A repository for Marcospinelli's comments and essays published at other websites.

Antonin Scalia: Death Penalty, Abortion, 'Homosexual Sodomy' Are Easy Cases

Friday, October 5, 2012


My point being that even the earliest laws weren't about preventing women from obtaining abortions - Just from whom women could get abortions from.  It's a reach for Scalia to contend that a woman's right to an abortion isn't protected by the Constitution.
About Gay Marriage
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Antonin Scalia: Death Penalty, Abortion, 'Homosexual Sodomy' Are Easy Cases


"The death penalty? Give me a break. It's easy. Abortion? Absolutely easy. Nobody ever thought the Constitution prevented restrictions on abortion. Homosexual sodomy? Come on. For 200 years, it was criminal in every state," Scalia said at the American Enterprise Institute.

=============================================

At the time of the founding of the nation, abortion was prevalent and legal.  Women sought out midwives and pharmacists (herbal abortofacients) to terminate pregnancies.  

The first anti-abortion laws (early 1800s) were like everything else in this country - about curtailing commerce of one group over another.  Physicians and surgeons, in the early days of organizing themselves into a legitimate profession, wanted to supplant midwives and pharmacists as providers of abortions.  They lobbied legislators to outlaw abortions performed by anyone but physicians and surgeons.  Physicians argued that their interest was in saving women's lives.  
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Blasts Mitt Romney's Debate Claims: 'You Owe The American People The Truth'


Not that it's relevant (funny how Obama's 'most ardent fans' try to misdirect from the subject at hand), but I'll go one round with you.

I've not heard Charles Pierce "take back" something that he's said, but if he "always" does it as you claim, then you disagree when Pierce says of Obama, "The fact is that the president is a cool and rational man", or that, "Romney got to bull**it his way to the next topic because the president couldn't rein him in, and because moderator Jim Lehrer was in a hurry to get back to that hillside on Easter Island", and expect Pierce will be "taking it back"?

If what Charlie Pierce said is something that you disagree with, then explain why.  

As I share the opinion he expressed (and I'm not taking it back), that's the topic up for discussion.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

No More Excuses


Are you supporting the real Obama, or the idea of Obama?

I’m tired of hearing that “Romney would be a disaster,” or “the SupremeCourt would be more conservative.” Actually, if it were possible for Romney to win this election, it would probably be the best thing for the country in the long run. Why? Obama can get away with doing anything, as far as the left is concerned. After the election, he'll “make a deal” on SocialSecurity, lowering benefits and increasing the retirement age, in fact, he’s already said he supports it. The left will go along because he’ll sell it as the “best deal he could get,” just like he sold the insurance company bonanza Obamacare. The left will go along with his approval of the northern half of the sludgepipe, and probably the bombing of Iran as well. Actually, there’s almost nothing he won’t be able to get away with.

Romney, OTOH, won’t be able to get away with anything. He’ll do the exact same things Obama would've done, but the left won’t stand for it. Not for a moment! Romney doing the same things might even put hundreds-of-thousands of people in the streets, which will be the only way this country might have a chance of surviving.

The system we’re living under is rotten to the core. Our government is a wholly-owned subsidiary of banks and corporations. We’ve run out of time for incremental changes, tweaks to the system - It must be replaced. The effects of climate change: Food and water shortages, relocations, and increasingly violent weather, are going to be combined with another major economic crash, and coming energy shortages due to the effects of peak oil, and upsets in the MiddleEast.

Our government is fully aware of these facts. Why has Homeland Security purchased and distributed millions of rounds of .40 hollow point ammunition, which is illegal under the GenevaConvention? Why have police forces all across the land been equipped to the point where some of them could defeat most countries armies? Why has our society become the most heavily surveiled in the entire world? Do you really think that voting for one candidate or the other is going to change where all this is headed?  

The forces governing this country aren’t afraid of elections, speeches, petitions on Facebook, and certainly not the media they control. They’re only afraid of what we could do if enough of us rise up and refuse to work within the system anymore. General strikes, peaceful civil disobedience in large numbers, removal of funds from major banks, filling the streets might get their attention, not voting for a “green” candidate or one of the duopoly.


Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

No More Excuses


Are you supporting the real Obama or the idea of Obama?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

About This Blog

  © Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP