Poll: Do you respect the Supreme Court?

Your statement is grossly false, misleading, and a lie. I do not condone a pro-choice position, and never have. I adhere strictly to being against elective abortion. I demand you retract yoru statement. I suspect that you're still upset that the movie "silent scream" is a lie.

 

Is that the best you can do?

Quote 1 is denouncing the prochoice view of elective abortion even when brainwaves are present.


Quote 2 is in the context of parents vs the state. The latter half of the quote affirms my "no elective abortions" stance.

Quote 3 is addressing the issue of a 12-week fetus's ability to experience pain. The film "Silent Scream" claims it can, but in fact, a fetus cannot percieve pain until the presence of the cerebral cortex (which occurs after this stage). This quote does not in any way present a pro-choice view. In fact, I am consistently against elective abortions, and would be so even if the fetus felt no pain up to birth. The point of Quote 3 was to address the need to us to remain credible and accurate in our Christian witness, and the movie "Silent Scream" is not a beneficial tool for those who which to be credible witnesses.


LE, you're doing a poor job of sliming me, but doing a rather good job of sliming yourself.

 

You are correct, we will draw our own conclusions. However, I don't see anything wrong with John's position in the material you posted. In fact, I think the most outrageous thing is the lies presented in the Silent Scream video. I guess it's alright to lie if you think the cause is just.

 

Are you stating this from personal experience or just making it up?

 

Well, I've had anesthesia disable my cerebral cortex and even though I was in surgery I felt no pain.

 

Actually, a SC decision is only a "LEGAL OPINION", for it to become "LAW" the only branch of government "VESTED" with the power to "Make laws", "House/Senate" must pass a law to conform to the courts opinion.

"Congress" made/pass the Roe Vs Wade law "AFTER" the courts decision, so why doesn't "Congress" pass laws prohibiting "prayer in schools", Etc, because the Constitution forbids it.

"SOMEBODY" is getting "slip-shucked" thinking they have to obey a law that is "un-Constutional" to be "on the books" and "IS NOT" on the books.

 

Me4HIm,

What the Supreme Court, under the Constitution is doing, is not making law (at least ideally, under the Constitutional power of judicial review) but rather striking down laws that, in their opinion and in their role on the highest court in the land, are unconstitutional.

Again, Alexander Hamilton, from Federalist 78:

Again, I VERY often disagree with them myself, particularly in areas of abortion and church-state (and some others such as the Kelo eminent domain case), but I do believe that it is a power granted them under the Constitution. The checks to that are impeachment and perhaps the Exceptions Clause of the Constitution, though I have disagreed with this as its intention in the past, but have seen some excellent arguments made in support of that position.

 

I just found a bill that was introduced in the past few months that uses Article III, section 2.

A bill introduced by Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, promises to return to the states those issues federal courts, by their decisions, "have wrested from state and local governments."

H.R. 4379, the We the People Act, would remove from federal courts' jurisdiction any case involving religious liberty; sexual practices, orientation or reproduction; and same-sex marriage.

Source: http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48319