An activist court whose radicals lied their way on to the top court in the country. Incredible.
Franken warns Roe v. Wade may be in danger
http://www.startribune.com/blogs/83384832.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUgOy9cP3DieyckcUsX
" Sen. Al Franken warned pro-choice supporters Tuesday that the landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision may not be in good hands with the Roberts Court.
"I fear that this court and the anti-choice activists are happy to adopt an incremental strategy that makes it harder for you to marshal your forces," Franken told members of NARAL Pro-Choice America at a luncheon commemorating the 37th anniversary of the decision. "They're happy to keep chipping away again and again at abortion rights in a way that the American people may not even notice."
The luncheon also included a tribute to Kansas abortion provider George Tiller, who was killed last year. Scott Roeder was convicted of the murder late last week.
Franken said Chief Justice John Roberts, particularly, has broken with the promises he stated in Congressional confirmation hearings that he would not legislate from the bench, and that the Roe v. Wade decision was in danger.
"We saw the Roberts court reject the long-standing precedent that an exception for a woman's health must be a component for any laws that restrict abortion rights, even when the woman's health includes her reproductive health," Franken said. "That's what Dr. Tiller did so often in his work, perform abortions on fetuses that would not be viable outside the womb in order to protect a woman's ability to bear children in the future. Ironically, what could be more pro-life?"
The Minnesota senator urged those at the luncheon to be on their guard.
According to NARAL Pro-Choice America communications director Ted Miller, the pro-choice group wanted Franken to speak at last year's luncheon, but he was unable to do so because of the election recount. Nancy Keenan, president of the pro-choice group, campaigned with Franken and the group endorsed him in the 2008 election.
Although Franken took some flak from women's rights groups over an article he wrote for Playboy magazine in 2000, NARAL Pro-Choice America is a strong Franken supporter. Miller said the organization was impressed by Franken's "clear pro-choice record and pro-choice values," such as a bill Franken authored and co-sponsored in December 2009 that would require emergency contraception be available to all women in the military. Sen. Olympia Snowe, a Republican senator from Maine, co-sponsored the bill. "
By Franken's logic every SCOTUS has legislated from the bench. I think Franken is judging from the Senate, oh, the horror!
How did this guy get elected again? Oh yeah, I forgot, this is the same state that elected this guy governor:
(http://tizona.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/jesse-ventura1.jpg)
Let me see if I understand this. . . If Roe V.S Wade is overturned, wouldn’t that make Al Franken illegal?
Quote from: Conan71 on February 04, 2010, 04:15:29 PM
(http://tizona.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/jesse-ventura1.jpg)
To be fair, that
was the fashionable dress in the '90s.
The preceding posters care not for freedom of choice and a woman's right to choose.
Any others?
Quote from: FOTD on February 04, 2010, 04:37:04 PM
The preceding posters care not for freedom of choice and a woman's right to choose.
Any others?
Not true my friend. I will cover this again as I did at about this same time last year when the libs started their annual RoeVWade scare.
QuoteHere's how I see it.
We kill people all the time. We always have good reasons to terminate a life. Usually self preservation, or the preservation of an ideology. Sometimes we simply kill for convenience, or because we judge the quality of one life as less important as the quality of another (a totally subjective judgement). We also kill to protect the quality of our own lives.
It seems that the only person who has a right to choose weather a baby is a life or simply a fetus is the mother. Mothers make this judgement all the time. What a powerful position to be in. When my wife was pregnant she referred to our unborn children as, well, children. We talked to them, played them music, called them by name, and felt them kick and roll. I guess my wife is pro-choice, because she chose to allow our kids to live. We were stable with a nice house and good jobs so we chose not to kill our children. I'm glad, I love them.
Some women opt to kill their fetuses and that IS their choice (no matter what anyone thinks). The birth of that child would simply not fit into their plan, or it would threaten their quality of life. Perhaps they feel that they wouldn't be able to offer the child the quality of life that they feel that child deserves. Or perhaps the pregnancy is just embarrassing. So death is a far better choice than life.
Why should we limit a woman's right to make that choice? I don't think we can.
As I mentioned before, there are other instances where we kill for the same reasons and we find it totally acceptable. In war we kill other people. We kill people for self preservation, or because they threaten our way of life, our ideology, or they are an inconvenience. The really strange part is how a person can be Pro-Abortion, but Anti-War? . . .Or how a person could be Pro-Life but support a war, even fight in it.
You can play with definitions all day long but you change nothing. Choice still exists, and it's a personal choice to kill. Wether you are at war with soldiers or babies. The justification is the same.
All the "definition of life" does is help you to feel better about your choice, and allow you to obtain the legal services of an abortionist. It does not limit your choice.
Quote from: FOTD on February 04, 2010, 04:37:04 PM
The preceding posters care not for freedom of choice and a woman's right to choose.
Any others?
Count me in!!!! I think Franken reads this forum because I was making his case last week.
Quote from: FOTD on February 04, 2010, 04:37:04 PM
The preceding posters care not for freedom of choice and a woman's right to choose.
Any others?
I'm not sure what stretch of logic made you draw that conclusion. I can't speak for Rob but I can tell you that's absolutely untrue as far as I'm concerned, though can say I'm grateful my mother exercized her freedom of choice to have me though.
I feel abortion is a moral decision between a woman and the doctor willing to do it. I do think it is an abominable method of birth control when two people are too lazy to use any other method of contraception available but I also see where there's room to argue that it needs to be kept legal to keep it as a safe alternative. I can also understand why there is a belief that the unborn have rights as well. I don't presume to know what is best for someone else's own personal situation. I've seen children who were the product of a horrible home life and thought to myself: "It might have been more merciful if that child had simply been aborted."
If one of my daughters were to approach me about it, I would simply help them think out their alternatives. I would not force their hand in any direction, though I can certainly impart my opinion. Ultimately, the impact and burden of carrying to full term and keeping the child, adopting out, or terminating the pregnancy is all theirs and I hope neither of them is ever faced with such a choice. I've had dear friends who have been faced with such a choice, have terminated, and I have not turned my back on them.
I've said this multiple times:
Roe V. Wade has survived in tact for 37 years now, through mostly Republican administrations. It's not going anywhere any time soon. This is the same fear tactic that the NRA pulls every presidential election cycle. "The Democrats are coming for your guns!"
Quote from: Conan71 on February 04, 2010, 05:36:47 PM
Roe V. Wade has survived in tact for 37 years now, through mostly Republican administrations. It's not going anywhere any time soon. This is the same fear tactic that the NRA pulls every presidential election cycle. "The Democrats are coming for your guns!"
Agree completely. I think you'll find that, when pressed, you'll find very few Republicans who really want abortion to be outlawed. The consequences of such action would be dire for the GOP, and they know it.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on February 04, 2010, 06:15:22 PM
Agree completely. I think you'll find that, when pressed, you'll find very few Republicans who really want abortion to be outlawed. The consequences of such action would be dire for the GOP, and they know it.
I wish they would quit getting baited into the issue. Like it or not, it's here to stay.
They don't get baited into it; it is an article of faith with them. Just like some LWRE (left wing reactionary extremists) have as an article of faith that "abortions-all-around" is good policy, too. Both wrong.
Abortion is one of the saddest, most horrendous tragedies that can happen in a person's life...and a terminal tragedy for one of the participants!
If we are going to pay homage to a principle of individual rights, the government has no right to intrude into that private space. It has to be one of those reserved personal rights.
Quote from: TURobY on February 04, 2010, 04:19:56 PM
To be fair, that was the fashionable dress in the '90s.
Not among any of my friends or acquaintances.
Don't plan to watch the super bowl....might run into Timmy Tebow...
Counterpoint below will not be seen during the Tebows shameful ad period, but here for the objective mind:
Quote from: FOTD on February 04, 2010, 08:49:25 PM
Don't plan to watch the super bowl....might run into Timmy Tebow...
I don't need an excuse to drink beer.
I am also one of the 4 or 5 people in the US that don't really care about watching Pro sports on the tube.
Quote from: FOTD on February 04, 2010, 08:49:25 PM
Don't plan to watch the super bowl....might run into Timmy Tebow...
Counterpoint below will not be seen during the Tebows shameful ad period, but here for the objective mind:
Have you seen the ad? Link please.
Quote from: FOTD on February 04, 2010, 08:49:25 PM
Don't plan to watch the super bowl....might run into Timmy Tebow...
After the debacle at the BCS Championship Game last year, I suspect there were some pro-life Oklahomans who wished that one guy in a blue jersey
had been aborted.
Morals tend to waver a bit when it comes to football in the Sooner State.
funny!
Here's a link, sausage brain. http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet/2010/02/05/raging_grannies/index.html
FOTD, Planned Parenthood is just as capable of buying air time for the Super Bowl if they like. It's called capitalism.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 05, 2010, 03:23:17 PM
FOTD, Planned Parenthood is just as capable of buying air time for the Super Bowl if they like. It's called capitalism.
You dolt. They aren't in the financial shape to compete against tax cheaters and fanatics who get their funds strictly for the purpose of destroying a woman's freedom. Unlike the haters, PPH needs their funds to educate and save women.
Quote from: FOTD on February 05, 2010, 03:27:56 PM
You dolt. They aren't in the financial shape to compete against tax cheaters and fanatics who get their funds strictly for the purpose of destroying a woman's freedom. Unlike the haters, PPH needs their funds to educate and save women.
BS, it only takes a few of their liberal donors and celebs to buy a spot if it's that important. Someone else found it worth the investment to send an anti-abortion message out instead of spending it on ammuntion and bomb-making equipment.
CBS is a second rate broadcaster for allowing this crap into everyone's home. It would be different if we knew when it was to broadcast to protect children from this false indoctrination. Next up? Iranian backed ads against Israel?
Quote from: FOTD on February 05, 2010, 03:37:29 PM
CBS is a second rate broadcaster for allowing this crap into everyone's home. It would be different if we knew when it was to broadcast to protect children from this false indoctrination. Next up? Iranian backed ads against Israel?
Would you say CBS was a second-rate broadcaster if the message were pro-choice? What's the difference? Doesn't fit your paradigm?
Quote from: FOTD on February 05, 2010, 03:37:29 PM
CBS is a second rate broadcaster for allowing this crap into everyone's home. It would be different if we knew when it was to broadcast to protect children from this false indoctrination. Next up? Iranian backed ads against Israel?
Have you seen the ad? If so, get me a link because I can't find it.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 05, 2010, 03:40:06 PM
Would you say CBS was a second-rate broadcaster if the message were pro-choice? What's the difference? Doesn't fit your paradigm?
NO...it doesn't fit the picture....you know, family entertainment...politicizing a game for the purpose of agitating good Americans is just weird...but hey,
Quote from: guido911 on February 05, 2010, 03:41:26 PM
Have you seen the ad? If so, get me a link because I can't find it.
Quit your drumb beat...it's under wraps for the purpose of growing the controversy and higher ratings.
Quote from: guido911 on February 05, 2010, 03:41:26 PM
Have you seen the ad? If so, get me a link because I can't find it.
You can see this one coming from a mile away. FOF or CBS leaked the info on the ad to develop this hype. I'm willing to bet it's completely innocuous. Get the liberals in a frothing frenzy. It's a good PR tactic.
Everything I've heard, including comments from Tebow is that everyone is going to be very surprised that people made a big deal of this. CBS and FOF win from the publicity and the "protesters" look foolish. . . or at least more foolish.
Quote from: Gaspar on February 05, 2010, 04:09:11 PM
You can see this one coming from a mile away. FOF or CBS leaked the info on the ad to develop this hype. I'm willing to bet it's completely innocuous. Get the liberals in a frothing frenzy. It's a good PR tactic.
Everything I've heard, including comments from Tebow is that everyone is going to be very surprised that people made a big deal of this. CBS and FOF win from the publicity and the "protesters" look foolish. . . or at least more foolish.
Why do you fundies keep missing the point. It's not the script that's the issue.
Quote from: FOTD on February 05, 2010, 04:17:33 PM
Why do you fundies keep missing the point. It's not the script that's the issue.
OMG The HORROR:
Quote from: Conan71 on February 04, 2010, 05:36:47 PM
I do think it is an abominable method of birth control when two people are too lazy to use any other method of contraception available but I also see where there's room to argue that it needs to be kept legal to keep it as a safe alternative.
You do realize that sometimes contraception fails, right? It's not nearly the problem it was now that Plan B is far more accessible than it used to be, but it still happens that condoms break, pills get missed, or whatever.
Either way, I think the result of Roe is good (I want women to have the
choice, and I like privacy), but the legal reasoning is utter trash.
And CBS? Those bastards can suck it. The ad itself isn't bad, although the message is stupid: "Don't listen to your doctors." ::)
The reason why I won't be enjoying their fine program this evening is that while they're happy to run this ad, they not only previously refused to run the United Church of Christ ad (I get it, policies change), but won't run the ManCrunch ad this year, either. None of these are any better than the other, yet Teary Tebow gets his run? Idiots.
NFL football sucks anyway. College football is much more entertaining.
It seems not worth the controversy...
I do question the story the mom is telling, though.
She says her doctors were telling her to get an abortion. Abortions were illegal in the Philippines then. I doubt that her doctors were telling her to break the law.
But, who am I to get in the way of a good story.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on February 07, 2010, 02:53:35 PM
It seems not worth the controversy...
I do question the story the mom is telling, though.
She says her doctors were telling her to get an abortion. Abortions were illegal in the Philippines then. I doubt that her doctors were telling her to break the law.
But, who am I to get in the way of a good story.
It's my understanding there was an exception to that law in cases where the mother's life was in danger.
What was weird was that I was watching that wonderful game tonight and watched the ads if they started well and interested me.
I don't know what Tim Tebow's mom looked like, so I zoned out on that ad until about 85% through, when all of a sudden I noticed: "Hey, that's Tim Tebow." Of course, because the ad wasn't good to start with, the message that it was trying to convey was lost on me because it didn't grab me at the beginning, and lost the narrative.
So, based on my experience, I'd say it wasn't a very effective ad. YMMV.
Quote from: nathanm on February 07, 2010, 02:45:10 PM
You do realize that sometimes contraception fails, right? It's not nearly the problem it was now that Plan B is far more accessible than it used to be, but it still happens that condoms break, pills get missed, or whatever.
No Nathan, I had no idea that happens. Really? ::)