e3cef667   
   XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.support.abortion, talk.abortion   
   From: together@wyoming.com   
      
   In article ,   
    rbwinn3@juno.com (Robert B. Winn) wrote:   
      
   > --sexkitten--  wrote in message   
   > news:<2mm3k9Fo65emU7@uni-berlin.de>...   
   > > Robert B. Winn wrote:   
   > >   
   > > > --sexkitten--  wrote in message   
   > > > news:<2m7ithFjhlgdU7@uni-berlin.de>...   
   > > >   
   > > >>Robert B. Winn wrote:   
   > > >>   
   > > >>   
   > > >>>"David W. Barnes"  wrote in message   
   > > >>>news:<230620040745474906%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com>...   
   > > >>>   
   > > >>>   
   > > >>>>In article <7943568.0406230409.4f4f2838@posting.google.com>, Robert B.   
   > > >>>>Winn  wrote:   
   > > >>>>   
   > > >>>>   
   > > >>>>   
   > > >>>>>"David W. Barnes"  wrote in message   
   > > >>>>>news:<220620042140401999%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com>...   
   > > >>>>>   
   > > >>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>In article <7943568.0406222039.771c2baa@posting.google.com>, Robert   
   > > >>>>>>B.   
   > > >>>>>>Winn  wrote:   
   > > >>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>>>>>>A court opinion is not a law.   
   > > >>>>>>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>>>>>A woman walks into planned parenthood today and proceeds with an   
   > > >>>>>>>>>>abortion. Your contention is that abortion is not legal. Please   
   > > >>>>>>>>>>explain   
   > > >>>>>>>>>>your position that she is now in violation of the law.   
   > > >>>>>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>>>>All states had laws in effect to prohibit what you describe.  A   
   > > >>>>>>>>>Supreme Court opinion does not change that.   
   > > >>>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   > > >>>>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>>>The Supreme Court's job is to interpret the constitution, so their   
   > > >>>>>>>>opinion DOES change that. And what laws do the states have to   
   > > >>>>>>>>prevent   
   > > >>>>>>>>abortion?   
   > > >>>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>>The law I was  born under that prevented abortion was California   
   > > >>>>>>>Penal   
   > > >>>>>>>Code sections 274, 275, 276.  That law is still in effect because   
   > > >>>>>>>the   
   > > >>>>>>>United States Supreme Court does not have original jurisdiction in   
   > > >>>>>>>capital cases.  They cannot sentence people to death.  It has to be   
   > > >>>>>>>done by a lower court.   
   > > >>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>You seem to be forgetting they do have jurisdiction over   
   > > >>>>>>constitutional   
   > > >>>>>>issues.   
   > > >>>>>   
   > > >>>>>Homicides of children is not a constitutional issue.   
   > > >>>>   
   > > >>>>A woman's privacy is.   
   > > >>>   
   > > >>>   
   > > >>>Homicides of children has nothing to do with any woman's privacy.   
   > > >>>Robert b. Winn   
   > > >>   
   > > >>No, that's very true, homicides of children have nothing to do with a   
   > > >>woman's privacy. Abortion has EVERYTHING to do with a woman's privacy.   
   > > >   
   > > >   
   > > > Well, let's see how private you think abortion is when Jesus Christ   
   > > > returns to judge the earth.   
   > > > Robert B. Winn   
   > >   
   > > Sure. And at that point you will be free to enforce your definitions,   
   > > but not before.   
   >   
   > I do not enforce anything.  The problem of abortion will be solved by Jesus   
   > Christ.   
      
   LOL. He couldn't solve it 2000 years ago, what makes you think he could   
   and would?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)