Results 1 to 10 of 147
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksHybrid View
-
10-23-2008, 07:12 AM #1
Bruno, the president nominates the supreme court justices (they still have to get confirmed at legislation), and the abortion question is in their power (to move the decision to state level, or why not criminalize it on federal level). Few old people on the court right now, so it's expected that the next president will get to appoint some justices. Of course they all tell you there's no litmus test, but the fact that Lee and many others feel so strongly about who gets to nominate tells you that actualy there is an implicit litmus test.
How alive is a a fertilized egg is pretty settled, the question is at which point it gets its 'unalienable rights' under the US constitution.
-
10-23-2008, 07:26 AM #2
I know how it works, but one of the amazing things is that the supreme judges seem to do a relatively good job of remaining impartial. I don't know if it is true or not, but I once read that supreme judges are observed not to have any special disposition towards the president who appointed them.
Originally Posted by gugi
That is the sticking point of course. Originally Posted by gugi
Personally I draw the line at the end of the first trimester, unless special circumstances are involved like life threatening condition of the mother or if the fetus develops a condition that pretty much guarantees a short life full of agony, like spina bifida combined with britle bone disease.
Btw this is going seriously off-topic so if anyone is intersted in continuing with this abortion tangent I'll split it off into a new thread.Til shade is gone, til water is gone, Into the shadow with teeth bared, screaming defiance with the last breath.
To spit in Sightblinder’s eye on the Last Day
Reply With Quote
