Supreme Court Vacancy

[BVS]

But where did the common sense that murder is wrong start? Murder, as in sacrifice of babies and virgins, wasn't wrong to many an ancient civilization. Why?

You honestly think when "Cain" committed the first murder, that people just sat back and said, well that's OK until we have something telling us otherwise? Come on...

As far as sacrifices. People still justify murder in capital punishment and war, you will always find those that justify murder.

Our forefathers knew that absolutes didn't exist? I don't know what would lead you to that conclusion.

The constitution would have been much more rigid if they had, religious freedom would not have been such a major factor that's for sure.

 

[80sU2isBest]

You honestly think when "Cain" committed the first murder, that people just sat back and said, well that's OK until we have something telling us otherwise? Come on...

That's exactly my point, BVS. The moral of "thou shalt not kill" came from God. The Bible says that when Adam and Eve ate the apple, they suddenly grew aware of sin. That realization came from God.

And if you want to get right down to it, in the book of Romans, Paul said that the law (right vs. wrong) is written on everyone's hearts, whether they know about God or not.

 

[BVS]

And if you want to get right down to it, in the book of Romans, Paul said that the law (right vs. wrong) is written on everyone's hearts, whether they know about God or not.

And this is exactly my point. It has nothing to do with religion, it has nothing to do with the 10 commandments it's common moral humanity that we all have.

 

[80sU2isBest]

And this is exactly my point. It has nothing to do with religion, it has nothing to do with the 10 commandments it's common moral humanity that we all have.

My point all along was that the "universal laws", the "common moral humanity" that you are talking about has its basis in God. You even referenced that yourself, talking about Cain and Abel. Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel were the only people at that time. They got their knowledge of sin from God.

 

[BVS]

Well then we agree somewhat, but I think we'll continue to disagree with the peripheral.

 

[melon]

Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel were the only people at that time. They got their knowledge of sin from God.

Except they're legend, not fact.

Melon

 

[joyfulgirl]

Published on Saturday, July 2, 2005 by the Associated Press

NOW Declares 'state of Emergency,' Plans March After News of O'Connor's Retirement
by Rose French


NASHVILLE, Tenn. - The president of the National Organization for Women declared a "state of emergency" for women's rights and planned a march on the state Capitol as news of Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement reverberated through the group's annual convention.

NOW president Kim Gandy told about 800 NOW members Friday that women need to send a message that they won't tolerate "extremist" judges who set back women's rights.

"This is our time. This is our challenge," Gandy said as the crowd replied by clapping and chanting, "Hell no, we won't go" and "We won't go back."

The group shifted the agenda for their three-day convention to include a march to the Tennessee Capitol on Saturday to "make sure Senator Frist and all senators are going to hear our voices. We're going to march on every Capitol in this country," Gandy said.

The first woman on the Supreme Court, O'Connor was often the swing vote on 5-4 decisions supporting abortion, affirmative action and other contentious social issues. Her retirement leaves Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the only woman on the court.

Gandy and former NOW president Eleanor Smeal, now president of the Feminist Majority Foundation, praised O'Connor as a moderate.

"Twenty-four years ago, as president of the National Organization for Women, I testified for Sandra Day O'Connor before the Senate Judiciary Committee," Smeal said. "I knew then that O'Connor, although a conservative voice, would be one who would not permit the elimination of women's fundamental rights, including the right to privacy."

Gandy said the group fears "a nominee along the lines of some of the extremist judges that have been put on the appellate court by George Bush."

NOW members are set to elect their president Saturday night. Gandy, elected in 2001, is being challenged by Rosemary J. Dempsey, a Connecticut lawyer who's held several national and state leadership roles since joining NOW in 1970.

Dempsey wants to focus on attracting younger members and opposing President Bush's economic agenda, which she says inflicts disproportionate harm on women.

"We were effective in the 70s, and we're effective now," Dempsey said. "But there has been a backlash. Most young women don't know about NOW these days. If NOW is visible and relevant where they (young members) live, that's what makes NOW powerful."

On the Net:
NOW: http://www.now.org

 

[randhail]

Published on Saturday, July 2, 2005 by the Associated Press

NOW Declares 'state of Emergency,' Plans March After News of O'Connor's Retirement
by Rose French


NASHVILLE, Tenn. - The president of the National Organization for Women declared a "state of emergency" for women's rights and planned a march on the state Capitol as news of Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement reverberated through the group's annual convention.

On the Net:
NOW: http://www.now.org

Doesn't this organization have some golf course to go protest at?

 

[pax]

Wow, you're so witty and incisive!

In response to joyfulgirl's post:

It would be nice to see NOW become a more relevant organization again. I think a lot of women my own age (say, early 20s) or younger don't even know what NOW does or why NOW was (and could be again) so influential.

The mistake I think that women's groups like NOW have made, again and again, is getting wrapped up in political issues that don't necessarily touch the "woman on the street." They don't focus enough on economic injustice or inequities in health and education, because those problems do, I think, continue to disproportionately affect women (and young women at that).

If they don't alter both their message and their approach, we're going to keep hearing boneheaded comments about golf courses.

 

[nbcrusader]

Too bad that abortion will once again be used as a tool to exercise political power.

 

[80sU2isBest]

If Bush doesn't nominate a pro-lifer, he has betrayed the majority of his contituency, the people who put him in office.

 

[Irvine511]

i can't understand why abortion is such a hysteria-inducing issue, on both sides, in the United States, but pretty much nowhere else in the developed world.

what do they know that we don't?

 

[80sU2isBest]

i can't understand why abortion is such a hysteria-inducing issue, on both sides, in the United States, but pretty much nowhere else in the developed world.

what do they know that we don't?

I don't think it's an issue of "something we don't know".

There are pro-lifers all over the world, and there are indeed other countries in which abortion is illegal.

 

[Irvine511]

I don't think it's an issue of "something we don't know".

There are pro-lifers all over the world, and there are indeed other countries in which abortion is illegal.

yes, but it does not occupy the same amount of political emotion anywhere else.

why is this so emotional for Americans?

 

[nbcrusader]

yes, but it does not occupy the same amount of political emotion anywhere else.

why is this so emotional for Americans?

The issue is manipulated by both sides for political gains. Phrases like "killing children" and "control of bodies" are used to maintain the emotional aspects of the issue.

And we keep buying into it.

Over the next 6 months, phrases like "a return to the dark ages" and "back street abortions" will be used regularly. Groups don't seek to resolve the issue, they want to keep it in contention so that they can continue to have influence.

 

[Irvine511]

The issue is manipulated by both sides for political gains. Phrases like "killing children" and "control of bodies" are used to maintain the emotional aspects of the issue.

And we keep buying into it.

Over the next 6 months, phrases like "a return to the dark ages" and "back street abortions" will be used regularly. Groups don't seek to resolve the issue, they want to keep it in contention so that they can continue to have influence.

i agree.

why does that work here, but nowhere else?

 

[80sU2isBest]

The issue is manipulated by both sides for political gains. Phrases like "killing children" and "control of bodies" are used to maintain the emotional aspects of the issue.

And we keep buying into it.

Over the next 6 months, phrases like "a return to the dark ages" and "back street abortions" will be used regularly. Groups don't seek to resolve the issue, they want to keep it in contention so that they can continue to have influence.

I don't agree. I think the reason pro-lifers use the term "killing children/babies" and pro-choicers use the term "control of body" is because that's how they really feel about the issue. I think it's as simple as that.

 

[Rono]

If Bush doesn't nominate a pro-lifer, he has betrayed the majority of his contituency, the people who put him in office.

Does this not worrie you ? Judges should be independed.


Are the judges independed in the usa ?

 

[Irvine511]

Does this not worrie you ? Judges should be independed.


Are the judges independed in the usa ?

judges are independent in that they are not affiliated with any particular party and they have no constituents they are beholden to nor anyone's particular values to represent beyond their own.

however, judges are nominated by whatever presidential administration is in power, and then they are sent through an extensive review process and eventually confirmed by Congress.

since most laws have different interpretations, what makes a judge liberal or conservative is his/her rulings on traditionally hot-button issues for the USA, issues that are usually served as benchmarks to determine whether or not you are liberal or conservative. these issues are usually: abortion rights, affirmative action, gay/lesbian rights, gun control, etc. there are other distinctions, such as how strictly one interprets the constitution (or perhaps lack of interpreting the Constitution) that i feel someone more qualified than i, not being a lawyer, could expound upon further.

 

[nbcrusader]

Does this not worrie you ? Judges should be independed.


Are the judges independed in the usa ?

As independent as you can expect. Obviously, everyone has their own biases and opinions. Once Bush appoints a judge, he does not have the ability to control the judge. In that light, they are completely independent.

 

[BVS]

If Bush doesn't nominate a pro-lifer, he has betrayed the majority of his contituency, the people who put him in office.

Why? He didn't run on this issue, he never said he'd end abortion.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Does this not worrie you ? Judges should be independed.


Are the judges independed in the usa ?

Independent of having a view on abortion?

 

[80sU2isBest]

Why? He didn't run on this issue, he never said he'd end abortion.

He never said he'd "end abortion", but he certainly did run on a pro-life platform. People who are pro-life who elect a pro-life candidate expect that candidate to do whatever he can to combat abortion. This is his opportunity. If he puts someone in there who will vote pro-choice, he is betraying his pro-life constituency.

 

[Irvine511]

He never said he'd "end abortion", but he certainly did run on a pro-life platform. People who are pro-life who elect a pro-life candidate expect that candidate to do whatever he can to combat abortion. This is his opportunity. If he puts someone in there who will vote pro-choice, he is betraying his pro-life constituency.

which was probably the political strategy to begin with.

it hasn't yet dawned on the one-issue pro-life voters that abortion is always going to remain legal, and by aligning yourselves with the Republicans solely on the basis of their stated opposition to abortion, you're assisting a party that, in general, is only going to take your support and translate that into tax cuts for the rich and lax environmental regulations for businesses.

since most of us -- pro-life/anti-choice and pro-choice included -- aren't wealthy enough to benefit from these tax cuts, this combined with the fact that the average income in the Red States -- more pro-life/anti-choice than the Blue States, as a rule -- and you'll find that many pro-life/anti-choice people have been conned into voting against their own economic self-interests.

 

[financeguy]

He'll appoint a moderate.

And the fundamentalist right will hate him

Fun times.

 

[pax]

which was probably the political strategy to begin with.

it hasn't yet dawned on the one-issue pro-life voters that abortion is always going to remain legal, and by aligning yourselves with the Republicans solely on the basis of their stated opposition to abortion, you're assisting a party that, in general, is only going to take your support and translate that into tax cuts for the rich and lax environmental regulations for businesses.

since most of us -- pro-life/anti-choice and pro-choice included -- aren't wealthy enough to benefit from these tax cuts, this combined with the fact that the average income in the Red States -- more pro-life/anti-choice than the Blue States, as a rule -- and you'll find that many pro-life/anti-choice people have been conned into voting against their own economic self-interests.

Although I agree with you, Irvine, that many "red-staters" as it were do vote against their economic self-interest, what truly concerns me is that I think Bush does, in fact, have the wherewithal to nominate and ram through a confirmation on a solidly anti-abortion-rights candidate (see how carefully I worded that one? ). I really do worry that the Democrats don't have enough spine to shoot down a nominee who could and would tip the balance towards a repudiation of Roe, and we could be facing the end of reproductive rights as we know them in the United States.

My worry here is bolstered by the fact that Bush is a lame duck and has nothing to lose.

What makes you think he won't try--or won't succees--in pushing through an anti-abortion-rights judge? I'm not giving you a hard time; I'm genuinely curious as to the root of your position, because everything I see leads me to believe he really could and would do it.

 

[Irvine511]

What makes you think he won't try--or won't succees--in pushing through an anti-abortion-rights judge? I'm not giving you a hard time; I'm genuinely curious as to the root of your position, because everything I see leads me to believe he really could and would do it.

it could be politically ruinous for the Republican party to be the party that ended reproductive rights. and for the past 30+ years the Republicans have been all talk and no action on the issue, so i don't see any reason why they'd have more success now than they did with Bork. Bush has also, as BVS pointed out, never said that he'd end abortion. he gives parts of his constituency vauge pillow-talk (and total bullshit) phrases like "culture of life" -- which, oddly, embraces the death penalty, fears stem cells, and loves to bomb iraqis -- and semi-obscure references like his Dread Scott reference in Bush vs. Kerry debate #2, i think.

when it gets down to it, i think that many Republicans might mouth an anti-choice/pro-life line, but deep down no one wants to see that law overturned. especially Republican women.

because, frankly, if these high ranking Republican women didn't remain in control of when they do and do not get pregnant, it's rather doubtful that they'd be walking the halls of Congress.

 

[pax]

Zing!

Thanks for clearing that up. Good points.

 

[Irvine511]

though your point about Bush being a lame duck (and, boy, is he ever lame) is a very good one.

who knows? the waters could be more dangerous than i anticipate.

 

[pax]

though your point about Bush being a lame duck (and, boy, is he ever lame) is a very good one.

who knows? the waters could be more dangerous than i anticipate.

Well, I hope not. Maybe I'm just a bit on-edge from too much advertising (I started seeing NARAL ads as early as Saturday).