Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmccarrell
Well, I've heard it from several lawyers all the way from a Yale grad to the company counsel that sits in the office next to mine that McCain's interpretation is correct because the states had control of the issue before Roe. Overturning it would simply put it back to the states. Also, I would assume you know that when overturning a law, it doesn't always reverse it back to zero, there is room for nuance in the final orders . . . .
|
Of course it would go back to the states. No one is saying it will not. But, it does not end there, which is what you are implying if not stating. Are you actually arguing the R party will not then vehemently advocate the states ban it "eek." I think you know better than that.
Again, if you are for less govt., then why would you advocate the govt. (state of federal) telling a woman what to do with her body?
Interestingly, if the Congress or a state legis. passed a law allowing abortion, would you be for getting some court to overturn the law?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmccarrell
. . . I did respond to your statement on the ends justifying the means and I said what I thought, which was something along the lines of "this car is great, despite the number of wrecks its been in." No, I don't believe in an inherent right to privacy . . . .
|
I did not see that. And, if you do not believe in the right to privacy, then what do you believe in? Do you actually think the Const. or any of the papers surrounding its creation fail to support the right to privacy? If you are for less govt., that belief is founded on a right to privacy is it not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmccarrell
. . . The job of the VP is up to the VP and the president. There is no defined job. I see this ticket as being a reincarnation of the Eisenhower-Nixon administration. Nixon was an excellent VP because he was a great bully and I think Palin can do that for McCain. McCain is usually too nice to people, much like Eisenhower . . . .
|
My point was as VP, Palin has no Constitutional power to change anything. So, all this talk about her is meaningless. It is, IMO, a rather obvious attempt to take the focus off of McCain and his 95% voting with W record.
I take it you like Palin. That is strange because she is for more govt. interference in our lives. Her history clearly dictates that she wants religion to control us - she wants to make religion the rule of law in stark violation of the First Amendment. Or, do you think that establishing a religion is okay? If you do, Palin is your candidate despite your professed want of less govt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmccarrell
. . . As far as the rest of it goes, it's just your opinion and you have a right to it. It's why McCain has a limp.
|
Do not try to haul out the war veteran card with me in an attempt to make your argument. McCain served his country in an honorable manner and I and everyone owes him a huge thank you. So, thank you McCain! But, that service does not de facto allow him to throw away the Constitution and then shove his religious beliefs down my throat.
Interestingly, were you this gung ho about service records when Kerry ran for office, much less the smearing of Max Cleland? After all, they served their country honorably as well, but got little to no respect from the R's for it. Instead, the R's fuly supported W, whose service record was, to be kind, less than stellar, and Cheney, who "had more important thing to do" than serve.
More to the point though - do you actually think that the far Christian right will have any rest until the Fed. Govt. is a religious entity. I just do not get how you can be for less govt. and still support these people, which is what you are doing when you support the current R party. While Obama's plan taxes the rich a little more (please do not haul out that BS economic argument again
) Obama's plan is much less govt. interference with our private lives. To say otherwise distorts the truth - and I am no fan of Obama's.
In the end, even if everyone is paying a little more, I'd rather pay a little more tax and be left alone. I am at a loss why you would not want to either.