Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We've seen that the constitution can be interpreted any number of ways, otherwise there would not be a way for laws to be overturned. What conservatives want is a religious bias put into laws. That is actually fine by me.
There are many conservatives that do not want religious bias into law, including myself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove
Wait until abortion is thrown to the states and red states make it illegal. That will be entertaining to watch, as those states have to deal with the increase in poverty stricken babies and mothers born in hospitals with no health coverage, high medical expenses, no prenatal care and the resulting never ending costs associated with all of that.
I doubt Roe vs Wade will be revisited by the SC, despite the current shriekery on the left.
The court will be 6-3 as soon as Ginsberg is out. Boy, she is a poster child for term limits. What a shriveled old prune. How will they be able to tell when she actually is really dead?
I would expect 6 occurs by the end of 2019.
Maybe 7.
SC was one of my major 2016 voting issues. I was hoping DT got to select at least 2. Did not see 2 happening so fast.
Conservative justices have been known for a bias towards business and religion. There are any number of ways of interpreting the constitution but conservatives seem to think only they truly understand the constitution.
What conservatives want is a religious bias put into laws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Conservative justices have been known for a bias towards business and religion. There are any number of ways of interpreting the constitution but conservatives seem to think only they truly understand the constitution.
The usual wishful thinking. Acompanied by the usual complete lack of evidence or proof. (yawn)
What’s your take on the 13th amendment? It wasn’t in the original constitution. In fact, the original constitution said that fugitive slaves must be returned to their masters.
There are many conservatives that do not want religious bias into law, including myself.
I doubt Roe vs Wade will be revisited by the SC, despite the current shriekery on the left.
Hey, I don't care, I live in a blue state that legalized abortion outside of Roe V. Wade but Republicans have lined up multiple abortion cases that are winding their way through the courts. All it will take is one of those to go to the Supreme Court and that's what Republicans are counting on. Like I said, I don't care. But I don't want my taxes paying for the mess in some red state because they decided to force a lot of babies to be born into poverty and now have the resulting costs associated with that.
Red states themselves should have to pay for that just like Ohio should have to pay for the law they passed forcing Downs Syndrome babies to be born. That is going to force the birth of babies with heart, hearing, vision and other expensive issues that will need to be treated and will need to be watched over 24/7.
No, it's not that conservatives have a bias toward the Constitution. ALL - well, almost all - justices base their decision on the Constitution, but it's open to interpretation. However, one example of not following the Constitution was when conservatives threw the election to Bush.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.