Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Community
»
The Flameboard
»
Second presidential debate
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by TSN: [QB] <blockquote>"Do I feed this board 'mid-packing post[s]'?"</blockquote> Jay's post is the "mid-packing" one. Because he posted it while in the middle of packing. <blockquote>"Perhaps what he was getting at (and I know I'm on a limb on this one; I don't have time to research the legislative history this moment) is that, in order to keep the Supreme Court from knocking down another partial birth abortion ban, Congress tried to do some fact-finding on whether there is ever really needed such an abortion for the life or health of the mother. If I recall correctly, they found that there really weren't any such circumstances that medicine had identified as demanding such a procedure."</blockquote> The sponsors of the bill say there's no need for a "health" clause. The majority of the Supreme Court say there is. I have neither the time nor the resources to do the research myself, but I would tend to believe the SC in this case. Especially since there's another difference of opinion there: the SC says PBA is safer than the alternatives; the bill's sponsors say it's more dangerous. Judging from the descriptions of the procedures in the SC's majority opinion on the Nebraska PBA case, I have a hard time understanding where the Congresspeople in question could get such an idea. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3