You are correct, IB. I'll try again.+1
THEY . . . ARE . . . NOT . . . THE . . . SAME . . . TYPE . . . OF . . . CASE
Maybe that will help. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
COG, the lefties do not possess the innate cognitive skills to understand your argument. You must employ simple, monosyllabic words; otherwise, they do not understand. Originally Posted by I B Hankering
But does this case seem similar?Now let us all remember that there are nine Justices. They do not always agree or even agree with you two fine legal scholars! LOL
.
Originally Posted by WTF
.......................This is just one more reason that women must be vigilant. As we can see from this thread and the limited success of Sanatorium, there is a well funded, vocal and quite active segment of society that wants to get all the "slutty" women back in line. Just a thought.
Contraception, however, and yes, women, are not as protected as race. The law violating the right of the Church to not pay for services they deem abhorrent will be superior to the attempt by the state to make them pay.
So you have two different standards. The cases are not similar. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
And OH thinks this is settled law...............and the other side has lost the war !This is my post was that immediately preceded your post.
Originally Posted by Whirlaway
This is just one more reason that women must be vigilant. As we can see from this thread and the limited success of Sanatorium, there is a well funded, vocal and quite active segment of society that wants to get all the "slutty" women back in line. Just a thought.They are polar opposites so reading the rest of your post is moot.
Originally Posted by OliviaHoward
“I don’t think they have much of a case under current precedent,” said Jessica Arons of the Center For American Progress. “Courts in New York and California have already upheld the exemption that was initially adopted by the Administration. And I think the further accommodation that the Administration has offered shows exceeding sensitivity to claims of religious liberty that are not required under the law.”
Adam Winkler, a constitutional law professor at UCLA, was more blunt. “This lawsuit is inspired by politics and nothing more,” he told TPM. “Even under the previously announced rule there was little chance of success.”
And OH thinks this is settled law and the other side has lost.
Virginia House Passes Bills Restricting Abortion
By Sam Favate
Oklahoma’s not the only state passing laws restricting abortions this week. The Virginia House of Delegates passed two of the strictest anti-abortion bills in the nation on Tuesday, and opponents say it’s part of a strategy which would make abortion illegal immediately if the Supreme Court were to overturn Roe v. Wade, CBS reported.
The first bill defines personhood at conception and is similar to the one passed by the Oklahoma Senate, which was noted in this morning’s AM Roundup. The Virginia bill doesn’t ban abortions, but it would make certain kinds of contraceptives illegal. If the Roe decision were eventually overturned, this measure would also make abortion illegal immediately.
The second measure passed in Virginia requires that women seeking an abortion be forced to undergo an ultrasound, which would mean a more physically invasive transvaginal ultrasound in the cases of early pregnancy. The Virginia Senate passed an ultrasound bill earlier this month, as Reuters noted. Gov. Bob McDonnell has indicated his support for the law, and is expected to sign it.
Several other states have ultrasound laws, including Texas, where a federal judge allowed the state to begin enforcing it earlier this month, after an appeals court blocked part of the statute.
Virginia’s approach to the personhood bill is different from other states where similar measures failed, like Colorado and Mississippi. Virginia’s bill doesn’t seek an amendment to the state constitution and looks to make change through the legal code, the Baltimore Sun reported.
The intent, however, is the same, according to Elizabeth Nash, a public policy advocate at the Guttmacher Institute, which studies reproductive health issues. Nash said the measure is ultimately aimed at banning abortion, contraception and infertility treatments, the Sun noted.
Proponents deny that banning contraceptives is part of the agenda. George Allen, a Republican who is running for the U.S. Senate in Virginia, indicated through a spokeswoman that he supports the personhood bill but remains opposed to the government prohibiting or banning contraceptives, CBS reported.
Allen’s opponent, Tim Kaine, a Democrat and former governor of Virginia, called the bill “reckless.”
Gov. McDonnell has not yet taken a position on the personhood bill. Originally Posted by Whirlaway
Say what you want about Santorum, but the guy went from 1% to the lead in just a couple weeks.And you can bet your sweet ass that Obama wants him to win more than Mitt.
He is definitely a goodie goodie but I still like him far better than obambam. Originally Posted by LovingKayla
Say what you want about Santorum, but the guy went from 1% to the lead in just a couple weeks.
He is definitely a goodie goodie but I still like him far better than obambam. Originally Posted by LovingKayla