The newest speculation about the leak and ongoing stories is that they are coming from the Alito-Thomas camp. The goal is to lock in the 5 nutjob justices and weaken Roberts as the chief. This is all part of a payback for Roberts refusing to kill Obamacare.
We have many programs at the State and Federal level that provide this support. Yes there are those that view these programs as socialist. Given the programs that exist I would say being called a socialist is the least of your worries as my suspicion would be that a majority regardless of political stripe or religious affiliation agrees with such support. That of course does not mean there will not be arguments concerning results and effectiveness of the support. Financial Help for Pregnant Women
Just wondering from all my staunch anti-abortion, pro-life brothers and sisters on Gator Country. After you all stomp out pre-birth murder, are you going to be just as vigorous demanding an end to post-birth murder, ie The Death Penalty?? Because, judging by the color coding, many of the same states that want pre-birth murders ended, have absolutely no problem with post-birth murder?? What say you Pro-Lifers?
I support the death penalty notionally, but in practice have no faith in our government or justice system's ability to carry it out in a manner that doesn't result in execution of the innocent.
I am against most abortions but have exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother. That stance has caused me to change my view on the death penalty, it should be very rare, only for the most heinous murderers, Ted Bundy, Tim McVeigh, etc.
This is my outlook on it. It's carried out in an arbitrary, racially biased way that has already resulted in the deaths of a number of innocent people. And we're very lucky that we didn't execute more innocent people. I'm not morally opposed to the death penalty in the abstract. But I am opposed to the death penalty as it exists now.
Excuse me, health caught me on that one I meant to say I am NOT for the death penalty, but I am pro-life. Sorry
I like the fair and honest answers several people have given. As mentioned previously, I am anti-abortion in my personal life. However, I do not presume to tell others what they should or should not do. I am adamantly opposed to the death penalty, which is state-sponsored murder to me. Given the two topics, I would say that the second one (death penalty) has had much more influence on my voting than abortion.
Thanks for the correction. As a result I deleted my response since it was to a typo/misrepresentation of your positoin. I am aligned with this fairly well.
IMO with our current justice system the only way it could be carried out in any sort of just way is if someone is caught in the act with sufficiently high-res video to clearly make out what is going on, or gives a completely voluntary, uncoerced confession to first degree murder during the sentencing phase (i.e. the no doubt whatsoever standard)
Interesting point regarding the leak. I am listing to an interview with Josh Gerstein, the reporter that actually received the leak and published the story. He was asked whether it was absolutely unprecedented for a draft opinion to leak. He made a point I had not considered. He said that there's a lot of evidence that opinions had been leaked in the past, either copies or full opinions, for review. However, those “leaks” would've all happened before the age of media when a full opinion could be circulated via the internet. In the past reporters likely had advance opinions but obviously could not publish them completely so it wouldn't be described or referenced that way.
I'd disallow it for everybody except a person who commits a murder after already being previously convicted of murder. Is that a foolproof system? No. But my personal view is that solitary confinement for life is torture, so death is a more merciful sentence for those who continue to kill after being convicted and locked up.
Susan Squier, Justice Samuel Alito's former Princeton classmate, calls draft Supreme Court opinion 'a greatest hits of misogyny' - CNNPolitics
I think it is telling no one will straight up answer my question about Jesus commanding his disciples to form a massive welfare state. It shows the thin ice people on your side of the aisle are standing on, which is not much at all. If one of you could straight up answer the question, then you would. But you can't because Jesus and the Bible do not teach the state is supposed to be a massive welfare state. He did teach individuals to help those in need in society however. If you want to help the least of these, then that means you personally from your own bank account should help the least of these. The state forcibly extracting your neighbor's wealth under the threat of force does not fulfill the Jesus' teaching that people are supposed to help the least of the these. It has nothing to do with the command. If that was what Jesus intended he would have commanded Caesar to establish a massive welfare state. Nonetheless, the most important passage relating to this topic in the Bible IMO is Luke 1:39-45 which says John the Baptist leapt for joy in the womb when he was in the presence of Jesus, who was also in the womb. People today would approve and tolerate Elizabeth if she had killed the rejoicing John the Baptist, filled with joy, giving glory in the presence of His Lord and Savior. Many would shout that abortion if Mary had killed the Lord of glory that John the Baptist was celebrating in her womb. And what is really important about the Luke 1:39-45 passage is four things: 1) Luke refers to an in-utero John the Baptist as a baby, not a fetus. He uses the same word that would be used to refer to a baby outside the womb. 2) John the Baptist is at least 6 months older than Jesus, and this event happens when John the Baptist was still in the womb. 3) Elizabeth refers to Jesus at this stage as not just a baby, but her Lord, the title by which Jesus was referred to outside the womb as an adult as the Lord of glory. 4) John the Baptist was the greatest man ever born of a woman according to Jesus. Jesus, attested to the fact that John the Baptist was a prophet. A prophet filled with the Holy Spirit was not leaping for joy for a clump of cells. He was leaping for joy because there was a person worth celebrating in that womb. I don't need anything more than that to establish personhood shortly after conception. It really is a slam dunk case. P.S.: If we could totally outlaw abortion in exchange for a massive welfare state, then I'd make the exchange in a millisecond. I don't think it is necessarily wrong for the state to participate in welfare, but I do think a massive welfare state makes a more selfish self-centered less charitable populace out of a nation. It is better if churches shoulder the burden of helping the poor because the church can minister to the spiritual needs of a person alongside their physical needs. I don't trust an anti-Christian state to minister to the soul of a person.
