Justice O'Connor has just resigned!

[chadfromdallas]

Perhaps this poster should read something more than just the Treay of Tripoli. If you take the time and read a bit more you could just find that you are ignoring some very rich and rewarding reading. I believe a fair reading of the Declaration of Independence, the early state constitutions, the Northwest Ordinance, the Mayflower Compact, the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut and so on by any objective person would find that there certainly were a good number of professing Christians involved in settling this country and establishing its laws.

Proof texts almost never prove anything because they are almost always taken out of context.

 

[DisDuck]

But I guess no Jews.

 

[shrubber]

Perhaps this poster should read something more than just the Treay of Tripoli. If you take the time and read a bit more you could just find that you are ignoring some very rich and rewarding reading. I believe a fair reading of the Declaration of Independence, the early state constitutions, the Northwest Ordinance, the Mayflower Compact, the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut and so on by any objective person would find that there certainly were a good number of professing Christians involved in settling this country and establishing its laws.

Proof texts almost never prove anything because they are almost always taken out of context.

Of Course....It seems a shame to have to point this out, but thank you for doing so.

 

[marybet]

I hope not. We won the last election-let's take advantage of it!

Well 51% is hardly a mandate, I think the other 49% should also have a voice. We are always being told to get over it and respect W, but IMO he is the president of all of us, not just those who voted for him. Didn't he make a big deal about being a uniter not a divider? I think this is a great opportunity for him to unite the country and pick a middle of the road moderate that will not tilt the court so far to the right that only the ultra conservites will be happy.

 

[GreatBiscuit]

Let's skip all the debate and just nominate Judge Judy!

Somehow I don't see her being overly receptive to lobbyist on either side!

 

[chadfromdallas]

Let's skip all the debate and just nominate Judge Judy!

Somehow I don't see her being overly receptive to lobbyist on either side!

I would support that!

She is a strong supporter of abortions for stupid people

 

[jimmiej]

Well 51% is hardly a mandate, I think the other 49% should also have a voice. We are always being told to get over it and respect W, but IMO he is the president of all of us, not just those who voted for him. Didn't he make a big deal about being a uniter not a divider? I think this is a great opportunity for him to unite the country and pick a middle of the road moderate that will not tilt the court so far to the right that only the ultra conservites will be happy.

To be more specific, Republicans have the White House, Senate, & the House. Too often, they cowtow to the Democrats. It's time to do something with their power! Whether you win by 2% or 22%, you need to do what you can while you're in power. The other side surely would!

 

[JoeEpcotRocks]

Well 51% is hardly a mandate, I think the other 49% should also have a voice. We are always being told to get over it and respect W, but IMO he is the president of all of us, not just those who voted for him. Didn't he make a big deal about being a uniter not a divider? I think this is a great opportunity for him to unite the country and pick a middle of the road moderate that will not tilt the court so far to the right that only the ultra conservites will be happy.

Can we use the word "right" without "extreme" and the word "conservatives" without "ultra." ?? (addressed to all posters)

I'm not sure who the "moderates" are who would be in the running.

Names anyone?

 

[JoeThaNo1Stunna]

Yes...those rape victims should really learn to control themselves.

I'm not supporting banning abortion in the case of rape. So that does not apply.

However if you get pregnant through casual sex and use abortion as birth control to rid yourself of an inconvienence? Nahhh, I don't support that.

 

[chadfromdallas]

I'm not supporting banning abortion in the case of rape. So that does not apply.

How would you suppose they sort the cases that are rape and those that are not? I could see a lot of false police reports coming up in a situation caused by that thinking...

 

[Professor Mouse]

When the democrats filibuster - and they will - we need to pull out the "nuclear option" and shut them down. There is nothing that gives them the authority to dictate who is appointed to the court. Bring on that fight. We can give them 100 hours on the Senate floor to lie all they want - but then we vote. If they need 150 hours to get in all their lies, then let them have it. Then we vote. We could even buy some TV time and let Ted Kennedy lie and smear for ten days straight. Then vote.

The nuclear option is dead. Go read the Memorandum of Agreement from the 14 moderates. The agreement to vote against any change in the Senate rules is an independent provision and will not be abrogated if the Democrats decide to filibuster a Bush nominee.

Due to the MOA, there are not the votes to exercise the nuclear option. The reason why Flip Flop Frist wanted to violate Senate rules and try the nuclear option in May was so that the furor over such a violation of Senate rules would have time to die down before a Supreme Court nomination fight. There is no way that the GOP would dare try the nuclear option for a Supreme Court nomination battle. Flip Flop Frist blew it and the nuclear option is dead.

 

[jodifla]

Ok, thank you for explaining.

I really think, however, there are much fewer people that oppose birth control than those that oppose abortion, and don't honestly think birth control overall would be threatened. The morning after pill, possibly, because it is used after the fact rather than as a preventative measure, but I don't think most people don't have a problem with birth control.

I oppose abortion, but not birth control, and I am one of those religious right wing nuts everyone is referring to. I don't claim to speak for everyone, but most of the other religious right wing nuts I hang around with don't oppose birth control either.

But once you throw out the right to privacy, you THROW OUT THE RIGHT TO BIRTH CONTROL! Griswold v. Connecticut wasn't that long ago, and it was the right FOR MARRIED COUPLES to use birth control in Connecticut. Welcome the Republican Party right into your bedroom, folks. That's where they want to be....controlling the most intimate aspects of your life.

It amazes me how naive people are. Most forms of birth control can be construed as interfering after conception, and WILL MOST LIKELY BE OUTLAWED BY SOME STATES! Like Birth Control Pills, and the IUD.

It will leave us with condoms and diaphrams, if we're lucky.




,

 

[caitycaity]

Whether you win by 2% or 22%, you need to do what you can while you're in power. The other side surely would!

someone earlier asked about what extremism was. in all seriousness, the above quote is what i consider to be extremeism, no matter the side. it reeks of divisiveness and deferring to special interest groups rather than trying to do what is best for the country. and i mean that regardless of whatever side is saying it.

JMHO.

 

[marybet]

Can we use the word "right" without "extreme" and the word "conservatives" without "ultra." ?? (addressed to all posters)

I'm not sure who the "moderates" are who would be in the running.

Names anyone?

I am not sure who the moderates are either. I consider both liberals and conservatives to be moderate if they sometimes agree with the other side. It is the extremes on both sides that scare me. I think if a person has shown an ability to compromise and see some validity in the opposing view than they would qualify as a moderate.

 

[nuke]

But once you throw out the right to privacy, you THROW OUT THE RIGHT TO BIRTH CONTROL! Griswold v. Connecticut wasn't that long ago, and it was the right FOR MARRIED COUPLES to use birth control in Connecticut. Welcome the Republican Party right into your bedroom, folks. That's where they want to be....controlling the most intimate aspects of your life.

It amazes me how naive people are. Most forms of birth control can be construed as interfering after conception, and WILL MOST LIKELY BE OUTLAWED BY SOME STATES! Like Birth Control Pills, and the IUD.

It will leave us with condoms and diaphrams, if we're lucky.
,

Excellent Post!!

 

[cardaway]

I'm not supporting banning abortion in the case of rape. So that does not apply.

However if you get pregnant through casual sex and use abortion as birth control to rid yourself of an inconvienence? Nahhh, I don't support that.

So why is the "murder" of the product of rape OK and not the product of casual sex? Wouldn't they both be worth protecting?

 

[Aidensmom]

But once you throw out the right to privacy, you THROW OUT THE RIGHT TO BIRTH CONTROL! Griswold v. Connecticut wasn't that long ago, and it was the right FOR MARRIED COUPLES to use birth control in Connecticut. Welcome the Republican Party right into your bedroom, folks. That's where they want to be....controlling the most intimate aspects of your life.

It amazes me how naive people are. Most forms of birth control can be construed as interfering after conception, and WILL MOST LIKELY BE OUTLAWED BY SOME STATES! Like Birth Control Pills, and the IUD.

It will leave us with condoms and diaphrams, if we're lucky.

,

Forgive me for being naive, I am not sure if you are referring to my knowledge of birth control (I know what it is and what it does, I use it) or to my lack of assumption that birth control is now in jeopardy. I don't claim to know everything, just stating my opinion.

I guess I always thought that there were plenty of things that you could do, even if you were not specifically given the right to do so. For example, I can go out there and drive my car home from work, but the government has not given me the "right" to drive (the state has given me a license, but the constitution does not guarantee a right). So, technically, driving could be outlawed because we are not guaranteed that right if people wanted to make it so. However, it is hard to imagine that this situation would ever happen, there would not be the support for it.

Just because you don't have the right to birth control does not mean that you can assume it will be outlawed. There has to be support for that. All I was saying is that I don't think that the number of people that support outlawing birth control is as large as the number of people that oppose abortion.

 

[cardaway]

Since many people believe BC pills and the like are equal to abortions it's not a big leap to believe there would be laws proposed to make them illegal as well.

Sad, but true.

 

[dcentity2000]

Nuke, your sig pic is the cutest!



Rich::

 

[Galahad]

And I was thanking you for explaining it!

~Amanda

Ah, Got it! Thanks!

Off to WDW for a week. Y'all have fun!