Supreme court nomination

[JoeWeber 2,720]

5 hours ago, brenthutch said:

That would be called an “infringement” and the 2nd amendment mentions, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”.  I am unaware of the amendment which states, “the right to murder your unborn child shall not be infringed”*

*a bit hyperbolic, but I hope you get the point

Away from the gun issue, I would argue that the term "unborn child" is a bit hyperbolic.

[wmw999 2,447]

By the time of honest viability (i.e. without massive help), about 7 months, "unborn child" is probably a reasonable thing to say. Before that, I agree. This is a turnabout for me from when I was very young; at 19 I thought abortion should be legal up until 9 months. That was wrong. But making the morning after pill expensive and hard to get is bullshit, too.

That only helps rich people

Wendy P.

[brenthutch 444]

20 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

when I was very young; at 19 I thought abortion should be legal up until 9 months. 

Wendy P.

Same here, that all changed when I watched my daughter my daughter’s birth.  I am still pro-choice but pro-choice to a point.

[JerryBaumchen 1,363]

1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

By the time of honest viability (i.e. without massive help), about 7 months,

Hi Wendy,

That would be me; the early arriver.  Two months in an incubator and five times the doctor told my mother he did not expect me to live.

Jerry Baumchen

[GeorgiaDon 362]

I think most people would like abortion to be available (within limits, such as before viability) but rarely chosen.  Of course for that to happen, effective birth control would have to be readily available and inexpensive, people would have to know about it (sex education in school), and the economic cost of having a child would have to be dramatically lowered.  Society would have to be willing to shoulder some of the burden of paying for medical care, day care, etc. so having a child (especially when Daddy takes off or is otherwise unavailable) would not be such an economic calamity for Mom.  There are such places, where people have access to universal health care and day care (so Mom can have a job and a child).  Canada and the Scandinavian countries, and I presume much of the EU, are like that.  I think the USA is pretty unique among developed countries in the lack of support it offers to parents.  There isn't even universal access to maternity leave from your job. 

It seems contradictory to me, and more than a little cruel, to expect women to always "choose life" and then condemn them to poverty if they end up a single parent.  I wonder why conservatives lose interest in children the minute they are born.  It seems they want to punish women for life for making a human mistake (sometimes) or just having bad luck (sometimes).

My oldest daughter had a child when she was in high school.  She turned out fine, finished University and owns her own business, and we have a wonderful grand-daughter, but that was only because my wife and I were able to step up and take care of a lot of the cost, and a fair share of the child care.  Many women do not have that level of support.

Don

[JoeWeber 2,720]

2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Same here, that all changed when I watched my daughter my daughter’s birth.  I am still pro-choice but pro-choice to a point.

Sounds good. So then please get on board with helping to end these types of statements: “the right to murder your unborn child shall not be infringed”. 

[airdvr 210]

I am somewhat torn on the issue of abortion.  As I've said before I was adopted.  That was 1958.  Had that been post 1973 I'm not sure I would be here today.  I also got a woman pregnant when I was in HS.  She had an abortion.  I wasn't ready to be a parent and I doubt her husband would have been very understanding. 

In this age I hear people defend abortion by saying things like "everyone makes mistakes".  I agree.  But it shouldn't take 7 months to figure it out.  At 7 months the fetus is viable and I have a problem with abortion that late in the pregnancy.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

4 minutes ago, airdvr said:

In this age I hear people defend abortion by saying things like "everyone makes mistakes".  I agree.  But it shouldn't take 7 months to figure it out.  At 7 months the fetus is viable and I have a problem with abortion that late in the pregnancy.

The number of abortions at 7 months is pretty small. 

The number done when the mother's life is not in danger or when they find serious defects in the fetus is just about zero. 

The idea of abortions that late being done for birth control is one that has been fabricated by the 'pro-birth' crowd (they sure as hell aren't 'pro-life' -  the last 7 months have demonstrated that pretty clearly). 

[Phil1111 1,149]

I hate to ruin a good debate but trump has already decided the abortion debate.

'Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s nominee to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat on the Supreme Court, signed a newspaper ad in 2006 that supported overturning Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision establishing the right to abortion.

The ad, which ran across two pages in The South Bend Tribune and was first reported by The Guardian on Thursday, quoted Justice Byron White’s dissent in Roe v. Wade, and called the decision “an exercise of raw judicial power” and urged overturning its “barbaric legacy.”

[headoverheels 333]

3 hours ago, airdvr said:

But it shouldn't take 7 months to figure it out. 

And then, we have the Governor of Alabama signing a bill which prohibits abortion when there is a detectable heartbeat, which would typically be at ~6 weeks.  

[kallend 2,027]

Apparently  Kayleigh Mouth of Sauron McEnany thinks Ms. Barrett is a Rhodes Scholar.

Ms. Barrett attended Rhodes College in Memphis, TN.

Edited October 2, 2020 by kallend

[billvon 2,991]

1 hour ago, kallend said:

Apparently  Kayleigh Mouth of Sauron McEnany thinks Ms. Barrett is a Rhodes Scholar.

Ms. Barrett attended Rhodes College in Memphis, TN.

I was a Rhode scholar.  I drove from home to school through Rhode Island.

[ryoder 1,590]

Frasier: We were students together when I was a Rhodes scholar.

Woody: Wow, you were a Rhodes scholar? Tell me this, how come the stuff they fill in the potholes with is darker than the rest of the road?

Frasier: I don't know Woody. I missed that day. 

Woody: And now it's come back to haunt you. 

[headoverheels 333]

9 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

I hate to ruin a good debate but trump has already decided the abortion debate.

 

Another case of where the politicians do not follow the will of the people.  Of course, one could cast that as "leadership."

Catholics as a whole are 2:1 against overturning RvW.  Other groups are even higher.

[kallend 2,027]

Not a mask in sight.  Aren't judges supposed to exercise good judgment?  Don't good mothers protect their children?

[Phil1111 1,149]

4 minutes ago, kallend said:

Not a mask in sight.  Aren't judges supposed to exercise good judgment?  Don't good mothers protect their children?

In America dead children are just collateral damage to re-elect trump and GOP members. Trump administration pressured CDC to play down risks of reopening schools: report

Trump criticizes CDC guidelines for reopening schools as "very tough & expensive". then Trump threatens to cut funding for schools, slams CDC reopening guidelines as too tough and expensive

[JoeWeber 2,720]

1 hour ago, kallend said:

Not a mask in sight.  Aren't judges supposed to exercise good judgment?  Don't good mothers protect their children?

The Lord will protect them, John. Obviously, if the Lord decides to act in mysterious ways and not protect them for some higher purpose or to bring them home that is good, too. Certainly, if the Lord decided to have one of your little ones infect the President that's also a higher purpose and might get you an extra cookie.

Edited October 4, 2020 by JoeWeber

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

5 hours ago, kallend said:

Not a mask in sight.  Aren't judges supposed to exercise good judgment?  Don't good mothers protect their children?   

Yes, they are supposed to.
Yes, they do.

Not surprised in the least that 'political expediency' over rode good judgement.

[Coreece 190]

On 9/30/2020 at 8:17 PM, SkyDekker said:

her fundamental belief, and she is welcome to it, appears to be a state where women, wives, are submissive to their husbands. You don't think it warrants to ask what that means for her professionally?

Clearly she was in total submission to her husband when she graciously accepted the hyphenated name he gave her as a wedding gift.  Also a good decision on his part for them to become white colonizers to prop up her career. . .

[billvon 2,991]

On 10/4/2020 at 7:23 AM, kallend said:

Not a mask in sight.  Aren't judges supposed to exercise good judgment?  Don't good mothers protect their children?

But they are with the president.  He's totally protected; no way he's going to be a superspreader.

 

[GeorgiaDon 362]

16 hours ago, billvon said:

But they are with the president.  He's totally protected; no way he's going to be a superspreader.

 

I think they are probably covered in his "immune glow". 

[headoverheels 333]

So, Barrett cannot even answer a softball question from an R Senator (meant to be trivially easy) about the freedoms guaranteed in the 1st amendment.  She is unqualified, independent of how she would rule on various topics.  It is the highest court in the land, ruling on Constitutional matters.  She is not qualified.

[airdvr 210]

6 hours ago, headoverheels said:

So, Barrett cannot even answer a softball question from an R Senator (meant to be trivially easy) about the freedoms guaranteed in the 1st amendment.  She is unqualified, independent of how she would rule on various topics.  It is the highest court in the land, ruling on Constitutional matters.  She is not qualified.

She's using the playbook of RBG.  It's kind of fun to watch how frustrated the questioners get with her non-answers.

[jakee 1,489]

1 hour ago, airdvr said:

She's using the playbook of RBG.  It's kind of fun to watch how frustrated the questioners get with her non-answers.

Lol right. Because to the Republicans nothing is so important that the game of 'let's piss off the dems' doesn't take precedence.

 

Exactly when did you decide to abdicate any feeling of civic responsibility?

[airdvr 210]

It's been said here before.  When the D's had control they pulled the same stuff the R's are now.  It's about power and control.