issue a Roe vs Wade type ruling, which will legalize gay/homosexual marriage as the law of the land.
2) Ruling on whether reciting the Pledge of Allegiane is legitimate or unconstitutional.... I think he will write a tortuously convoluted word-splitting ruling that will confuse all parties, skirt the issue, temporarily stay the decision but open the door for hundreds of lawsuits against the pledge, and eventually overturn the pledge or remove the words "under God".
3) Will reaffirm Roe vs Wade, and strike down any state laws regarding parental consent or partial birth abortion.
This is the John Robert that I believe will be our chief SCOTUS justice, very much opposite of what Pres Bush campaigned on when he promised to nominate strict constitutional judges in the mold of Scalia & Thomas. Roberts is clearly not in that mold.
Thanks -- very good to know. Raycpa, I did read the color codes. I think maybe we're crossing signals here or reading it wrong or something. Almost your entire map was green, and the code says green means abortion upon request. In several other countries, it said abortion was permitted for reasons of physical OR MENTAL health of the mother. That, to me, seems like a loophole that one could drive a truck through. I'd like to see whether that's meaningful in any way. Then there were a couple that allowed abortions for economic or social reasons in addition to reasons of physical or mental health -- thus simply expanding the gargantuan loophole.
However, it's good to know from Michael that in Germany, at least, the permissiveness in the law applies only (or mostly) to the first trimester.
I recommend that you check into them; help put an end to judges who legislate from the bench and ignore the law of the land.
I can guarantee that the Arab children are allowed to pray heavily to Allah in their schools while they are pledging allegiance to their so -called countries. This makes them very loyal to their cause. Too bad children in the US can't pledge allegiance to America and bless this country- under God- we need our youth to be feverently patriotic!
She looks like one of Hillary's lesbian, atheist friends that she surrounds herself with.
"They have an even newer term for abortion nowdays; "Selective Reduction"."
Now that I've had some time to think about it, this sounds like a great case for the Roberts court to overturn the abominable Roe v. Wade decision. After all, if plain infanticide places an "undue burden" on the alleged right created by Roe, then there is more than enough ammunition to find the finding of that alleged right to be in error.
Also the male children. Surely Males also "have the right to choose."
You are very right---
but also, I do believe that Muslim children are allowed to pray several times a day...and even have a special spot to go pray...
I SAY, if we are allowing THAT, then there is NO WAY, that children of other faiths should NOT be allowed to say "under God" in the pledge...
She really is embarrassing herself, IMHO!!!!
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
undue burden" on women's right
I didnt know the Const. barred "Undue burdens" OR provided the right to kill.
Excellent point...
One that I will use on my mother...
I've already asked her if I could have been a choice...
She got a little mad at me for some reason...I can't imagine why though...
Can't we just shoot them all and appoint new ones?
It's "our body." We can kill our 9 month old baby if we want to.
"Exhibitionism, promiscuity, sex toys, and adultery. This is women's liberation.
"Obligation to family, children and God mean nothing. Aborting children is a "constitutional right." Sex is just another activity, distinct from other activities only in that "everybody" lie about it."
It is not an accident that relentless attacks on morality spring from America's women. "The aim of the party," George Orwell wrote in "1984", "was not merely to prevent men and women from forming loyalties which it might not be able to control. Its real, undeclared purpose was to remove all pleasure from the sexual act...The Party was trying to kill the sex instinct, or, if it could not be killed, then to distort it and dirty it." The Party triumphed because "so far as the women were concerned, the Party's efforts were largely successful."
Quoted from Ann Coulter's book "Treason"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.