O'Neill on the Catholic Bishops: 'I Don't Know Where the Internal Revenue Service Is, But I Hope They're Paying Attention'
By Heather Friday Nov 13, 2009 6:00am
Dr. Nancy Snyderman talks to NOW's President Terry O'Neill about how the Stupak amendment caught NOW off guard, but that the issue has galvanized young women. O'Neill said she felt the amendment essentially over rules Roe v Wade. And I agree completely with O'Neill when asked by Dr. Nancy if this was a 'most fundamental violation of church and state' that the Catholic bishops inserted themselves into this political debate.
O'Neill: You know that's the first thing that I said. I don't know where the Internal Revenue Service is, but I hope they're paying attention.
And as Dr. Nancy noted again, it's two white men making policy about women's reproductive decisions.
While we're on the subject, what Digby said...
I have a moral objection to paying for any kind of erectile dysfunction medicine in the new health reform bill and I think men who want to use it should just pay for it out of pocket. After all, I won't ever need such a pill. And anyway, it's no biggie. Just because most of them can get it under their insurance today doesn't mean they shouldn't have it stripped from their coverage in the future because of my moral objections. (I don't think there's even been a Supreme Court ruling making wood a constitutional right. I might be wrong about that.)
Many of the men who are prescribed this medication are on Medicare, so I think it should be stripped out of that coverage as well. And unlike the payments for abortion, which actually lower overall medical costs (pregnancy obviously costs much, much more) banning tax dollars from covering any kind of Viagra would result in a substantial savings.
Login or Register to post comments.
Attach anything concerning reproductive rights to their little blue pill and they will strip THAT out of any bill ASAP.
Paying for ED is gender bias - no doubt.
The farging iceholes!
steering the message back to "Health Insurance" rather then reform.
I am long past the need for birth control but am still outraged..It is time for term limits and throw out all 40 who voted for this...
Strip out the viagra pill at once...The coots get no 'big blue' and are to be removed in 2010!
I want the catholic pedeophiles out of my govenrment as well! Yes the IRS needs to look at this ASAP! Not just the Cath's though..There is separation of Church and State! This is a clear violation...call the fools..1.800.828.0498!
Amendment.
My wife is unlikely to need an abortion, I do use Levitra, however. Just as a matter of principal, however, I would prefer - given the choice - that abortion services be universally covered than before ED.
I am an ally, in other words - so why pick on me? And my wife - who enjoys the damned Levitra as much as I do.
There is no need for the divisiveness, IOW. What we need to do is stand together and just say "No bill is better than this one, anyway." Not piss off the millions of men who had nothing to do with this, don't support it, and are ready to stand with you to fight it.
Just sayin...
Somebody said it out loud on TV. Repeat.
Get the Mormons and Westboro Baptist and Liberty University while you are at it!
Liberty University was supposed to be reviewed a while back (when Falwell was still alive). Since I never heard anything else about it, I think the IRS was too busy being sent to harass anti-war groups to bother though.
Or was that other outfit by Oral Roberts (talk about cursing a kid with a bad name)?
... I feel sorry for his brother Anal, though...
...for committing criminal fraud.
I still cannot understand why religions are tax exempt to begin with. Especially in the US of A where pretty much anyone can start there own religion. Doesn't the bible mention giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s, so why the tax dodge.
But don't most churches want 10% of your yearly income as donations?
Kinda ballsy to tell people what to give, if you ask me.
In context it also says that you should give 10 percent of your time to serve others as well. You don't see many living by those words.
Also, it should be noted that in addition to tithing, the Bible also says that every so often (I think every 20 years or so), we're supposed to wipe away everyone's debt and redistribute the wealth. (Leviticus 25.)
It should be noted that a verse in Leviticus is often quoted by Christians to justify their hatred and discrimination of gays.
... and you are correct, the bible mentions usury, and its associated moral dangers, far more times than homosexuality.
Funny thing that we didn't see these "Christians" (both the good ones and the bad ones, they are both equally full of sh*t) protesting Wallstreet. Even though I submit the fact that Wallstreet presents and has presented far more danger to "families" (and their values) in this country... than abortion clinics or gay couples requesting equal civil rights ever did.
time during services to collect "offerings" on top of the 10% tithe. In addition to that, the fellow who was giving me the classes on the church's Articles of Belief when I first became a member, mentioned he gave 20% for the tithe. But then, this was a WoF church.
It's kind of sad that people who are struggling financially believe paying the tithe and offerings is a first or almost first obligation...
Allen movie, but here goes: A Jewish guy is listening to a Catholic complain about confession, and he says, "Even for sin you people pay retail." This Businessman Jesus model has to go. If their God is so powerful, why does he need anyone working for him. And why do the followers have to pay for his staff? Huh?
granddaughter, and the one thing my father always resented about clergy other than his own father, was that they expected the congregations to support them. My Dad got to see plenty of that during the Great Depression, and he always hated how the pastors could take from people who already had nothing to begin with. My grandfather always had a day job...
Not only do religious figures today expect the congregations to support them, but to support them well. The pastor of my ex-church has a couple of very nice cars, a very nice house, and a motorcycle. Other people in the church, not so much.
... expect that the original idea of tax exemption was to emphasize that the church is not the state, nor dependent upon the state for its continued financial health/support.
This, of course, has become just as corrupt as any principle, exploited by those who seek influence and power to the point of being meaningless.
tax exempt status for churches violates the separation of church and state, this is outrageous; people who don't believe, or do not attend, should not have to pay for those who do.
religious leaders and sects, of varying persuasions, have been sticking their noses where they don't belong for far too long.
whether it is AIPAC, the Catholic bishops, Hagee, Focus on the Family, whomever, it has to stop now!
time to strip tax emempt status from all of these hucksters.
and by the way,if you can't get it up, maybe you aren't supposed to......
A false choice in health care battle
By Ellen Goodman | November 13, 2009
"IT WAS one of those small shocks that come unexpectedly following a death. Just days after the country had buried Ted Kennedy, Cardinal Sean O’Malley took to his blog to defend himself from critics attacking him for presiding over the funeral of a prochoice senator."
"...The cardinal explained how he had used the occasion to lobby one of the mourners: the president of the United States. He told Barack Obama that, yes, the Catholic bishops wanted universal health care but “we will not support a plan that will include a provision for abortion or could open the way to abortions in the future....’’"
"...Is there an etiquette for lobbying at a funeral? Unseemly is too mild a word. This politicking during a national outpouring of loss for the last of the Kennedy brothers, a time when tens of thousands of Americans of every religion lined up to say their farewells, was a warning sign...."
"...The Conference of Catholic Bishops was willing to scuttle their longtime support for universal health care in order to roll back women’s access to abortion. They were prepared to make common cause with Republicans whose only interest was to defeat Obama...."
"...Out went the careful construction of a congressional bill that was written to be “abortion-neutral.’’ Under intense pressure led by the bishops, a last-minute maneuver forced many in the House of Representatives to choose between a bill that left reproductive health on the cutting room floor or no bill at all....So, with the Stupak-Pitts amendment hanging from it like an albatross, a bill was passed that would cover millions of uninsured Americans but also strip millions of American women of reproductive health converge. To the uncompromising went the victory...."
"....If prochoice Democrats turn back reproductive rights, it proves that they can be rolled by intransigent opposition. And once rolled, it’s all downhill....If they vote against the bill and it is defeated, they become the allies of those enemies who want Obama to meet his Waterloo. Without health care reform, the president’s momentum slows to a crawl....Universal health care was the cause of Kennedy’s life. Four Democrats are vying for his seat. The one woman, Attorney General Martha Coakley, said she would vote against any bill that further restricts reproductive rights. Representative Mike Capuano dismissed her as naive and then flip-flopped into agreement. The other two have said they would reluctantly put reform first....But it’s fair to ask: What would Teddy do?"
"...As Coakley says, “I can’t believe that we are now reduced to saying the only way we can get good health care is by taking steps backward on women’s rights. It’s a false choice.’’"
Read Entire Article @: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_o...
shit out the church if it insists on involving itself in politics.
Amen LOL!
Where does Nancy "Ohhh...I'm the leader! I care about women's health issues!" Pelosi stand on this?
Oh...she's past child bearing age. Bummer.
abortion was illegal, if two MD's said a woman needed one, she got it. In a hospital and paid for by her health insurance company, with no questions asked. Poor women always had the coat hanger option.
I agree..but why give Viagra to a guy that is not married? I have a moral objection to sex between partners that are not married. Like vaccinating young women for HPV..giving Viagra to a single guy just promotes promiscuity!!!!
So dress codes for all, and the codes must meet the Catholic Churches standards. And if the Catholics get to dictate standards, so do all the other religions in this country. I am going to start sewing burkas right now. Ms. Pelosi, you just earned my harshest animosity, you weak and traitorous bitch.
Blood transfusions and the use of blood products in medical care clearly need to be forbidden from coverage if we're adopting religious standards for medical care.
does erectile dysfunction take precedent over other problems.
If he can't get it up, she won't need an abortion.
and I'll say it again.
IRS code Section 501(c)(3).
Hey Rev, Pastor, Mullah, Rabbi, whatever....
TIME TO PAY UP!!!!!!!
The concept of separation of church and state is more than a question of taxation. The nonsense the Catholic Church has been pushing, both in the Stupak Amendment and what Susie Madrak mentioned yesterday, does not become more palatable with a dollop of taxes paid by the church.
So it's not 'no taxes' - it's STAY THE FRACK OUT OF GOVERNMENT.
Even if these "churches" were paying a full till tax - I still want them OUT OF POLITICS! Peroid.
they may think twice about getting involved politics. They spent most their money the past ten years paying off little boys that they raped, they can't afford to pay taxes. They also have a fund set up where they take donations to pay for clergy retirements. Them paying 25 to 35 percent in taxes would kill the church and shut them the fuck up. Email or call Stupak and demand they start taxing the Catholic church.
... why would it stop Christians?
Tax them as they should be taxed.
I just don't want the fact that they pay taxes to serve as a license to enter the political area.
All politics are already faith based enough. (and not in a good way)
themselves in politics. But that was JPII. This new Hitler Youth/Nazi based pope has apparently changed the rules.
... right after EU governments told him that if his men in white wearing silly hats kept running their mouths and interfering with politics, then they had to start paying up just like everybody else.
JPII played the old affable guy part down to a T. Same reactionary mysoginist a**hole underneath though. Probably the last chance for the Catholic church to redeem itself died with the first John Paul.
.
Insurance pays for Contraceptive pills etc. and little blue pills for erectile dysfunction. I see no reason why Tax payers should pay for Abortions on demand. I do understand the possible need for an abortion in cases of life or death of a patient in a Hospital and insurance should cover such necessities.
That part of the health bill should be amended.
should be forced to bring a pregnancy to term?
Who is going to pay for the expenses for prenatal care, delivery, childhood care etc etc?
You?!?
Abortion would be an Out of Pocket Expense like many others.
I don't want to pay for it!
If the fetus is carried full term, wanted or not, we will end up paying out the rear.
I don't want to pay for wars, myself, but that makes no difference to those who start them, does it? It's poor women who need this the most. They don't have many resources available to them. Would you prefer breeding and raising an underclass of poor people? Sexual activity should be punished by having to deliver and care for a baby for at least 18 years? Is this what you are advocating?
Oliver Wendell Holmes said, "I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization."
this is about a person paying for their own insurance not the public option.
Private plans are not affected by the bill; only those sold through the Government plan in the POOL.
If you purchase insurance with assistance of a government subsidy. Even if that happens and you want to pay out of pocket, you can't.
Go to an Abortionist Dr. and fork over the cash. Done Period!
it's too bad for the rest of us that your Mother didn't follow your advice....
My wife's insurance plan will not pay for any contraception.
Many don't pay for little blue pills either.
Do you work at being this ignorant...or does it come naturally?
but all pay for 'big blue'! If women can not afford to pay for an abortion then who is going to pay for all the care/education of the children born to such women if the women live or if they die!
No they won't pay for contraceptives?
They will pay for Pills needed to regulate abnormal menstrual cycles AKA The Pill a Contraceptive. It's the difference between a Therapeutic or on demand abortion.
They do not cover plastic surgery, breast reductions, Dental work, etc. unless you can prove a Therapeutic need for such procedures following an accident or psychological health.
It's not what is prescribed but Why it is necessary.
You are misinformed.
In 2000, the EEOC issued a ruling that states in part:
Then in 2002, ABC ran with:
In 2008, the National Women's Law Center started a program called the "PILL4US Campaign" to pressure employers, to pressure their insurers, to provide coverage for birth control because even though many states require it...many insurers are not providing the coverage.
Just so you know.
up or not? ED does not effect society. I predict you will have an increasingly hard time trying to find someone willing to relieve you of your big blue stiffy with your attitude. As it should be.
take away coverage for their little blue pills and watch them squirm!!
"take away coverage for their little blue pills and watch them
squirmgo all soft on us!!the DC church is threatening to stop all charitable services if DC doesn't ban gay marriage:
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/.../AR2...
Isn't that the sole reason they've not paying taxes?
pill on the whistling ad with the dude that has the shit eating grin covered too? ;)
Can't remember the name of the pill but the ad cracks me up a little.
Asked one of my kids, it's enzyte and the dudes name is Smiling Bob
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7vOPPXkqm4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghrWz7cVXv8
Over population is killing the earth. We should remove tax exemptions for children. At the very least, remove the exemptions for any more than two children. After three children, start increasing taxation.
People who are unable to have children should be forced to adopt - no payments for in vitro or other artificial fertilization. After all, God doesn't want their genes to be reproduced.
Women should be offered a $10,000 bonus for having an abortion in the first trimester. Limit three per woman. On the third abortion, she should be sterilized.
All sterilization procedures and contraceptives should be fully paid for by the government.
Right on, Mutton Jeff! Our tax policy encouraging increasing family size is counter productive to our goals of conserving the earth's resources and attacking global warming. And while I'm on a rant, what about the whole nod to the concept of tailoring policy for the benefit of people opposed to their taxes going to fund activites to which they are morally opposed? What about those of us opposed to the Iraq War, the death penalty, tax exemption for religious organizations, slaughtering wolves in Idaho from helicopters, etc., etc. The government engages in many activites morally opposed by many, but those many still have to pay their taxes. Why is an exception made for legal abortion for poor women via the Hyde amendment and now the Stupak amendment? Infuriating!
If the great invisible man in the sky deemed you to lose a limb, it is an abomination to then attach an artificial limb to your body. It goes against the will of the great God and all his tenticles.
We need to make an amendment! I simply refuse to pay taxes and have my tax dollars spent on allowing people to go against the will of his holiness and get artifical limbs...
that is unless they are artificial tenticles...
Stop. If a church, any church puts one cent to any political campaine or gives one cent to any person running for office they should loose there Tax freebies.
Here we are with the catholic church any church, sticken there ass where it should not be. just how many catholic know the catholic church helped the SS get out of germany. the got some of these bishiops who are chomos get out of going to jail. Jet millions of people give them money.WTF is with you people.
I am morally opposed to churches sticking their tentacles where they don't belong.
If they as much as utter a political opinion or plea for prayers related to political action, they deserve to pay taxes.
The free ride has gone on for far too long, and has enriched too many evangelicals.
against abortions don't have one, I won't.
Terry O'Neil once again demonstrates the piss-poor critical thinking skills of the feminist movement. She says that that young women are galvanized by the Stupak amendment. Why? Because the National Organization of Women is hearing from them. Apparantly she never heard of skewed samples. Women who don't care about the issue simply aren't going to call NOW. NOW is, quite obviously, only going to hear from women who agree with them on this issue--a reality that should be obvious to her but isn't.
Also, religious organizations aren't allowed to tell their flock how to vote (for believers are apparantly sheep), they are allowed to weigh in on issues. It's possible that you could make a case that religious organizations are violating the separation of church and state but it'd be new legal ground.
In fact, isn't it a little weird for someone in charge of a national advocacy organization to say "someone should look into it"? If there's a case to be made why isn't NOW itself getting the ball rolling?
NOW is one of the most politically incompetent political organizations on the planet.
Bottom line is this helps their profits. Church based hospitals are tax free for profit businesses, as long as the profit stays within the tax exempt business.
And lets face it any organization that tells the starving poor to give it 10% of their food money or they’ll go to hell, is not really concerned with the needs of the needy and helpless.
Vegetative patients are low care, low nurse and Md to patient ratio, low skill ratio. But the maintenance can cost the earth and the hospital gets its % of the take.
These types of patients are often neglected in large hospitals, because they are not demanding, and nursing staff is needed elsewhere, as opposed to Hospice type care where this type of patient is their main business.
order to be able to function. It isn't a profit, it's operating capital.
Have you ever wondered why the churches could get involved in all of this?
IT'S NOT COSTING THEM A DIME!!!
They can spout all the hatemongering filth they want to (Fred Phelps and the "God Hates Fags" crowd)....they can go on TV and talk about how they would like to see a foreign head of state "taken out" (Pat Robertson on Hugo Chavez)...you know what keeps all these "christians" going? DONATIONS.
TAX-FREE DONATIONS.
From the sheep.
If the IRS were to suddenly start looking at their books, I guarantee you wouldn't hear another peep out of them.
If you go to church, fine....that's your right. You do what you have to do. But IF THE GOOD PEOPLE OF YOUR CHURCH WANT TO GET INVOLVED IN POLITICS, and they threaten to screw up passage of legislation because some minister isn't happy with it...that's too damn bad.
.
... no matter what the Catholic Church does, that the government is going to challenge it's tax-exempt status. Has anybody surveyed the religions practiced by the members of the Supreme Court lately?
Right?
Six Roman Catholics, two Jews, and a Protestant...
walk into a bar...
people.
:)
sterile.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/fait...
Isn't there something inherently ironic about getting sick from holy water?
Some of the fancy dispensers sell for $5000.00. Why couldn't a priest just bless a standard cheap-o water cooler dispenser found in any office? Oh, it doesn't match the $10,000,000.00 stained glass.
there is nothing holy about that water
and the christian god became rather camera shy with the advent of science, technology, and modern medicine. Because he sure needs help from those "nemesis" in order to dispense his "holy" water properly... LOL
And why does the Pope, the Vicar of Christ, need a bullet-proof car? Isn't that death contraception/intervention? General Stonewall Jackson was not afraid of bullets and led his troops bravely out front (hence his nickname) - he believed god would determine when his time on earth was done. Nothing could kill him until that time. Of course, that ended up being before the Civil War was over...accidentially shot by one of his own men...had to have his arm amputated... and then died about a week later after suffering from his wounds and pneumonia. As one cartoon commented on the Popemobile, "Because the bullets are real, your god is not."
.
In a Stupor, C Street Cultist Stupak, is NOT PRO-LIFE! He is an ANTI-ABORTION, ANTI-Women CONTROL FREAK, as are ALL his Blue Dog and Republithug UNAMERICAN, Unconstitutional cohorts.
PRO-LIFE means one SUPPORTS LIFE. They cannot CLAIM to be pro-LIFE and be pro-WAR at the same time. Ask them where is all their fake concern for LIFE when they vote to send hundreds of thousands of Americans, most 18 to 30 years old, mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, husbands, wives, CHILDREN, to be slaughtered for political gains based on THOUSANDS OF LIES by a wacko who claimed "God wants me to invade Afghanistan and Pakistan and Iraq!" and "God wants ME to be PRESIDENT!".
Where is their fake CONCERN when they ORDER troops to BOMB grade schools? Or for the CHILDREN they slaughter IN THOSE SCHOOLS?
Where is their fake CONCERN when pictures of those CHILDREN show their bloodied faces, lost limbs and TEARS OF PAIN?
This whole "argument" is a bunch of right wing wackos who BELIEVE they are "Chosen by GOD" to show WOMEN who their BOSSES are AND it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
Making WOMEN'S medical records a matter of FREE PUBLIC SCRUTINY for purposes of COMING BETWEEN WOMEN AND THEIR DOCTORS is what it is all about.
Contrary to the right wing wackos NEWT engendered BELIEFS, WOMEN do NOT get INFECTIONS every MONTH and CONCEPTION, (or fertilization of an EGG) DOES NOT TAKE PLACE IN THE UTERUS, NOR does it automatically guarantee there will BE a PREGNANCY!
These "people" need to get their NOSES out of a BOOK written OVER 2000 YEARS AGO and take some classes in ANATOMY AND HEALTH before they continue to spout superstition as FACT.
LIFE does NOT begin AT CONCEPTION because at CONCEPTION the egg is STILL in the TUBE and has NO CHANCE of becoming a FETUS UNLESS IT MAKES IT ALL THE WAY TO THE UTERUS AND ATTACHES TO THE WALL WHERE IT MAY OR MAY NOT DEVELOP ALL THE WAY INTO A HUMAN BEING!
AND, if WOMEN'S medical records are up for PUBLIC DISPLAY, and politicians have a right to KNOW whatever a WOMAN goes to her doctor FOR, then theirs are ALSO up for the same and I want to and have a RIGHT to KNOW what each of them has EVER seen THEIR doctors FOR. I want to KNOW who, among THEM have ever taken medication for ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION, HAVE EVER HAD AN STD, have ever had their OWN abortion. I want to know how many of the FEMALES in CONGRESS ever had a "Spontaneous Abortion" because maybe that would NOW be a crime as well IF SHE smoked, drank, caroused or in any way lived a life UNHEALTHY to the FETUS! How many belong to the C Street CULT and believe THEY were CHOSEN BY GOD to visit prostitutes and abandon their wives and children because being "CHOSEN BY GOD" to be a CULT MEMBER gives them exemption from DECENCY. Have ANY of them ever seen a Psychiatrist? How many of them, besides VITTER, wears DIAPERS at their liaisons?
Whatever one may think of the ACLU, because they've defended some questionable people in their time, I hope they and those defending ACORN get involved in this.
These ignorant, dictatorial, MANANIMALS make ME SICK! And their female PUPPETS make me SICKER!
Tax those chimos out of business. At the very least, think of all the revenue the government could raise if it started taxing the Catholic Church in America.
... we could pay half of our national debt.
are all those gold artifacts and antiques valued at?
...the Mormon church -- talk about rich!
... is mainly in it's land, chapels and temple buildings. They don't have a big pot of cash sitting around as I understand it.
will want to start eliminating the pedifile laws next.
All we have to do is declare abortion to be a religious practice, like Christian Science medicine -- call it "birthless salvation" -- and we can get all the Constitutional protection for it we want.
Think about it: the soul of an aborted fetus goes straight to Heaven... and isn't that what we want for everyone? Problem solved!
It's just like Doug Stanhope said -- "The separation of church and state is called the perineum... and the episiotomy didn't hold..."
I've read arguements about how since a fetus could not be baptized or accept Jesus, they wouldn't make it into Heaven. Pretty twisted stuff, imo.
It's why you see three year olds being pressured to get saved while they're maybe a bit too young to understand...
Original sin--talk about painting with a broad brush. If babies are so innocent, then how come they don't go right back to Heaven if they're aborted?
about babies' sin nature. They are already born sinful, need to be disciplined, etc. James Dobson is among them, and some of the discipline recommended is spanking, etc...
Ich!
Can you imagine the, um, difficulties if they were to wait until the boy is old enough to understand exactly why the moil is visiting?
There are plenty of pro-choice Catholics in America whose votes are not controlled by a bishops conference.
There are also plenty of Catholics who respect, sometimes through bitter experience, the separation of church and state. Unfortunately, a few wingnuts like Bill Donahue and a former handful of bishops have fallen in with the evangelicals and convinced the conference to give a "respectable" voice to their wingnuttery.
I wouldn't be surprised if a few "conferences" were had with AHIP as well.
StupakStupakStupak.
Terry O'Neill stated that Stupak essentially overturns Roe v. Wade, but that isn't entirely true. In fact, Stupak overturns Casey v. Planned Parenthood, the case that affirmed Roe's central holdings while crafting a new "undue burden" test.
Casey held that the right to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester is a fundamental right, and that it is unconstitutional for the government to place an "undue burden" upon the exercise of that right.
So by broadly preventing women from buying private health plans that include abortion coverage, Stupak creates an undue burden for women seeking to exercise their Casey rights.
This is actually very, very good news: Congress can leave Stupak in the bill as a vile compromise to get health reform passed. And then a court--perhaps the Supreme Court--can invalidate Stupak while leaving the rest of the health reform package in place.
But do we really want to give this Court another wack at Roe? Somehow I don't feel as confident in their analysis.
Granted, we have a conservative Court.
But conservatives are obedient to stare decisis and are unlikely to overturn Casey, especially since Casey was a "compromise" decision between the right and left justices.
The Court can overturn a decision if it has "proven unworkable." On the other hand, the Court cannot overturn if the decision has caused people to substantially rely on the decision. Casey has proven highly workable, and women have fundamentally reordered their lives around its "undue burden" standard. (Scalia has written impassioned defenses of stare decisis.)
True, Thomas doesn't believe in stare decisis, but he's a party of one. If there comes a day when I agree with Thomas on something, please check me into a nice clinic.
"right" decision? This is a packed court. Please don't try to dignify the current untenable situation. Scalia? I think he's so extreme as to be deranged. Thomas probably doesn't even know that stare decisis is Latin, much less what it means.
Erections lasting longer than 4 hours could cause opposable spleen,pez neck and foghorn leghorns.
Should you experience an erection lasting longer than four hours...call your wife's girlfriends.
;)
Thought I'd insert my favorite Colbert schtick(in a wholly inappropriate way)into the thread.Bad pinkobait.
if men want to interfere with
women's reproductive rights, then
why not have ALL men sterilized at birth.
that would solve an enormous amount of
the healthcare costs from abortion
costs....but we know that will never happen.
men must have their fun at other's expense.
Have you been reading Swift? His "Modest Proposal," which suggested that the Irish famine could be cured by killing the children and eating the meat.
that's good satire.
"As Dr. Nancy noted again, it's two white men making policy about women's reproductive decisions." Ah, but it is not just any two white men! The only conceivable objection anyone could have to a woman having an abortion (at least in the first two trimesters or even later if the circumstances are right) is religious. Only religious dogma teaches the lie that a fetus is a person. We're supposed to think that these people are getting this straight from "God." Actually, they were making it all up so they could rely upon the great delusion that there is a deity and they talk to him all the time.
I'd rather consult the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy.
Granted, we have a conservative Court.
But conservatives are obedient to stare decisis and are unlikely to overturn Casey, especially since Casey was a "compromise" decision between the right and left justices.
The Court can overturn a decision if it has "proven unworkable." On the other hand, the Court cannot overturn if the decision has caused people to substantially rely on the decision. Casey has proven highly workable, and women have fundamentally reordered their lives around its "undue burden" standard. (Scalia has written impassioned defenses of stare decisis.)
True, Thomas doesn't believe in stare decisis, but he's a party of one. If there comes a day when I agree with Thomas on something, please check me into a nice clinic.
...for running an international child sex ring, the least we can do is recognize that the perverted Catholic church has lost its tax-exempt status by interfering in our political process and tax it to death.
Login or Register to post comments.