[MD] Morality, Abortion and the MoQ

[Krimel]

> [Krimel]
> Actually the Roe v Wade decision is a brilliant exercise in  
> jurisprudence and the line they drew was the age of viability. Prior
> to that time, about 28 weeks, all of the rights accrue to the
> mother's  wishes; after that time the rights increasingly shift toward the
> fetus

MP: 
LoL. Krimel the civics 'expert' strikes again.

[Krimel]
As you so obviously are not.

[MP]
The simple truth is that Jurisprudence is NOT about drawing lines, it is
about 
*reading* them. 

[Krimel]
If it were just a matter of reading, there would be no need for judges.
Jurisprudence is absolutely about where the lines are drawn and interpreting
how those lines apply. Wake up, dufus.

[MP]
The court had no place to draw that line. Its not its job. 

[Krimel]
The court clearly thinks that is its job and the only thing that has come
close to shaking that is 30 years of right wing nut cases trying to stack
the court with right wing flakes.

[MP]
Its OUR job, through law. The court may only read the lines drawn by law and
judge 
whether they exceed the limits allowed those lines in the US Constitution.

[Krimel]
Law are almost never written by US. They are written by legislatures and
interpreted by courts and no amount of your blathering is going to change
that. Thank God.

[MP]
And while I'm at it, R v. W was not about mother's rights / fetus rights, it
was 
about mother's rights / State rights.

[Krimel]
It was about the rights of women to control their own reproductive health as
opposed to the state's right to protect the life of the fetus. And again no
amount of jibber jabber on your part will make squat worth of difference.

[MP]
Most legal scholars (Ruth Ginsburg among them, btw) feel the opinion as 
written was really poorly done. Instead of settling the issue, it igninted a
culture 
war. It did so precisely *because* it drew a line it had no place drawing.

[Krimel]
I don't know what you think Ginsberg was going on about but she did say this
recently, "People tend to think that Roe v Wade has to be preserved at all
costs.  What has to be preserved is the right of a woman to have access to
the means to control her own reproductive capacity."   

[MP]
If R v. W had been about defining life under the Constitution, THAT might
have 
been brilliant.

[Krimel]
Well it was on both counts. The regrettable result has been 30 years of
right wing religious nuts playing a dangerous game of chicken with the
composition of the court. And that threatens the life, liberty and happiness
of us all.