Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member.
Usually pretty decent. When I was there in October, they didn't have any cars out at all. They asked each person what they needed and brought that out. I got a Nissan Armada, but it was pretty high mileage, especially for National.Will do. Although my decision to use national depends on the likelihood of sing my EE if i pay with UR. Any DPs on that?
I don't know what it is like now, in season. Let us know.
His mistake was going after deblasio's wifeYep. But he isn't the brightest so doesn't surprise me...
Ok, so Rasha.Okay, that I can handle. Are they wrong, mistaken, perhaps even reshaim? I can take that but it is ridiculous to call people without masks rodfim.
Perhaps simple mesira would suffice?Which then means we can kill the moiser. Either way someone dies in your story.
I was explaining how RVW exists within its framework. Saying "it's framework is wrong" doesn't mean anything until the Supreme Court overturns it.RVW exists within RVW. Yes, I sure hope so. I exist within my framework too. Where does that take me?
I also explained how the court might go about overturning it in a narrow way (by saying that the science has changed and the benefits to saving prenatal life is greater now). In all likelihood, this is the way that the court will go. It will leave in place the legal theory that led to Roe, but curtail it in practice (ie by moving the cutoff date to 40 days, for example, or allowing a heartbeat law, with still technically keeping abortion as a right nationally).
Further, I commented that the impetus to say that abortion = murder is itself somewhat of a reach.
It seems like everyone is happy to say anything that fits within their worldview falls under judicial review, and anything that falls outside it is legistlating from the bench.LOLOLOL
So let me get this straight, you are quoting from RVW to show that RVW is in a basic reading of the constitution? And then you are calling other things laughable?At this point, I'm beginning to not take @shaulyaakov seriously anymore.
There can be a right to privacy without it meaning that the ability to regulate a doctor's office with a big huge sign offering abortions is included. Including this right to privacy under due process is very difficult to see as being inherently there. There can still be a right to privacy under other clauses of the constitution, but that would not include the favored outcome of protecting abortion.
Privacy from prying eyes is based on illegal search and seizure as well as housing of soldiers. THat the right to privacy restricts regulating an action is new. It is a stretch to say that a right to privacy means that a doctor can't be regulated against having an abortion clininc with a big huge sign in front.Exactly.
Merrick garland was specifically designed to be the least controversial pick possible, in the hopes of creating momentum to force a vote.Agreed. Dont think there is much risk here.
Trump's only risk here is that ACB says something in her hearings that make 2 or more Republicans not support her. I can't think of anything she could possibly say to change their minds.