XPost: alt.abortion, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh   
   XPost: sac.politics   
   From: NoBody@nowhere.com   
      
   On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 14:10:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth    
   wrote:   
      
   >On 9/8/2024 1:54 PM, Attila wrote:   
   >> On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 08:20:35 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth   
   >>  in alt.abortion with message-id   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 9/8/2024 8:13 AM, Attila wrote:   
   >>>> On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 07:57:08 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth   
   >>>>  in alt.abortion with message-id   
   >>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On 9/8/2024 4:25 AM, Attila wrote:   
   >>>>>> On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 00:27:33 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth   
   >>>>>>  in alt.abortion with message-id   
   >>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On 9/7/2024 11:49 PM, Attila wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Right! Like it or not, Roe is gone. And therefore, legislatures can   
   ban   
   >>>>>>>>> abortion even though a fetus is not a person.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> True.  But that can be reversed with the proper legal steps.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> You are expecting SCOTUS to reverse course and reinstate Roe? Sorry,   
   no.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Of course not, but there could be legislation and/or   
   >>>>>> Amendments or other court cases that effectively do the same   
   >>>>>> thing.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> There can't be other court cases that apply the federal constitution.   
   >>>>> SCOTUS has spoken and all other courts are bound by their decision.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Sigh.  Another SCOTUS case of course.   
   >>>   
   >>> WTF? You just said "of course not" to whether SCOTUS will reinstate Roe,   
   >>> and argued that *other* court cases can do the same job. What *other*   
   >>> SCOTUS court cases are you talking about?   
   >>>   
   >>>>> Yes, there can be legislation by Congress that forbids the states from   
   >>>>> banning abortion (even though you said Congress can't do that).   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I am not an attorney.  I will not argue specific laws   
   >>>> because I am not qualified to do so, and neither your   
   >>>> opinion or mine will impact legal procedures.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> And of course there are several drugs available.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I'm not sure what happens to you, but is illegal in Alabama to mail,   
   >>>>> receive or use these drugs for abortions.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I doubt that will survive a court challenge.   
   >>>   
   >>> Roe is wrong. SCOTUS said Alabama can ban abortion.   
   >>>   
   >>> At this point I am torn between whether you are an idiot or a troll.   
   >>   
   >> Neither,  I simply support anything that would reestablish   
   >> the right of a  woman to decide whether or not to terminate   
   >> her pregnancy.  Not being an attorney I don't know what   
   >> legal path would be necessary.   
   >   
   >If you had said "I don't know" all along rather than "I doubt that will   
   >survive a court challenge," then you would not be an idiot or a troll.   
      
   Interesting that you both believe in killing as many babies as desired   
   but you're still fighting among yourselves.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)