Republican's Latest Monumental Faux Pas

You don't mind it as long as it's your party in power.

 

How about Justice Whites dissenting opinion, he was appointed by JFK you know.

https://www.scribd.com/document/217330653/Dissent-White

 

Murder should be delayed if not stopped altogether.

 

Robert

It is not about you

 

Ad you differ how?

 

And for balance - what about the opinions of the other judges?

 

And you are taking away the rights of the unborn and fathers without due process.

 

He explained their opinions.

They cited the 14th amendment but gave no evidence as to why they did that when the 14th amendment specifically says nothing about it.

They said "liberty" applies to abortion but gave no just cause as to why that is so or why it overrides the 10th amendment and states rights.

White was not dissenting about legalizing abortion, he was saying that the Court had no constitutional evidence to rip this right away from the states.

But if you want to spend time going through the majority opinion knock yourself out....its a bunch of talk with no facts to back any of it up.

But not only this....this is just the decision part....the whole bringing the case to the Supreme Court is problematic also.

Roe v. Wade wasn't a case of someone fighting for their rights...no....it was hand selected by activists and lawyers to be specifically brought to the Court for a hearing.

Roe (Norma McCovey) got herself pregnant and tried to get an abortion in Texas. Since it was illegal except in rape cases she claimed a bunch of black men raped her. When this was found out to be a lie she eventually landed with a couple of lawyers that were looking for a case to bring to the Supreme Court, she had no standing to sue whatsoever.

None.

She didn't even attend a single court date, the lawyers were simply using her name. She eventually gave birth and gave it up for adoption without ever caring about the case again.

In order for the Court to hear a case there must be damage to the defendant...there was none here as nothing was ever illegal and she was suspect for lying about being raped anyways.

 

I was going to ignore that remark but decided to educate the democrats a bit more.

This country is not run by courts; It is run by congress creating laws approved by the president.


if they do not accept that, they don't know how laws are created.

 

Of course it is
"promote the general Welfare"'.....it's right there in the beginning.

 

Promote doesn't mean provide.

 

I don't have a party.

 

He must be lecturing you then.

 

Why is every case that the right loses "flawed"?

Some laws are actually good and hold up over time.

I'm thinking you had a lousy professor.

Unfortunately, you are right.

Won't matter, see above

Hard to say

 

You are kidding right?

 

No.

 

Does the woman feel the same way.

 

I went to a liberal school so odds are my professors were horrible.

 

Somebody failed you along the way

 

You did.

But I forgive you.

Does that make it hurt less?

 

Well, this is frightening. What else is on your list. Please tell me guns because there could not be a more obvious problem that need a good Fuhrer to solve.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Ya, it was so flawed (according to YOUR "legal scholars" ) that it lasted 50 years...

Yes, even Roberts believes even women have a right to their own bodies even if Anti-Choicers don't.

 

There is no gun issue, the Supreme Court has already ensured our right to them against the whiny left's attempts to take them.

 

And they are contradicting the ones that actually rule on constitutional law. It's easy from the cheap seats.

 

No they aren't, they are echoing Justice White, who sat on the Supreme Court and actually ruled on constitutional law.

See folks, this is what happens when you cherrypick threads.

You get embarrassed in front of the whole forum.