Unfortunately, the "originalists" and "textualists" on the current Court seem to have their own "original" copies of the Constitution, which may or may not be the same as the one we studied in school..... They will interpret their copies and judge from on high, and they won't let history or the expressed original intent get in the way of a good story.....
Unfortunately, the "originalists" and "textualists" on the current Court seem to have their own "original" copies of the Constitution, which may or may not be the same as the one we studied in school..... They will interpret their copies and judge from on high, and they won't let history or the expressed original intent get in the way of a good story.....
From what I have read, at worst, the standard for abortions was to restrict them at the "quickening" (about 15 weeks or so), but before that, the fetus was not considered to be alive. The biological fact is that life does not start at conception, or fertilization, or implantation - life is a continuum, an unbroken stream that is at least a billion years old on this little blue marble. The gametes (sperm and egg) are not independently alive, but they contain the essentials for life to continue when they are joined..... This is one of those arguments that cannot ever be solved - it is a binary disagreement, and so one side or the other will always be disappointed that the decision went the other way. The real crime is that so many states essentially ban serious health and reproductive education and support - the conservative deep south has the highest rates of teenage pregnancies and abortions in the country, and the worst sex and health education.....
Bruce, I appreciated your explication. We do part ways, however, with you calling their story 'good'. 'Old hat', would, at least, stamp it as familiar baggage.
"good story" was just an ironic figure of speech on my part - I have always considered the phrase "a good story" as referring to stories that are plainly false or exaggerated. Sorry about that, chief.....:-)
Unfortunately, the "originalists" and "textualists" on the current Court seem to have their own "original" copies of the Constitution, which may or may not be the same as the one we studied in school..... They will interpret their copies and judge from on high, and they won't let history or the expressed original intent get in the way of a good story.....
From what I have read, at worst, the standard for abortions was to restrict them at the "quickening" (about 15 weeks or so), but before that, the fetus was not considered to be alive. The biological fact is that life does not start at conception, or fertilization, or implantation - life is a continuum, an unbroken stream that is at least a billion years old on this little blue marble. The gametes (sperm and egg) are not independently alive, but they contain the essentials for life to continue when they are joined..... This is one of those arguments that cannot ever be solved - it is a binary disagreement, and so one side or the other will always be disappointed that the decision went the other way. The real crime is that so many states essentially ban serious health and reproductive education and support - the conservative deep south has the highest rates of teenage pregnancies and abortions in the country, and the worst sex and health education.....
Bruce, I appreciated your explication. We do part ways, however, with you calling their story 'good'. 'Old hat', would, at least, stamp it as familiar baggage.
"good story" was just an ironic figure of speech on my part - I have always considered the phrase "a good story" as referring to stories that are plainly false or exaggerated. Sorry about that, chief.....:-)
Any other figures of speech on you part, which you care to share in advance? In all other ways, Bruce, your clarity is a charm.
😣