Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToeInTheWater
I see this as Trump actually thinking
strategically by nominating someone who doesn't have as much baggage on
abortion and other issues, as some others who were on the initial list
of 20 he mentioned during his campaign.
|
I've heard that might be why Pryor wasn't chosen.
__________________
"We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage... it
is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time."
"The view of the church’s teaching as a monolith to defend without nuance or different understandings is wrong."
(Pope Francis)
Feb 2, '17, 12:03 pm
|
|
Veteran Member
Forum Supporter
|
|
Join Date: May 19, 2005
Posts: 10,620
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
I am just pleased that he is someone who believes a SC justice interprets the law and does not make the law. How refreshing.
__________________
 Praying for all CAF intentions.
|
Feb 2, '17, 12:24 pm
|
 |
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: January 17, 2014
Posts: 2,440
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Niall
I went third party.
|
I almost did, for fear of the pro-life cause always being coupled
with Trump. But then I realized pro-lifers are already painted in a
negative light, and I was hoping for some long-term gains with the SC. I
would have felt like a coward hoping other people would vote to shield
pro-life doctors and pregnancy clinics (and baby's lives, by extension),
if I myself was not willing to make a practical, albeit tenuous, vote.
Again, I can understand why someone else may not have come to the same
conclusion, and I can sympathize with third-party voters. I sympathize
if they accept the practical outcome of their vote, and don't use it as a
soap-box for self-righteous hand-washing.
|
Feb 2, '17, 12:27 pm
|
 |
Veteran Member
|
|
Join Date: December 5, 2010
Posts: 10,598
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Abyssinia
I don't think he's explicitly ruled on an
issue directly pertaining to abortion, but he sided with Little Sisters
of the Poor and Hobby Lobby, and he sided with the state of Utah in
regards to defunding Planned Parenthood ( http://www.lifenews.com/2017/01/31/s...ed-parenthood/). |
Regarding the defunding of Planned Parenthood, it is important to
understand Gorsuch's involvement. As a federal judge, he knows and
believes deep in his heart that his role is to interpret the law - not
to make law or policy. As such, he tries very hard not to be swayed by
his own view of what outcome he would like to see. In the Utah case, he
decided that the law and the constitution did allow the state of Utah to
stop funding Planned Parenthood. This in no way says what Gorsuch
thinks of Planned Parenthood itself - whether it is a good thing or a
bad thing. That was not the question he was tasked to answer. He looked
at the law and decided Utah could do what they wanted. That is all.
|
Feb 2, '17, 12:34 pm
|
 |
Forum Elder
|
|
Join Date: September 5, 2005
Posts: 17,452
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Niall
I knew it.
However well intentioned, pro-life voters for Trump have been suckered.......again.
|
I'm not sure I agree. He's pretty young, and abortion legal so long it might not have had an opportunity to address it in court.
If I recall, Sonya Sotomayor didn't have any experience with abortion
court cases either prior to becoming a Supreme Court Justice.
__________________
Jesus, protect and save the unborn.
The Word became flesh, He lived among us, and we
saw His glory, the glory that He has from the Father as only Son of the
Father, full of grace and truth.
|
Feb 2, '17, 12:37 pm
|
 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: September 19, 2013
Posts: 6,808
Religion: Catholic - Roman Rite
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeafByNiggle
Regarding the defunding of Planned
Parenthood, it is important to understand Gorsuch's involvement. As a
federal judge, he knows and believes deep in his heart that his role is
to interpret the law - not to make law or policy. As such, he tries very
hard not to be swayed by his own view of what outcome he would like to
see. In the Utah case, he decided that the law and the constitution did
allow the state of Utah to stop funding Planned Parenthood. This in no
way says what Gorsuch thinks of Planned Parenthood itself - whether it
is a good thing or a bad thing. That was not the question he was tasked
to answer. He looked at the law and decided Utah could do what they
wanted. That is all.
|
Yes. Gorsuch believes that he must defend the Constitution first, regardless of personal feelings.
People on the right (while we want Roe v Wade to be overturned) also want Justices and Judges who do not legislate from bench.
Even in the abortion debate, if Justices overturned Roe v. Wade based
solely on their personal views and not the law, then it would be bad.
The liberals believe that Constitutional interpretations can change over
time, while conservatives believe that the Constitution must be
interpreted the way the founders interpreted it.
|
Feb 2, '17, 12:48 pm
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: September 19, 2013
Posts: 6,808
Religion: Catholic - Roman Rite
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Niall
I knew it.
However well intentioned, pro-life voters for Trump have been suckered.......again.
|
This is an example of terrible journalism. He's had no cases.
Furthermore, this is a good example of the difference between liberal vs conservative judges.
Liberal judges are encouraged to be "crusaders" or "activists" for things they care about.
Conservative judges on the other hand are discouraged from being
crusaders or activists. As Gorsuch has stated, good judges sometimes
have to rule against their conscience.
But he has also stated that when the law is not precise, it must be sent
back to the legislature. Roe v. Wade is a good example. The
Constitution was NEVER written to support abortion. And honestly, the
only place the founders wrote anything that even comes close was in the
Declaration of Independence, where it states that we have a right to
life.
Otherwise, it states nothing, as the founders never foresaw something
that had been illegal since the time of Emperor Constantine to become a
legal debate. Same thing with "same sex marriage," they never even
imagined such a thing.
Therefore, since the Constitution does not address both of those things,
they should have been kicked back to the states, not ruled on by the
Supreme Court who didn't have the legal authority according to
originalists to make those rulings.
|
Feb 2, '17, 1:08 pm
|
 |
New Member
|
|
Join Date: October 21, 2010
Posts: 42
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
I may be mistaken but I firmly believe that being anti-abortion doesn't
necessarily mean that one is pro-life. To me being pro life is being
anti-abortion, anti-racist, anti-war and anti-every other evil (and all
evils affect life in one way or another) as taught by Christ, and the
Fathers of the Church. Therefore I ask: are Trump, Gorduch et. al.
really pro-life? Frankly some of Trump's pronouncements both before and
since his inauguration and especially his blocking refugees from
entering the USA is anything other than pro-life.
|
Feb 2, '17, 1:16 pm
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: January 17, 2014
Posts: 2,440
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacrow
I may be mistaken but I firmly believe
that being anti-abortion doesn't necessarily mean that one is pro-life.
To me being pro life is being anti-abortion, anti-racist, anti-war and
anti-every other evil (and all evils affect life in one way or another)
as taught by Christ, and the Fathers of the Church. Therefore I ask: are
Trump, Gorduch et. al. really pro-life? Frankly some of Trump's
pronouncements both before and since his inauguration and especially his
blocking refugees from entering the USA is anything other than
pro-life.
|
I'm kind of tired of people raising the legitimacy of this term,
but since your profile says you arent from around here, I'll put in my
two cents. If people really insist on calling us anti-abortion (which I
don't mind that much), then tit-for-tat pro-choicers deserve to be
called pro-abortion. The push over terminology, in my opinion, is really
just people trying to frame perception a certain way. I, for one, don't
think it's hard to deduce that pro-life means the life of the baby, and
increasingly the life of the mother and parents. The push to challenge
that, I think, is really just about drawing emphasis away from the fact
abortion takes a life. However, anti-abortion isn't a dirty term to me.
"Abolition" isn't a dirty term.
|
Feb 2, '17, 1:25 pm
|
|
Forum Elder
|
|
Join Date: August 11, 2004
Posts: 16,504
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacrow
I may be mistaken but I firmly believe
that being anti-abortion doesn't necessarily mean that one is pro-life.
To me being pro life is being anti-abortion, anti-racist, anti-war and
anti-every other evil (and all evils affect life in one way or another)
as taught by Christ, and the Fathers of the Church. Therefore I ask: are
Trump, Gorduch et. al. really pro-life? Frankly some of Trump's
pronouncements both before and since his inauguration and especially his
blocking refugees from entering the USA is anything other than
pro-life.
|
Making pro-life cover "every other evil" makes the phrase
meaningless. We already have a word for anti-evil: Catholic. Let
pro-life continue as being about abortion and possibly euthanasia, but
don't dilute it to the point it means nothing at all.
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely
exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It
would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral
busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity
may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own
good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of
their own conscience."
CS Lewis–God in the Dock, 1948
|
Feb 2, '17, 1:47 pm
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: October 21, 2015
Posts: 896
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil19034
This is an example of terrible journalism. He's had no cases.
Furthermore, this is a good example of the difference between liberal vs conservative judges.
Liberal judges are encouraged to be "crusaders" or "activists" for things they care about.
Conservative judges on the other hand are discouraged from being
crusaders or activists. As Gorsuch has stated, good judges sometimes
have to rule against their conscience.
But he has also stated that when the law is not precise, it must be sent
back to the legislature. Roe v. Wade is a good example. The
Constitution was NEVER written to support abortion. And honestly, the
only place the founders wrote anything that even comes close was in the
Declaration of Independence, where it states that we have a right to
life.
Otherwise, it states nothing, as the founders never foresaw something
that had been illegal since the time of Emperor Constantine to become a
legal debate. Same thing with "same sex marriage," they never even
imagined such a thing.
Therefore, since the Constitution does not address both of those things,
they should have been kicked back to the states, not ruled on by the
Supreme Court who didn't have the legal authority according to
originalists to make those rulings.
|
There's a legitimate argument for the 14th Amendment protecting gay marriage just like it protects mixed marriage.
|
Feb 2, '17, 1:51 pm
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: September 23, 2010
Posts: 2,893
Religion: Thinking About Catholicism...
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by St Francis
Making pro-life cover "every other evil"
makes the phrase meaningless. We already have a word for anti-evil:
Catholic. Let pro-life continue as being about abortion and possibly
euthanasia, but don't dilute it to the point it means nothing at all.
|
It also would provide cover for those who claim to be pro-life
merely because they propose policies that would improve the overall
standard of living for people. Also feeds into the stereotype that
"those who claim to be pro-life are actually only pro- birth, once the baby is born they don't care if the kid starves to death while the rich get richer".
|
Feb 2, '17, 1:52 pm
|
 |
Junior Member
|
|
Join Date: October 17, 2011
Posts: 426
Religion: Roman Catholic with Eastern Orthodox Sympathies
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
So this guy doesn't have any track record at all on abortion cases? Why
doesn't it surprise me that there's a misleading headline for this news
story?
|
Feb 2, '17, 10:42 pm
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: September 19, 2013
Posts: 6,808
Religion: Catholic - Roman Rite
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFerri48
There's a legitimate argument for the 14th Amendment protecting gay marriage just like it protects mixed marriage.
|
Yes, people make that argument. But if you could create a time
machine and travel back to the 19th century and made that argument to
the authors of the Amendment and those who voted for it, I'm sure they
they would say that the 14th Amendment does not give two men to marry
each other.
That's the point of originalism.
The 14th amendment was never considered to address marriage (which is
historically considered a religious event) until relatively recently.
|
Feb 2, '17, 11:54 pm
|
 |
Veteran Member
|
|
Join Date: June 30, 2014
Posts: 12,329
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
There's an interesting article at Salon about Gorsuch. It seems he was a
teenager with a rather David Duke-ish outlook, and these skeletons in
his closet may do him in. I'm certainly hoping they do, at least. I
suppose it depends entirely on how it's spun, and how the mass media
decides to frame it. It will undoubtedly be framed as a youthful
mistake, and any suggestions of anti-Semitism will be vehemently, vehemently
denied. And even more than this, it will be presented as outrageously
offensive and absurd to even dare to question his racial views. So it
just depends on whether media decides to destroy him, or to just let it
go. Is he or was he the anti-Jewish variety of fascist, or is he or was
he the staunchly pro-Israel variety of fascist? And also I should add
that I have no reason to believe he is or was anti-Jewish, I'm just saying this is sure to be a sticking point to whatever degree.
Supreme Court nominee Gorsuch in his youth: “Fascism Forever”
http://www.salon.com/2017/02/02/supr...rever_partner/
__________________
Solvitur ambulando…. It is solved by walking…
~Augustine
|
Feb 3, '17, 12:17 am
|
 |
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
|
|
Join Date: September 10, 2012
Posts: 1,240
Religion: Roman Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sy Noe
Didn't he say he would uphold the laws of the nation?
|
He's against liberal interpretation of the law. Like Scalia.
Feb 3, '17, 12:22 am
|
|
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
|
|
Join Date: September 10, 2012
Posts: 1,240
Religion: Roman Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exiled Child
There's an interesting article at Salon
about Gorsuch. It seems he was a teenager with a rather David Duke-ish
outlook, and these skeletons in his closet may do him in. I'm certainly
hoping they do, at least. I suppose it depends entirely on how it's
spun, and how the mass media decides to frame it. It will undoubtedly be
framed as a youthful mistake, and any suggestions of anti-Semitism will
be vehemently, vehemently denied. And even more than this, it
will be presented as outrageously offensive and absurd to even dare to
question his racial views. So it just depends on whether media decides
to destroy him, or to just let it go. Is he or was he the anti-Jewish
variety of fascist, or is he or was he the staunchly pro-Israel variety
of fascist? And also I should add that I have no reason to believe he is or was anti-Jewish, I'm just saying this is sure to be a sticking point to whatever degree.
Supreme Court nominee Gorsuch in his youth: “Fascism Forever”
http://www.salon.com/2017/02/02/supr...rever_partner/ |
Fake news....
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...SXS5Y6A_LPk44g
|
Feb 3, '17, 12:27 am
|
|
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
|
|
Join Date: September 10, 2012
Posts: 1,240
Religion: Roman Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
|
Feb 3, '17, 6:30 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: October 21, 2015
Posts: 896
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil19034
Yes, people make that argument. But if
you could create a time machine and travel back to the 19th century and
made that argument to the authors of the Amendment and those who voted
for it, I'm sure they they would say that the 14th Amendment does not
give two men to marry each other.
That's the point of originalism.
The 14th amendment was never considered to address marriage (which is
historically considered a religious event) until relatively recently.
|
Liberals try to use this argument to fight against certain guns being legal, because they weren't around in the 1700's.
|
Feb 3, '17, 6:33 am
|
 |
Veteran Member
|
|
Join Date: June 4, 2005
Posts: 9,257
Religion: Roman Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saints Alive
|
My goodness. So it is true! I thought he was kidding when he said the media was disseminating fake news.
__________________
Lord, by your cross and resurrection
you have set us free.
You are the Savior of the world.
Life begins at conception not implantation.
|
Feb 3, '17, 7:21 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: September 23, 2010
Posts: 2,893
Religion: Thinking About Catholicism...
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
The story is debunked by America magazine as well, and by a writer not known to be a right-winger at all, Michael O'Loughlin:
http://www.americamagazine.org/polit...is-jesuit-high
Quote:
When it came time to write his senior biography for the yearbook, he
would make light of the divide between his conservative political
beliefs and those of the more liberal faculty and students.
He wrote that he founded and led the “Fascism Forever Club,” though
those with knowledge of the school back in the 1980s say there was no
such club. The mention of it in the yearbook was a tongue-in-cheek
attempt to poke fun at liberal peers who teased him about his fierce
conservatism.
It was “a total joke,” said Steve Ochs, a history teacher at Georgetown
Prep who was the student government advisor during Mr. Gorsuch’s junior
and senior years at the Bethesda, Md., school.
“There was no club at a Jesuit school about young fascists,” he told
America. “The students would create fictitious clubs; they would have
fictitious activities. They were all inside jokes on their senior
pages.”
|
So it was a joke. Now I guess we can debate if it was on good
taste or not, but joking about being a fascist does not make you one.
Actually I recall there was a conservative club at my HS in a fairly
liberal part of the country, they printed a newsletter every month that
had similar attempts at humor.
Anyway, I think that all of us regardless of ideology find it tempting
to believe the worst about our opponents. How easy it would be if
everyone to the right of us were actually fascists! But on the other
hand how easy it would be if everyone to the left of us were actually
child molesters. (One obvious Fake News tidbit from 2016 claimed Hillary
Clinton was running a child sex ring.)
|
Feb 3, '17, 10:20 am
|
|
New Member
|
|
Join Date: October 21, 2010
Posts: 42
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCEL
I'm kind of tired of people raising the
legitimacy of this term, but since your profile says you arent from
around here, I'll put in my two cents. If people really insist on
calling us anti-abortion (which I don't mind that much), then
tit-for-tat pro-choicers deserve to be called pro-abortion. The push
over terminology, in my opinion, is really just people trying to frame
perception a certain way. I, for one, don't think it's hard to deduce
that pro-life means the life of the baby, and increasingly the life of
the mother and parents. The push to challenge that, I think, is really
just about drawing emphasis away from the fact abortion takes a life.
However, anti-abortion isn't a dirty term to me. "Abolition" isn't a
dirty term.
|
TCEL: You may have misunderstood me. I am not pro-abortion but
very much pro-life. I agree wholeheartedly with you that "pro-choicers
deserve to be called pro-abortion" because that is what they are. With
regard to evil read Isaiah 1:16-20.
|
Feb 3, '17, 10:33 am
|
|
New Member
|
|
Join Date: October 21, 2010
Posts: 42
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by St Francis
Making pro-life cover "every other evil"
makes the phrase meaningless. We already have a word for anti-evil:
Catholic. Let pro-life continue as being about abortion and possibly
euthanasia, but don't dilute it to the point it means nothing at all.
|
Dear St Francis, my intention is not to dilute the term "pro-life" but hopefully to strengthen it! God bless you and yours.
|
Feb 3, '17, 10:48 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: January 17, 2014
Posts: 2,440
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacrow
TCEL: You may have misunderstood me. I am
not pro-abortion but very much pro-life. I agree wholeheartedly with
you that "pro-choicers deserve to be called pro-abortion" because that
is what they are. With regard to evil read Isaiah 1:16-20.
|
I didn't get the impression that you were pro-choice. I don't
think we should call pro-choicers "pro-abortion," I was just saying that
if they keep insisting on calling us anti-abortion, they would object
if we turned the term around on them. I don't know about Ireland, but
here in the U.S., people who object to the designation of "pro-life"
often do so to cast a skeptical eye on the term, and to question and
de-legitimize it. It's a rhetoric war.
|
Feb 3, '17, 11:01 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: July 19, 2013
Posts: 536
Religion: Converting to Roman Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by gracepoole
The bigger question is why he became the
GOP nominee in the first place. Or rather, why eliminating abortion is
such a low priority for Republicans as well as Democrats.
|
It's a low priority for them because they've realized that as long
as it is an issue they can fund raise on it. They're not about to kill
the goose that lays the golden eggs.
The Republicans exhort their voters to donate to their campaigns so that
when they get into office they can change the laws. They've been
promising to change those laws for more than 20 years...and will
continue promising and doing nothing, because they need those campaign
funds.
So, of course, the Democrats raise money from their supporters on the
other side of the issue, and as long as the Republicans are against
abortion, of course the Democrats will be for a woman's right to choose.
Again, this results in campaign contributions from the liberals.
Meantime, no one is paying attention to the fact that in areas where
birth control in its many forms were available at no cost the abortion
rate decreased. The liberals are right in one thing -- being able to
plan for and control getting pregnant DOES result in fewer unwanted
children.
|
Feb 3, '17, 11:03 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: September 2, 2015
Posts: 1,344
Religion: Humanist/Skeptic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magdalen2013
It's a low priority for them because
they've realized that as long as it is an issue they can fund raise on
it. They're not about to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.
The Republicans exhort their voters to donate to their campaigns so that
when they get into office they can change the laws. They've been
promising to change those laws for more than 20 years...and will
continue promising and doing nothing, because they need those campaign
funds.
So, of course, the Democrats raise money from their supporters on the
other side of the issue, and as long as the Republicans are against
abortion, of course the Democrats will be for a woman's right to choose.
Again, this results in campaign contributions from the liberals.
Meantime, no one is paying attention to the fact that in areas where
birth control in its many forms were available at no cost the abortion
rate decreased. The liberals are right in one thing -- being able to
plan for and control getting pregnant DOES result in fewer unwanted
children.
|
Indeed it does. Of course now with El Cheeto doing his nonsense
the abortion rates will spike up and more dangerous abortions may come
about. What are dangerous abortions? Back ally ones or home made ones.
|
Feb 3, '17, 11:05 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: May 22, 2004
Posts: 3,206
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFerri48
There's a legitimate argument for the 14th Amendment protecting gay marriage just like it protects mixed marriage.
|
The way some have interpreted the 14th amendment, almost makes the 10th amendment moot.
How can Chicago have restrictive gun laws when Texas does not? (Not right that Chicago citizens are treated "unfairly").
Can an overweight, out-of-shape, far-sighted guy like myself claim that
the 14th amendment should prevent the Navy from keeping me out of their
pilot training program? (after all, its not fair that the Navy has
standards that exclude me)
The iterations can go on and on. The view that the constitution is a
"living breathing document" allows for claims such as these...the
originalist view does not.
__________________
Shockerfan
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pro-Choice Christians: Giving Christ a bad name since 1973
|
Feb 3, '17, 11:11 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: September 2, 2015
Posts: 1,344
Religion: Humanist/Skeptic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by shockerfan
The way some have interpreted the 14th amendment, almost makes the 10th amendment moot.
How can Chicago have restrictive gun laws when Texas does not? (Not right that Chicago citizens are treated "unfairly").
Can an overweight, out-of-shape, far-sighted guy like myself claim that
the 14th amendment should prevent the Navy from keeping me out of their
pilot training program? (after all, its not fair that the Navy has
standards that exclude me)
The iterations can go on and on. The view that the constitution is a
"living breathing document" allows for claims such as these...the
originalist view does not.
|
Which is why it is a living breathing document. Why have
amendments at all if the constitution is fine the first time. So POC are
3/5 a human being?
|
Feb 3, '17, 11:11 am
|
 |
Senior Member
Prayer Warrior
|
|
Join Date: May 29, 2011
Posts: 8,635
Religion: may the force be with you
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by gracepoole
The bigger question is why he became the
GOP nominee in the first place. Or rather, why eliminating abortion is
such a low priority for Republicans as well as Democrats.
|
It seems he became the nominee because he incited and stoked the
uncontrollable fears and anger of a large group of people...made
ridiculous promises to appease them...and played very dirty during the
campaign--more than politicians usually do.
Eliminating abortion is not a high priority for many because they
believe women should make the choice of what they do with their body.
For those who want to prevent abortions, it would make sense that they
advocate for safe and effective contraception to be available. But many
who are anti-choice don't seem to do this.
And also...instead of building a Mexican wall, the new "president" should take those billions of dollars and
provide free healthcare and other financial supports for women who are
pregnant...and also, make it a law that the father of the child is
legally bound to pay support--right away, no ifs ands or buts.
This would alleviate many young women's fears when they get pregnant, and fewer women would have abortions.
And...if men are made more accountable, they would think twice before
having sex without keeping in mind the natural consequences of it.
Outlawing abortions is not the answer. Women will still do it, and men will still urge them to do it. Only it will be done more dangerously.
.
__________________
Creator and member of The Rational Rat Pack:
"Wherever you go, there you are."
|
Feb 3, '17, 11:12 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: May 22, 2004
Posts: 3,206
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magdalen2013
It's a low priority for them because
they've realized that as long as it is an issue they can fund raise on
it. They're not about to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.
The Republicans exhort their voters to donate to their campaigns so that
when they get into office they can change the laws. They've been
promising to change those laws for more than 20 years...and will
continue promising and doing nothing, because they need those campaign
funds.
So, of course, the Democrats raise money from their supporters on the
other side of the issue, and as long as the Republicans are against
abortion, of course the Democrats will be for a woman's right to choose.
Again, this results in campaign contributions from the liberals.
Meantime, no one is paying attention to the fact that in areas where
birth control in its many forms were available at no cost the abortion
rate decreased. The liberals are right in one thing -- being able to
plan for and control getting pregnant DOES result in fewer unwanted
children.
|
Texas and a number of other states have passed more restrictive
laws on abortion, only to see them overturned by liberal judges. Who
mostly appoints liberal, pro-abortion rights judges? Democrat
presidents.
By the way, what was one of the first actions Trump took? Reinstating
the "Mexico City" policy that pro-abortion rights President Obama
suspended.
__________________
Shockerfan
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pro-Choice Christians: Giving Christ a bad name since 1973
|
Feb 3, '17, 11:15 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: September 2, 2015
Posts: 1,344
Religion: Humanist/Skeptic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaddyGirl
It seems he became the nominee because he
incited and stoked the uncontrollable fears and anger of a large group
of people...made ridiculous promises to appease them...and played very
dirty during the campaign--more than politicians usually do.
Eliminating abortion is not a high priority for many because they
believe women should make the choice of what they do with their body.
For those who want to prevent abortions, it would make sense that they
advocate for safe and effective contraception to be available. But many
who are anti-choice don't seem to do this.
And also...instead of building a Mexican wall, the new "president" should take those billions of dollars and
provide free healthcare and other financial supports for women who are
pregnant...and also, make it a law that the father of the child is
legally bound to pay support--right away, no ifs ands or buts.
This would alleviate many young women's fears when they get pregnant, and fewer women would have abortions.
And...if men are made more accountable, they would think twice before
having sex without keeping in mind the natural consequences of it.
Outlawing abortions is not the answer. Women will still do it, and men will still urge them to do it. Only it will be done more dangerously.
.
|
A lot of this makes sense. El Cheeto would be smart in helping the
infrastructure as well as not pushing away our allies. Of course it
would help if he didn't surround himself with people who go against
people.
|
Feb 3, '17, 11:16 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: May 22, 2004
Posts: 3,206
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by NM505StKate
Which is why it is a living breathing
document. Why have amendments at all if the constitution is fine the
first time. So POC are 3/5 a human being?
|
There is a process to change the constitution. Follow the process.
Changing the constitution should not be up to 9 judges...that job belongs to congress, then the president, then the states.
If it is truly a "living breathing document" then it means nothing other
than what 9 judges want it to say. Any law or part of the constitution
could be rendered invalid since "times have changed".
__________________
Shockerfan
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pro-Choice Christians: Giving Christ a bad name since 1973
|
Feb 3, '17, 11:16 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: September 2, 2015
Posts: 1,344
Religion: Humanist/Skeptic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by shockerfan
Texas and a number of other states have
passed more restrictive laws on abortion, only to see them overturned by
liberal judges. Who mostly appoints liberal, pro-abortion rights
judges? Democrat presidents.
By the way, what was one of the first actions Trump took? Reinstating
the "Mexico City" policy that pro-abortion rights President Obama
suspended.
|
The Mexico City gag order bounces with each president that comes
from a different party. Thankfully, I believe, the Netherlands stepped
up to help fund education.
|
Feb 3, '17, 11:18 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: September 2, 2015
Posts: 1,344
Religion: Humanist/Skeptic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by shockerfan
There is a process to change the constitution. Follow the process.
Changing the constitution should not be up to 9 judges...that job belongs to congress, then the president, then the states.
If it is truly a "living breathing document" then it means nothing other
than what 9 judges want it to say. Any law or part of the constitution
could be rendered invalid since "times have changed".
|
What has changed? I am doing a Google search and not finding it at all.
|
Feb 3, '17, 11:44 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: May 22, 2004
Posts: 3,206
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by NM505StKate
What has changed? I am doing a Google search and not finding it at all.
|
marriage being re-defined and defended by a "living breathing" interpretation of the 14th amendment
abortion justified by a "right to privacy" (neither "abortion" nor "right to privacy" not found in the constitution)
you might argue Citizens United was a change
These are just a few that come to the top of my head
__________________
Shockerfan
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pro-Choice Christians: Giving Christ a bad name since 1973
|
Feb 3, '17, 7:04 pm
|
|
Forum Elder
|
|
Join Date: August 11, 2004
Posts: 16,504
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacrow
Dear St Francis, my intention is not to dilute the term "pro-life" but hopefully to strengthen it! God bless you and yours.
|
But you won't strengthen it, you dilute it. It becomes more meaningless the more you pile onto it.
When people do this sort of thing, they do it from good motives,
generally, but they don't understand how language works and they make a
mistake.
Right now, a libertarian who believes in market forces determining wages
can be pro-life. stick a living wage under the term pro-life, and the
libertarian is no longer pro-life.
Additionally, say there is a pro-life group in town, run by volunteers
who have families, jobs, etc. If the term gets broadened, siddenly they
are expected to get involved in other issues. If the living wage folks
down the street decide to do something, they try to persuade the
pro-life people to get involved or de-legitimize their pro-lifeness.
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely
exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It
would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral
busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity
may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own
good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of
their own conscience."
CS Lewis–God in the Dock, 1948
|
Feb 3, '17, 7:17 pm
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: September 19, 2013
Posts: 6,808
Religion: Catholic - Roman Rite
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaddyGirl
For those who want to prevent abortions, it would make sense that they
advocate for safe and effective contraception to be available. But many
who are anti-choice don't seem to do this.
|
I'm tired of hearing this argument.
With a few isolated exceptions, the only Pro Life organizations that do not advocate contraception are Catholic Pro Life groups.
Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, secular, atheist, and other pro life groups do advocate contraception.
God Bless.
|
Feb 3, '17, 7:22 pm
|
|
Forum Elder
|
|
Join Date: January 26, 2008
Posts: 43,235
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saints Alive
He's against liberal interpretation of the law. Like Scalia.
|
In fairness to Trump, his definition of "pro-life" is letting the
states decide on the matter, or returning to the state prior to Roe vs
Wade. IOW, invoking the 10th Amendment.
If he can show that Gorsuch would rule against bringing up a 10th Amendment issue, then he would pass Trump's test.
|
Feb 3, '17, 7:25 pm
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: September 19, 2013
Posts: 6,808
Religion: Catholic - Roman Rite
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFerri48
Liberals try to use this argument to fight against certain guns being legal, because they weren't around in the 1700's.
|
Yes, they do. And I used to agree with that view.
However, the founders did believe is allowing citizens to be armed so
they could protect their homes and neighborhoods in case of invasion,
criminals, and/or even a rogue government.
I don't own a gun, but I'm seriously considering purchasing one to
protect my family in case we have another civil war. My brother (who is
in the military) owns his own AR-15 for that exact same reason.
|
Feb 3, '17, 7:30 pm
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: September 19, 2013
Posts: 6,808
Religion: Catholic - Roman Rite
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProVobis
In fairness to Trump, his definition of
"pro-life" is letting the states decide on the matter, or returning to
the state prior to Roe vs Wade. IOW, invoking the 10th Amendment.
If he can show that Gorsuch would rule against bringing up a 10th Amendment issue, then he would pass Trump's test.
|
To be fair, I don't think that's Trump's definition of "pro-life." I just think that's his thoughts on how to overturn it.
I've heard some legal professionals argue that the Supreme Court did not
have the jurisdiction to make that ruling. So if the argument is that
the Supreme Court does not have the jurisdiction to rule on abortion,
then the Supreme Court can't ban it.
So it depends on the legal arguments used to overturn Roe v Wade.
|
Feb 3, '17, 7:35 pm
|
|
Forum Elder
|
|
Join Date: January 26, 2008
Posts: 43,235
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by shockerfan
There is a process to change the constitution. Follow the process.
Changing the constitution should not be up to 9 judges...that job belongs to congress, then the president, then the states.
|
Alternatively, 2/3rds of the states can call a constitutional
convention to draft a proposed amendment, which then gets ratified by
3/4 of the states within a stated period of time. Congress need need get
involved, except to extend the time limit perhaps. An amendment IMO
would give it more permanence than a SC ruling.
|
Feb 3, '17, 7:37 pm
|
|
Forum Elder
|
|
Join Date: August 11, 2004
Posts: 16,504
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProVobis
In fairness to Trump, his definition of
"pro-life" is letting the states decide on the matter, or returning to
the state prior to Roe vs Wade. IOW, invoking the 10th Amendment.
If he can show that Gorsuch would rule against bringing up a 10th Amendment issue, then he would pass Trump's test.
|
I think his expansion of the Mexico City policy belies such an opinion. To me, it indicates a real sincerity on the issue.
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely
exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It
would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral
busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity
may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own
good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of
their own conscience."
CS Lewis–God in the Dock, 1948
|
Feb 3, '17, 7:50 pm
|
|
Forum Elder
|
|
Join Date: January 26, 2008
Posts: 43,235
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil19034
To be fair, I don't think that's Trump's definition of "pro-life." I just think that's his thoughts on how to overturn it.
I've heard some legal professionals argue that the Supreme Court did not
have the jurisdiction to make that ruling. So if the argument is that
the Supreme Court does not have the jurisdiction to rule on abortion,
then the Supreme Court can't ban it.
So it depends on the legal arguments used to overturn Roe v Wade.
|
Good points.
I would say this (or add to what you stated here) whoever decides on
banning abortion would have to decide on the penalty. Effectively there
is no ban without a penalty.
|
Feb 3, '17, 8:00 pm
|
|
Junior Member
|
|
Join Date: October 17, 2011
Posts: 426
Religion: Roman Catholic with Eastern Orthodox Sympathies
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProVobis
Good points.
I would say this (or add to what you stated here) whoever decides on
banning abortion would have to decide on the penalty. Effectively there
is no ban without a penalty.
|
At the very least, first-degree murder for whoever performs the abortion.
|
Feb 3, '17, 8:09 pm
|
|
Forum Elder
|
|
Join Date: January 26, 2008
Posts: 43,235
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by St Francis
I think his expansion of the Mexico City policy belies such an opinion. To me, it indicates a real sincerity on the issue.
|
If that's true, why the thread?
|
Feb 3, '17, 8:23 pm
|
|
Veteran Member
|
|
Join Date: June 30, 2014
Posts: 12,329
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saints Alive
|
That in no way, shape or form makes the story fake. They're doing
exactly what I predicted they would do: they're attempting to spin the
facts. The physical evidence of his Fascism Forever club and his
statements at the time cannot be denied out of existence, so instead
they're reframing it as a "joke". I personally put precisely zero stock
in Snopes' authenticity.
__________________
Solvitur ambulando…. It is solved by walking…
~Augustine
|
Feb 3, '17, 8:28 pm
|
|
Forum Elder
|
|
Join Date: August 11, 2004
Posts: 16,504
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProVobis
If that's true, why the thread?
|
I'm sorry, I don't understand your question.
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely
exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It
would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral
busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity
may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own
good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of
their own conscience."
CS Lewis–God in the Dock, 1948
|
Feb 3, '17, 9:42 pm
|
 |
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: February 26, 2007
Posts: 1,361
Religion: Byzantine Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Gorsuch has written a book about other Pro-Life issues which argues
against Assisted Suicide and the assisted murdering of patients and
declares both practices to be rationally immoral.
The book doesn't explain his views on abortion but I'm encouraged about
his respect and understanding of the intrinsic value of the human person
and human life.
I first heard about Gorsuch's book on the Canadian news  :
Quote:
In it (i.e., “The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia.”),
Gorsuch reveals that he firmly opposes assisted suicide and euthanasia,
and argues against death with dignity laws, which currently exist in
just five states. His reasons, he writes, are rooted in his belief in an
“inviolability” of human life . . .
“All human beings are intrinsically valuable,” he writes in the book,
“and the intentional taking of human life by private persons is always
wrong.”
He continues:
We seek to protect and preserve life for life’s own sake in everything
from our most fundamental laws of homicide to our road traffic
regulations to our largest governmental programs for health and social
security. We have all witnessed, as well, family, friends, or medical
workers who have chosen to provide years of loving care to persons who
may suffer from Alzheimer’s or other debilitating illnesses precisely
because they are human persons, not because doing so instrumentally
advances some other hidden objective. This is not to say that all
persons would always make a similar choice, but the fact that some
people have made such a choice is some evidence that life itself is a
basic good.
|
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/02/01/neil-gorsuch-wrote-the-book-on-assisted-suicide-heres-what-he-said/?utm_term=.f980f4779ac4
__________________
"It's a free country; you can say whatever you want."
--Old American Saying
(U.S. Postal Service stamp-- from 1977 Americana series which extols
freedom of speech and features a Speaker's Stand decorated with an
American Flag shield.)
Last edited by Dwyer; Feb 3, '17 at 9:55 pm.
|
Feb 3, '17, 11:53 pm
|
 |
Forum Elder
|
|
Join Date: August 28, 2012
Posts: 21,626
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
I wonder if a lot of Americans understand that the Supreme Court cannot
solve the moral issue of abortion. I imagine a lot of pro-lifers will
wake up unhappy to realize that if Roe is overturned, states will move
to legalize abortion and my guess is the court--even a conservative
one---will give the time to do it.
Many of the pro-life justices are more 10th Amendment constitutionalists than anything else.
__________________
"The left is no longer liberal"-----Dave Rubin
"Social network censorship----SEE HOW FAR THEY GET WITH IT!!!!!" --------from Social Justice the Musical
"...censorship begins with me, but will end with you". --Milo Yiannapolous
Hate speech = free speech #1A #2A
|
Feb 4, '17, 5:24 am
|
|
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: January 17, 2014
Posts: 2,440
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperLuigi
I wonder if a lot of Americans understand
that the Supreme Court cannot solve the moral issue of abortion. I
imagine a lot of pro-lifers will wake up unhappy to realize that if Roe
is overturned, states will move to legalize abortion and my guess is the
court--even a conservative one---will give the time to do it.
Many of the pro-life justices are more 10th Amendment constitutionalists than anything else.
|
Sure, but it still seems it would be easier to fight on a more local scale than a national one. Subsidiarity comes in.
|
Feb 5, '17, 1:40 am
|
 |
Regular Member
|
|
Join Date: August 28, 2007
Posts: 3,182
Religion: Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wedge Antilles
Knew what? that he hasn't had to rule on
any abortion related cases (which we knew when we applauded the pick
Tuesday night)? Or that he defended the sanctity of life in his writings
about the folly of euthanasia and assisted suicide? Or that we were
suckered by Trump's reinstating of the ban on funding overseas
abortions?
Why is it supposed pro-life people are waiting to pounce and looking for
reasons to say "I told you so" rather than reveling in the good that
presents itself and letting the chips fall where they may. If he
disappoints, so be it. thus far, no pro-lifer I know is disappointed;
quite the contrary. Treating issues as serious as this as a game of
"gotcha" is sad and something I'll never understand.
|
|
Feb 9, '17, 4:18 pm
|
|
New Member
|
|
Join Date: August 3, 2015
Posts: 20
Religion: Roman Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacrow
I may be mistaken but I firmly believe
that being anti-abortion doesn't necessarily mean that one is pro-life.
To me being pro life is being anti-abortion, anti-racist, anti-war and
anti-every other evil (and all evils affect life in one way or another)
as taught by Christ, and the Fathers of the Church. Therefore I ask: are
Trump, Gorduch et. al. really pro-life? Frankly some of Trump's
pronouncements both before and since his inauguration and especially his
blocking refugees from entering the USA is anything other than
pro-life.
|
Yes!
Trump was never "pro-life." It was simply a guise he assumed to fool the
right. The thrice-married vulgarian has no moral/ethical compass.
|
Feb 9, '17, 5:27 pm
|
|
Veteran Member
|
|
Join Date: June 4, 2005
Posts: 9,257
Religion: Roman Catholic
|
|
Re: Gorsuch case review shows he's no crusader on abortion
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeFrancisSDCA
Yes!
Trump was never "pro-life." It was simply a guise he assumed to fool the
right. The thrice-married vulgarian has no moral/ethical compass.
|
That’s the problem when you are fixated with label and care less with what he is doing.
He disallows abortion by stopping any fund to do it which is much more
than the past President who did just the opposite, and Clinton too
should she had become the first female President of the US.
If you should refer to pro-life, well, it is about not murdering unborn
babies. It is a good thing for us Catholics because abortion is sin. A
President who condones sin cannot be a supporter of Catholicism.
President Trump is, regardless of his personal life.
As Jesus said, if he is not against us, he is for us.
__________________
Lord, by your cross and resurrection
you have set us free.
You are the Savior of the world.
Life begins at conception not implantation.
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment