Page 65 of 94 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775 ... LastLast
Results 641 to 650 of 937

Thread: Why I Voted For Trump...

  1. #641
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,555
    Amen (Given)
    1799
    Amen (Received)
    1522
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    Many on the left see any decision they disagree with, whether legislative or judicial, to be fought tooth and nail until they get a outcome they like and then that is therefore set in stone never to be challenged
    Project much?

  2. #642
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    57,544
    Amen (Given)
    12477
    Amen (Received)
    26696
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    The actual “expertise in constitutional law” that matters, is that vested in the Justices of the Supreme Court.
    Last I checked, every single member of the Supreme Court is or has been a human, and subject to error.

    And the Roe v. Wade ruling by this court affirmed that access to safe and legal abortion is a constitutional right.
    Here's what you seem incapable of understanding, Tass - they INVENTED that "right" - it is found nowhere in the US Constitution.

    The fact that there were differences of opinion among legal experts is the reason it was referred for a ruling by the highest court in the first place. It is inevitable that those ruled against will consider the decision “horrible”.
    There WERE (past tense) differences of opinion? No, Tassman -- there are many liberals today who, when they are being honest, STILL say that RvW was a horrible decision. All you're doing now is repeating the same old crap over and over, apparently thinking that makes it true.
    DuckDuckGo - Privacy Simplified

  3. #643
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    57,544
    Amen (Given)
    12477
    Amen (Received)
    26696
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    Many on the left see any decision they disagree with, whether legislative or judicial, to be fought tooth and nail until they get a outcome they like and then that is therefore set in stone never to be challenged
    EGGzackly, which is why the emphasis is on HONEST liberals who look at it and see it as a horrible decision.
    DuckDuckGo - Privacy Simplified

  4. Amen RumTumTugger amen'd this post.
  5. #644
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,627
    Amen (Given)
    2523
    Amen (Received)
    1839
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Last I checked, every single member of the Supreme Court is or has been a human, and subject to error.
    In this instance they are “humans” with expertise in constitutional law and they ruled 7 to 2 that access to safe and legal abortion is a constitutional right.

    Here's what you seem incapable of understanding, Tass - they INVENTED that "right" - it is found nowhere in the US Constitution.
    This is a matter of legal opinion and it’s not an opinion with which the majority agrees. OTOH your "opinion" is less concerned with the Constitution per se than an attempt to implement your religious agenda.

    There WERE (past tense) differences of opinion? No, Tassman -- there are many liberals today who, when they are being honest, STILL say that RvW was a horrible decision.
    Nevertheless, the bottom line is that the Supreme Court is highly unlikely to overturn Roe v Wade, according to most legal analysts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    EGGzackly, which is why the emphasis is on HONEST liberals who look at it and see it as a horrible decision.
    "HONEST liberals" being those that agree with you, of course.
    Last edited by Tassman; 10-16-2019 at 11:22 PM.
    “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.

  6. #645
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    57,544
    Amen (Given)
    12477
    Amen (Received)
    26696
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    In this instance they are “humans” with expertise in constitutional law and they ruled 7 to 2 that access to safe and legal abortion is a constitutional right.
    "Humans" can be wrong in great numbers.

    This is a matter of legal opinion and it’s not an opinion with which the majority agrees.
    And, once again, the majority can be wrong. Even Supreme court justices, as has been demonstrated with numerous examples which you ignore.

    OTOH your "opinion" is less concerned with the Constitution per se than an attempt to implement your religious agenda.
    There you go again, losing an argument, so you resort to your incredible inability to read minds.

    Nevertheless, the bottom line is that the Supreme Court is highly unlikely to overturn Roe v Wade, according to most legal analysts.
    I never said otherwise, in spite of it being a HORRIBLE decision by legal standards, which any honest liberal would concede.

    "HONEST liberals" being those that agree with you, of course.
    Nope - liberals with whom I would probably disagree on 90% of what they believe, but they're HONEST enough to admit RvW was a horrible decision, as I have documented.
    DuckDuckGo - Privacy Simplified

  7. #646
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    57,544
    Amen (Given)
    12477
    Amen (Received)
    26696
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    "HONEST liberals" being those that agree with you, of course.
    Let's look again at the actual citations of some notable liberal legal experts...

    Laurence Tribe — Harvard Law School. Lawyer for Al Gore in 2000.

    "One of the most curious things about Roe is that, behind its own verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgment on which it rests is nowhere to be found."

    "The Supreme Court, 1972 Term—Foreword: Toward a Model of Roles in the Due Process of Life and Law," 87 Harvard Law Review 1, 7 (1973).

    Ruth Bader Ginsburg — Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court


    " Roe, I believe, would have been more acceptable as a judicial decision if it had not gone beyond a ruling on the extreme statute before the court. … Heavy-handed judicial intervention was difficult to justify and appears to have provoked, not resolved, conflict."

    North Carolina Law Review, 1985

    Edward Lazarus — Former clerk to Harry Blackmun.

    "As a matter of constitutional interpretation and judicial method, Roe borders on the indefensible. I say this as someone utterly committed to the right to choose, as someone who believes such a right has grounding elsewhere in the Constitution instead of where Roe placed it, and as someone who loved Roe's author like a grandfather."
    ….
    "What, exactly, is the problem with Roe? The problem, I believe, is that it has little connection to the Constitutional right it purportedly interpreted. A constitutional right to privacy broad enough to include abortion has no meaningful foundation in constitutional text, history, or precedent - at least, it does not if those sources are fairly described and reasonably faithfully followed."

    " The Lingering Problems with Roe v. Wade, and Why the Recent Senate Hearings on Michael McConnell's Nomination Only Underlined Them," FindLaw Legal Commentary, Oct. 3, 2002

    "[A]s a matter of constitutional interpretation, even most liberal jurisprudes — if you administer truth serum — will tell you it is basically indefensible."

    " Liberals, Don't Make Her an Icon" Washington Post July 10, 2003.

    William Saletan — Slate columnist who left the GOP 2004 because it was too pro-life.

    "Blackmun's [ Supreme Court] papers vindicate every indictment of Roe: invention, overreach, arbitrariness, textual indifference."

    " Unbecoming Justice Blackmun," Legal Affairs, May/June 2005.

    John Hart Ely — Yale Law School, Harvard Law School, Stanford Law School

    Roe "is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be."
    ….
    "What is frightening about Roe is that this super-protected right is not inferable from the language of the Constitution, the framers' thinking respecting the specific problem in issue, any general value derivable from the provisions they included, or the nation's governmental structure. Nor is it explainable in terms of the unusual political impotence of the group judicially protected vis-à-vis the interest that legislatively prevailed over it.… At times the inferences the Court has drawn from the values the Constitution marks for special protection have been controversial, even shaky, but never before has its sense of an obligation to draw one been so obviously lacking."

    "The Wages of Crying Wolf: A Comment on Roe v. Wade," 82 Yale Law Journal, 920, 935-937 (1973).

    Benjamin Wittes — Washington Post

    Roe "is a lousy opinion that disenfranchised millions of conservatives on an issue about which they care deeply."

    " Letting Go of Roe," The Atlantic Monthly, Jan/Feb 2005.

    Richard Cohen — Washington Post


    "[T]he very basis of the Roe v. Wade decision — the one that grounds abortion rights in the Constitution — strikes many people now as faintly ridiculous. Whatever abortion may be, it cannot simply be a matter of privacy."
    ….
    "As a layman, it's hard for me to raise profound constitutional objections to the decision. But it is not hard to say it confounds our common-sense understanding of what privacy is.

    "If a Supreme Court ruling is going to affect so many people then it ought to rest on perfectly clear logic and up-to-date science. Roe , with its reliance on trimesters and viability, has a musty feel to it, and its argument about privacy raises more questions than it answers.
    ….
    Roe "is a Supreme Court decision whose reasoning has not held up. It seems more fiat than argument."
    ….
    "Still, a bad decision is a bad decision. If the best we can say for it is that the end justifies the means, then we have not only lost the argument — but a bit of our soul as well."

    " Support Choice, Not Roe" Washington Post, October 19, 2005.

    Alan Dershowitz — Harvard Law School

    Roe v. Wade and Bush v. Gore "represent opposite sides of the same currency of judicial activism in areas more appropriately left to the political processes…. Judges have no special competence, qualifications, or mandate to decide between equally compelling moral claims (as in the abortion controversy)…. [C]lear governing constitutional principles … are not present in either case."


    Now, rather than just spew forth ignorance and false accusations, how bout actually trying to defend the merits of RvW with something beyond "Well, gosh golly, it was 7-2!!!!!"

    I'll wait.
    DuckDuckGo - Privacy Simplified

  8. #647
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,627
    Amen (Given)
    2523
    Amen (Received)
    1839
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Let's look again at the actual citations of some:

    [snipped]

    Now, rather than just spew forth ignorance and false accusations, how bout actually trying to defend the merits of RvW with something beyond "Well, gosh golly, it was 7-2!!!!!"
    There is no disputing that SOME legal experts disagree with the Roe v Wade decision. Obviously. If there was total agreement on how abortion should be viewed through the lens of the Constitution there would have been no need to take it before the Supreme Court. You’ve provided seven (excluding Ginsburg who voted for it even though it didn’t go far enough) which is the same number of Justices, themselves “legal experts”, who voted it into law.

    As for the merits of R v W they can are well summed up by W. A. Criswell - the Southern Baptist Convention’s former president and pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas, Texas. He was pleased at the ruling: “I have always felt that it was only after a child was born and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual person,” he said, “and it has always, therefore, seemed to me that what is best for the mother and for the future should be allowed.”

    In short, the rights of the mother to choose.
    “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.

  9. #648
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    57,544
    Amen (Given)
    12477
    Amen (Received)
    26696
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    There is no disputing that SOME legal experts disagree with the Roe v Wade decision....
    Wow, that's quite an admission, Tass.

    Now, perhaps you can bring yourself to admit that these are actually LIBERAL experts who happen to be FOR abortion, but recognize the decision itself was CRAP.

    THEN you can continue your psychotic war on Southern Baptists.
    DuckDuckGo - Privacy Simplified

  10. #649
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,555
    Amen (Given)
    1799
    Amen (Received)
    1522
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Wow, that's quite an admission, Tass.

    Now, perhaps you can bring yourself to admit that these are actually LIBERAL experts who happen to be FOR abortion, but recognize the decision itself was CRAP.

    THEN you can continue your psychotic war on Southern Baptists.
    And perhaps you could do the same in reverse. His point is that it's controversial, but a 7 to 2 ruling.

  11. #650
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    57,544
    Amen (Given)
    12477
    Amen (Received)
    26696
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    And perhaps you could do the same in reverse. His point is that it's controversial, but a 7 to 2 ruling.
    Not understanding that second sentence. You realize that other really bad decisions by SCOTUS have been 8-1 or by total majority?
    DuckDuckGo - Privacy Simplified

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •