Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Why I Voted For Trump...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by JimL View Post
    How about the 7 that came to that decision.
    How bout the 7 that came to the Plessy v Ferguson decision? Were they right?
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by JimL View Post
      I wouldn't say that the trimester framework was the hallmark of R v W., that a woman has the fundemental right to choose was.
      The supposed "fundamental right to choose" was a part of it, but the trimester framework was the decree the Supreme Court gave as to how that manifested itself.

      The Casey decision, afaics, basically, simply moved the stage of fetal viability from 28 weeks to 24 weeks.
      Roe v. Wade decreed that abortion regulation was essentially prohibited in the first trimester, only permitted in the second trimester if it could be demonstrated it related to maternal health, and then allowed in the third trimester. Planned Parenthood v. Casey said that abortion can be regulated after viability as well as before viability if it does not pose an undue burden.

      EDIT: To clarify, as I'm not sure I phrased it well: The "cannot pose an undue burden" requirement applies only to regulation that applies before viability, not after.

      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      How bout the 7 that came to the Plessy v Ferguson decision? Were they right?
      ...good googly moogly, it was 7-1, wasn't it? While I don't think it being 8-1 rather than 7-1 changes any point I made, I nevertheless apologize for asserting in previous posts that it was 8-1 rather than 7-1. I forgot that Brewer didn't participate in the decision.
      Last edited by Terraceth; 10-19-2019, 09:16 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
        How bout the 7 that came to the Plessy v Ferguson decision? Were they right?
        You asked for 1 in the R v W decision, I gave you 7.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JimL View Post
          You asked for 1 in the R v W decision, I gave you 7.
          Come on, Jim - look at what I actually asked...
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          Please provide a single legal expert who defends Roe v Wade as based on sound reasoning and actual legal principles.

          The fact is that none of these 7 ever tried to defend their decision "on sound reasoning and actual legal principles".

          If I'm wrong, you need to show me where ANY of them actually defended the decision on anything other than their own personal biases.
          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            Come on, Jim - look at what I actually asked...

            The fact is that none of these 7 ever tried to defend their decision "on sound reasoning and actual legal principles".

            If I'm wrong, you need to show me where ANY of them actually defended the decision on anything other than their own personal biases.
            You're calling their reasoning to be nothing other than personal biases because you don't agree with their reasoning. But, R v W, as well as the underlying reasoning in that decision, has been defended by many other Justices in other cases concerning abortion. The Planned Parenthood v Casey for instance.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by JimL View Post
              You're calling their reasoning to be nothing other than personal biases because you don't agree with their reasoning.
              Jim, find me a legal scholar who supports their decision "on legal grounds" or on "judicial process". Have you ever actually read the decision? Even THEY don't pretend it's on legal grounds or judicial principles.

              But, R v W, as well as the underlying reasoning in that decision, has been defended by many other Justices in other cases concerning abortion.
              Then why can't you produce a single legal scholar who says so?

              The Planned Parenthood v Casey for instance.
              No, Jim - that case didn't uphold the legal grounds of RvW itself, but was about "essential holding" of Roe, dealing with restrictions from the State of Pennsylvania regarding informed consent, spousal notice, parental consent, a "Medical Emergency" definition, and reporting requirements. And it was a very close 5-4 decision. This had to do with "stare decisis", or "respect of precedent", as they were not prepared to set aside a previous SCOTUS decision. It didn't actually deal with the judicial process or legal principles upon which RvW was decided.
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post


                No, Jim - that case didn't uphold the legal grounds of RvW itself, but was about "essential holding" of Roe, dealing with restrictions from the State of Pennsylvania regarding informed consent, spousal notice, parental consent, a "Medical Emergency" definition, and reporting requirements. And it was a very close 5-4 decision. This had to do with "stare decisis", or "respect of precedent", as they were not prepared to set aside a previous SCOTUS decision. It didn't actually deal with the judicial process or legal principles upon which RvW was decided.
                And Roe v Wade will continue to do with “stare decisis", or "respect of precedent". Chief Justice John Roberts has demonstrated the weight he gives to precedent, as evidenced by a concurring opinion in the 2010 Citizens United decision. In it, he wrote, “Fidelity to precedent—the policy of stare decisis—is vital to the proper exercise of the judicial function. For these reasons, we have long recognized that departures from precedent are inappropriate in the absence of a “special justification.” “A high-profile, landmark case like Roe v. Wade is so etched in the public consciousness, however, that it would take a lot for the Court to decide to overturn it entirely rather than make incremental changes”.

                https://fortune.com/2019/05/20/can-r...be-overturned/
                “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                  And Roe v Wade will continue to do with “stare decisis", or "respect of precedent". Chief Justice John Roberts has demonstrated the weight he gives to precedent, as evidenced by a concurring opinion in the 2010 Citizens United decision. In it, he wrote, “Fidelity to precedent—the policy of stare decisis—is vital to the proper exercise of the judicial function. For these reasons, we have long recognized that departures from precedent are inappropriate in the absence of a “special justification.” “A high-profile, landmark case like Roe v. Wade is so etched in the public consciousness, however, that it would take a lot for the Court to decide to overturn it entirely rather than make incremental changes”.

                  https://fortune.com/2019/05/20/can-r...be-overturned/
                  This stare decisis fetishism is the gigantic defect of "judicial conservatism."
                  Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                  Beige Federalist.

                  Nationalist Christian.

                  "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                  Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                  Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                  Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                  Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                  Justice for Matthew Perna!

                  Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                    This stare decisis fetishism is the gigantic defect of "judicial conservatism."
                    Not "fetishism", stare decisis is common law doctrine whereby judges follow the precedent established when making a decision. It's how the law has long functioned.
                    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                      And Roe v Wade will continue to do with “stare decisis", or "respect of precedent"...
                      Perhaps. That doesn't change the fact that it was a horrible legal decision.
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                        This stare decisis fetishism is the gigantic defect of "judicial conservatism."
                        It is the culture of death hanging onto a horrible decision for no other reason than "but that's what we WANT".
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                          It is the culture of death hanging onto a horrible decision for no other reason than "but that's what we WANT".
                          Unfortunately the culture of death for no other reason than "but that's what we WANT" goes a lot further than that:

                          The primary problem is not with Mr. Trump’s past sins, it is that the policies he currently supports are inconsistent with his claim in his address today that “every life is sacred.” And where do we begin? His inhumane deportation policies? His seeming belief that the value of lives from prosperous countries are worth more than those from poor—or as he allegedly put it, “xxxxhole”—countries? His threats to end thousands of lives with nuclear war?https://www.americamagazine.org/poli...oke-march-life
                          "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Charles View Post
                            Unfortunately the culture of death for no other reason than "but that's what we WANT" goes a lot further than that:
                            It does - the other end of abortion is euthanasia.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              It does - the other end of abortion is euthanasia.
                              And a lot more than that. As can be easily seen you have just skipped huge parts in my post about the culture of death and the tragic consequences it has already had and could have in the future.
                              "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Charles View Post
                                And a lot more than that. As can be easily seen you have just skipped huge parts in my post about the culture of death and the tragic consequences it has already had and could have in the future.
                                I have.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 05:11 PM
                                9 responses
                                54 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 11:25 AM
                                52 responses
                                282 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sam
                                by Sam
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 01:48 PM
                                25 responses
                                113 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, 03-17-2024, 11:56 AM
                                66 responses
                                347 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-16-2024, 07:40 AM
                                78 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                                Working...
                                X