SCOTUS Vacancy

Quote: aceofspades

Yes, I realize that - they want him to reveal that he would nominate her should he become POTUS

Who cares about "they"
Some guys in a foreign country wants a Presidential candidate in another country to reveal his SC pick
WTF. Who cares what "they" want
Why do you care about "they". They aren't even Americans

Quote: terapined

Who cares about "they"
Some guys in a foreign country wants a Presidential candidate in another country to reveal his SC pick
WTF. Who cares what "they" want
Why do you care about "they". They aren't even Americans

When did I say I cared about their opinion?

I was merely posting the article as a viewpoint that is being proffered

So let me see if I understand the difference here.

In 2016, the president and the senate were from different parties, so the voters get to decide if they want to make them the same party, in the election 9 months away.

In 2020, the president and the senate are from the same party, so the voters don't get to decide if they want to make them different parties, in the election less than 2 months away.

Even Romney is on board to vote
for the new Justice. McConnell
says there will be no circus this
time like there was with Kavanaugh.
It's getting the fast track thru
the Senate, as well it should. Been
done 19 times before in an election
year.

Quote: Dalex64

So let me see if I understand the difference here.

In 2016, the president and the senate were from different parties, so the voters get to decide if they want to make them the same party, in the election 9 months away.

In 2020, the president and the senate are from the same party, so the voters don't get to decide if they want to make them different parties, in the election less than 2 months away.

No, you are not getting it.

2001-2009, Democrats made it OK to refuse to allow a vote on appointed judges.

2016, Democrats cry like babies when their standard was followed.

Quote: AZDuffman

No, you are not getting it.

2001-2009, Democrats made it OK to refuse to allow a vote on appointed judges.

Just like in 2013 the Dems took
away the 60 vote and replaced
it with a 51. They were told
they would regret it and they
laughed and laughed because
they knew Hillary had
2016 all sewed up. And she would
have if Obama had not been such
a god awful president that 4
more years of his policies sent
us to the other side.

Quote: AZDuffma

And that they made the "then a sperm is life" argument shows how many in the pro-abortion crowd cannot handle the morality part of things. Deep down they know life starts at conception but want to hide from it. It does not fit their argument.

You’re way over your head on the science and morality argument. Life begins at conception has a real big problem with infertile women who pursue pregnancy. It also has a big problem in injury accident. Watch people getting charged for manslaughter in a moderate or even minor accident when a female who doesn’t even know she is pregnant yet miscarries. They could charge you even if the woman was never planning to have a baby, just for the big money involved. Heck there could be serious rights issues, or you might get child abuse cases for that clump of cells.

Quote: Dalex64

So let me see if I understand the difference here.

In 2016, the president and the senate were from different parties, so the voters get to decide if they want to make them the same party, in the election 9 months away.

In 2020, the president and the senate are from the same party, so the voters don't get to decide if they want to make them different parties, in the election less than 2 months away.

Yeah, you don't understand the difference.
In 2016, a duly elected GOP majority Senate decided on whether they wanted to vote on nominee confirmation.
In 2020, a duly elected GOP majority Senate will decide on whether they wanted to vote on nominee confirmation.
See the difference?
Dems didn't gain control of the Senate in the 2014 election.
Dems lost Senate seats in the 2018 election.
Elections have consequences.
Dems need to see if they can win an election in 2020 and maybe they will be able to move forward their agenda in 2021
Until then, they are "$hit our of Luck"

Quote: rxwine

You’re way over your head on the science and morality argument. Life begins at conception has a real big problem with infertile women who pursue pregnancy.

Not really. No conception = no life. Conception = life. Simple science.

Quote:

It also has a big problem in injury accident. Watch people getting charged for manslaughter in a moderate or even minor accident when a female who doesn’t even know she is pregnant yet miscarries. They could charge you even if the woman was never planning to have a baby, just for the big money involved. Heck there could be serious rights issues, or you might get child abuse cases for that clump of cells.

You are talking about a legal argument. I am talking about science, which all of the sudden you seem to not like. The legal solution is simple, let it be an added count but require concurrent sentencing. Problem solved!

Are you saying you do not care for the clumps of cells that died from the china virus? Because if once only a clump of cells always a clump of cells. Which swings right back to my point about a society with a high abortion rate being a society in decline.

Quote: AZDuffman

Not really. No conception = no life. Conception = life. Simple science.



You are talking about a legal argument. I am talking about science, which all of the sudden you seem to not like. The legal solution is simple, let it be an added count but require concurrent sentencing. Problem solved!

Are you saying you do not care for the clumps of cells that died from the china virus? Because if once only a clump of cells always a clump of cells. Which swings right back to my point about a society with a high abortion rate being a society in decline.

A clump of cells is worth a clump of cells. Just like when you crunch an acorn under your shoe crossing a neighbors property, you don’t owe him the cost of replacing a majestic grown oak tree that might of been. And if someone steals a thousand dollars out of your investment account they don’t owe you the product of your potential 30 year investment. And so on.

That doesn’t mean a fertilized embryo isn’t valued at some worth. But It is even somewhat absurd to put an automatic positive value on the beginning since in fact not all individuals will produce value. A smaller percentage do the opposite.