Tom DeLay indicted. Again.
Anya, the Shopkeepers of America called. They wanted me to tell you that 'please go' just got replaced with 'have a nice day.'
Xander ,'Selfless'
Natter 39 and Holding
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
Tom Scola - Oct 03, 2005 2:31:10 pm PDT #2991 of 10002
Remember that the frontier of the Rebellion is everywhere. And even the smallest act of insurrection pushes our lines forward.
Burrell - Oct 03, 2005 2:32:43 pm PDT #2992 of 10002
Why did Darth Vader cross the road? To get to the Dark Side!
Why am I thinking that the ban on so-called "partial birth" abortions does not make an exception for the health of the mother?
My understanding is that the ban on Dilation & Extraction abortions does not mean that all late term abortions are banned. It simply places a ban on the preferred method. There are other methods, but these put the mother at a much higher risk for complications.
Jesse - Oct 03, 2005 2:34:19 pm PDT #2993 of 10002
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
My understanding is that the ban on Dilation & Extraction abortions does not mean that all late term abortions are banned. It simply places a ban on the preferred method. There are other methods, but these put the mother at a much higher risk for complications.
Yeah, it's even just Intact D&E, IIRC. But I don't really want to get into it.
Topic!Cindy - Oct 03, 2005 2:34:21 pm PDT #2994 of 10002
What is even happening?
It simply places a ban on the preferred method. There are other methods, but these put the mother at a much higher risk for complications.Am I right in thinking there's an exception for the life of the mother with the D&E (thanks--the term completely slipped my brain, before), but not for her health?
Aims - Oct 03, 2005 2:38:45 pm PDT #2995 of 10002
Shit's all sorts of different now.
As far as I understood the ban, it was, "No way, no how, no matter what. Even Mom." I could be wrong.
dw - Oct 03, 2005 2:40:32 pm PDT #2996 of 10002
Silence means security silence means approval
Why am I thinking that the ban on so-called "partial birth" abortions does not make an exception for the health of the mother?
That's why the Congressional ban got flipped by the SCOTUS -- no "life and health" clause.
Some think the eliding of "health" was the real test of the SCOTUS, not the ban on D&E.
Burrell - Oct 03, 2005 2:41:20 pm PDT #2997 of 10002
Why did Darth Vader cross the road? To get to the Dark Side!
Thanks Jesse.
Jesse - Oct 03, 2005 2:41:45 pm PDT #2998 of 10002
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
It's not even really a ban on D&E in the language, I don't think -- it's all this inflammatory non-medical language.
Gudanov - Oct 03, 2005 2:57:39 pm PDT #2999 of 10002
Coding and Sleeping
I do think Republican strategists are afraid of not having abortion as an issue. There are other issues like gay marriage and ethuanasia, but I don't think you get the same kind of traction as with abortion and Bush didn't exactly get landside victories against two of the least charismatic candidates out there.
bon bon - Oct 03, 2005 3:20:09 pm PDT #3000 of 10002
It's five thousand for kissing, ten thousand for snuggling... End of list.
I think Roe is a lot safer with Rehnquist off the Court. He was a man on a mission for precedents he didn't like.
Rehnquist wasn't a social opponent to Roe. He was a Constitutionalist opponent. In his mind, the right to ban/allow abortion should be rolled back to pre-Roe -- on a state by state basis. Scalia and his pubic-hair loving sockpuppet want a full-on ban with zero exception for life and health (which is a clear violation of the Constitution). Without Rehnquist, we're probably looking at politicking from the bench until Scalia dies in the saddle. I have hopes that Roberts will follow the Rehnquist model for a Chief Justice, but I'm afraid that Scalia will shove his hand up Roberts' ass the first chance he gets.
Uh, no. You give Rehnquist way, way too much credit and perhaps rely too much on his dissent in Roe. He was a supreme manipulator, one that Scalia and Thomas could never be. By the time Webster came around, he was all over overruling it, but sneakily. At conference he changed the issue to ensure that he would write the majority opinion which, in draft form, overruled Roe while explicitly claiming not to. He circulated this draft behind the backs of the liberal Justices in secret. Nevertheless, his transparently silly arguments pissed off every other Justice but Kennedy. Among other things, he thought he could ratchet abortion down to the rational review framework without anyone noticing. His opinion is an embarrassment of results-oriented jurisprudence without a scintilla of reasonable argument.
Blackmun's draft dissent pointed out how Rehnquist's opinion would mean overruling most areas of constitutional interpretation (and Scalia privately agreed with his analysis). Rehnquist lost SOC's vote and was unable to overrule in the end because of her narrowing concurrence.
What's more, he announced the decision from the bench in such a way so as to imply that SOC's defection was not a controlling opinion, forcing Blackmun to read his dissent from the bench in outrage.
When Casey came around Rehnquist relisted the case (effectively delaying it) purportedly in order to avoid deciding it before the election. He was, however, confronted by Blackmun into holding the cert vote so that argument was held in spring, rather than fall.
As in Webster, he framed the debate to ensure he would end up writing the opinion. And as in Webster, he circulated a draft where he (a) changed the standard of review to rational basis; (b) effectively overturned Roe (c) claimed not to be overturning Roe and (d) ticked off SOC enough so that she joined the Kennedy/Souter troika.
The dissent he published ultimately stated his intention to overrule Roe, and Blackmun's dissent is aimed at his previous prevarications in attempting to gut Roe.
If Rehnquist hadn't been such a manipulator, he probably could have gotten SOC onto a majority. I hope Roberts is not like Rehnquist. And I know that Scalia, while intellectually seductive, is not going to put his hand up anything.