Like a dog chasing its' tale

...the US Supreme Court simply prevented the Florida Supreme Court

It becomes a states’ rights issue. Big deal!

Way to back up your arguement.

The quotes you are

The quotes you are referencing are not arguments, they are statements of fact. Learn the difference.

Lester

Just to be clear, your

Just to be clear, your arguments were; A. States should have the right to ban abortion B. Florida, A STATE, did not have the right to interpret the election results as they saw fit

The difference is, you only care about states rights when it works to your favor.

That is incorrect. The two

That is incorrect. The two statements of fact were: 1) If Roe was overturned then by definition it would become (not should be – your words, not mine) a states’ rights issue. 2) The US Supreme Court ruled that the Florida Supreme court could not change the rules (not interpret – your words, not mine) of Florida’s role in a FEDERAL election after the election had already begun.

I cannot dumb it down any more than that.

The larger issue is why did the Florida election even wind up in court? Why would you count “hanging chads” and “dimpled chads?” Voting cards are only kicked out of a machine if the voter votes incorrectly. The bottom line is this: if you lack the intellectual capacity to vote using a punch card ballot, then your vote should not count.

Lester

insist what?

Explain to me again the election process in 2000?

Who was it that went crying all the way to daddy's friends on the Supreme Court?

I believe if you will go

I believe if you will go back and actually read the history, you will learn that the US Supreme Court simply prevented the Florida Supreme Court from changing the rules governing Florida’s role in a federal election after the election had already begun. Perhaps your intended question is, “Why were the Florida Supremes trying to hand the election to Gore?”

Lester

The argument before the

The argument before the court in 1973 was if a constitutional right to an abortion existed. Clearly it does not. For the pro-abortionist, the argument is should there be a constitutional right to an abortion. There is a difference. The court wanted there to be a constitutional right to an abortion, so they created one.

What the constitution does say (I’m assuming you didn’t read that far) is that any powers not granted to the federal government, nor denied to the states shall be preserved for the states. Therefore, since abortion is not mentioned in the constitution, it should be an issue for the states to decide. And that’s how it was prior to 1973.

Why do liberals always insist on legislating from the bench instead of the legislature?

Lester

No 6 & 7?

I was looking for the “Choice 6 & 7” option.

Since the “right” to an abortion was created by the Supreme Court, logic dictates that the same court could, in theory, very well remove that “right.” However, if RvW was overturned, then the power that was originally stolen from the States would then be returned to the States.

A clear reading of the text of the Constitution proves that there is no “right” allowing a woman to murder her unborn child. Why are liberals no obsessed with making sure a woman has a right to have her unborn baby sucked down a sink?

What many of you pro-abortionists fail to realize is that there are actually two arguments to be made: (1) is there a constitutional right to an abortion and (2) should there be a constitutional right to an abortion. The pro-abortionist can argue all day long whether or not there should be a right to an abortion. However, the pro-abortionist cannot argue whether or not there is such a right defined in the constitution. Clearly, a reading of the text proves there is not.

Lester

Regarding: Clearly, a reading of the text proves there is not.

Lester (Phinney),

I direct your attention to the constitution where Madison anticipated and countered your argument:

ARTICLE IX.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Please stop misconstruing.

Forrest Erickson


Morality is doing right, no matter what you are told.
Religion is doing what you are told, no matter what is right.

-H. L. Mencken

I seriously doubt Mr.

I seriously doubt Mr. Madison would have countered the argument that there is no “right” for a woman to slaughter her unborn child.

Would your argument be that you have a constitutional right to murder someone? After all, there is nothing specific in the constitution that outlaws murder. The Declaration of Independence says that some rights are “endowed by our creator.” Among those is the “right to life.” When were we created? When we exited the womb or when we were conceived? Clearly, the biologically correct answer is the latter.

The error of many is that the ninth amendment allows us to create rights since it clearly says that we do have other rights not listed in the constitution. The flaw in logic is that when one right is created via the ninth amendment, another right can be derived from this newly created right. Such was the case of Roe. Prior to Roe, the court created a right to privacy. Then, with Roe, the court expanded the right to privacy and created a right to an abortion. Based on that logic, you can create a right to anything.

The problem with Roe is that it was originally argued from a scientific point of view. During that time, the science was not there to prove that the unborn child was, in fact, a human being. Now, Roe has become a political argument. Unfortunately, liberals are able to advance political arguments because political arguments can be based on emotion. And we all know liberals are queens of emotion.

Nonetheless, if the science of today existed then, Roe would have been blown out of the water.

However, in keeping with the original point of the thread – What happens if Roe is overturned? It becomes a states’ rights issue. Big deal!

God forbid, liberals let the people decide.

Lester

Yes let the people decide.

Yes we should let the people decide.
Not the federal government.
Not the state legislators.
Not someone else preacher.

The people should always have control of their own body and their own if, when, and how, of reproduction.

Forrest Erickson


Morality is doing right, no matter what you are told.
Religion is doing what you are told, no matter what is right.

-H. L. Mencken

Then I’m happy to have you

Then I’m happy to have you on board, Forrest, as we both apparently support the people’s right to decide if abortion should be legal and that the court should not be permitted to pass such a law.

Lester

Your argumenative methods

Lester-Your argumenative methods are "stunning" to say the least. Your parents must be very proud to have birthed such a close minded bigot.

Stunning

Have we really come to name calling on here? Give me a break; Lester is just voicing his opinion. Justin you need to grow up. You all also need to realize that not everyone is going to agree with everything on here and it's nice to hear other opinions. Keep up the good work Lester.

johnnyo

Johnny Lester has done more

Johnny
Lester has done more "name calling" than anyone else on this blog. If this was not a public forum I would have called him a few choice names myself, but out of respect for others I have not done so. He is a closed minded bigot in my opinion, but I do agree he has a right to his opinions.
If he dishes it out he should be prepared to take it.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

fair enough, have at it!

fair enough, have at it! Your right we shouldn't dish it if we can't take it. I'm not saying that I agree with him or anyone for that matter I have my own views and every once in a while i'll express them.
enjoy...
johnny

Poor Lester

Is it fair to say that liberals hate being called out for being the piles of dog squeeze they really are?

and

Why are liberals no obsessed with making sure a woman has a right to have her unborn baby sucked down a sink?

among many others. Yeah, thanks for the "good" work.

Even I can admit when I am

Even I can admit when I am wrong. The “dog squeeze” comment was out of line. My apologies.

Lester

I was looking in the

I was looking in the Constitution for where it says I have a right to seek medical care. Can't find it anywhere. Can't find where I have a right to breath clean air, either. Or drive an automobile on highways built with my tax dollars. Can't find where it says I can choose between Kroger or Food City to buy groceries. Nope. Not in there anywhere. So many rights I don't have. To the barricades!

Figure this

If RvW were overturned what would happen?

The rich, well connected would continue to have access to this procedure in clean, sterile, "don't look here, nothing going on" type facilities, while the poor and unconnected would be subject to "bathtub gin abortions". The type that could kill or maim both mother and unborn.

That is all you would gain from overturning RvW.

If you think that would end abortion as a form of birth control, you are living in another reality.

The rich, well connected

The rich, well connected would continue to have access to this procedure in clean, sterile, "don't look here, nothing going on" type facilities, while the poor and unconnected would be subject to "bathtub gin abortions". The type that could kill or maim both mother and unborn.

That is all you would gain from overturning RvW.

So true I had to repeat it. I feel every woman has to make her own choice of what is right for her. There has always been abortions and always will be abortions legal or not.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Man v. Woman

What right does a MAN have to tell a WOMAN what to do with her body? Other than Lester, how many men here have carried a child, in his womb, full term? I have my own opinions about Abortion, but since I am a Man, then I'll keep those opinions to myself.

viva Evo Morales

What’s your point? To

What’s your point?

To expand your oratory genius, what right does a man have to tell a woman that she cannot drown her children in a bathtub? I don’t care what a woman does with her body; she should not have the right to kill her own children. A child in the womb is not simply “part of her body.” To believe so is to believe that the woman, while pregnant, has two heads, four arms, four legs, and two genitals. This is biologically incorrect. Luckily for libs, however, they don’t let science and logic stand in the way of their reasoning.

Since abortion affects the survival of both male and female, and since I am a member of one of those genders, I am qualified to speak to the topic of abortion and will so.

Still, the original thread speaks to the notion of a constitutional right to an abortion; not the perceived favorability of such a right. Clearly, a review of the text proves that no such right exists.

Viva la migra!

Lester

Me and my twin

Oratory:
1. skill or eloquence in public speaking: The evangelist moved thousands to repentance with his oratory.
2. the art of public speaking, esp. in a formal and eloquent manner.

I think you were referring to his written genius, not his verbal genuis. Anyway, I've never caught BL using words he didn't understand.

Is a parasitic twin half dead or half alive (link...)? What part of intelligent design is this? Should people born with this defect be "forced" to carry around their twin to keep it "alive"?

Do you believe crime rates in the 90's lowered because of McGruff, or because women were not having unwanted babies in the 70's? If you believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible, is this preacher more devout than others? (link...)

Is there anything with organized religion you have a problem with or are you in lockstep with all of it?

BTW - I've never heard anyone say they felt good about abortion. Taking someone off life support is an awful thing to have to do - but it's done.

Horrors

You forgot to add: A little girls doctor could be prevented from even telling her about birth control options. (Can I put that in as a write-in vote?)

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

State News

Local .GOV

State .GOV

Wire Reports