TChris: “How do you ‘overrule’ those who have no authority to ‘rule’?”
Did Romney’s attorney have the authority to rule?
TChris: “Department of Health attorneys? I don’t see any mention of ‘attorneys’ in the article.”
Let’s see if I understand you correctly.
1. On an obviously highly controversial issue, you think a cabinet department in the ROMNEY administration did not consult with its own staff attorneys before issuing a finding that the new law did not apply to certain hospitals because of a pre-existing law protecting the right of conscience?
2. You’re suggesting that the Mass Catholic Conference also has no “real” attorneys, but just makes up its public policy positions on legal matters out of thin air.
Obviously, there are few lengths to which Rombots won’t go to cover for the Great Prevaricator, but if you actually believe that a state agency or the MCC either don’t have or wouldn’t consult their respective “real” attorneys before publicly commenting, it’s your intelligence that’s called into question.
Read it literally - TChris is saying that it was not stated in the article.
You can imagine all you want but the article as written does not support your interpretation.
He didn't rule. He advised the Governor who had the legal authority to rule. So, Governor Romney did not "overrule" anybody.
Let’s see if I understand you correctly.
....
No, you apparently do not understand me correctly.
If we're going to debate, you're going to need to provide some evidence to support your position.
Your position is that the DoH and the Catholic Conference had attorneys review and/or endorse their statements. That's nothing more than a convenient assumption on your part unless you can provide some evidence of it.
I'm not just going to take your word for it.