Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/10/10/scotus.abortion/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/10 /10/scotus.abortion/index.html</a> From the link: "The Supreme Court rejected an appeal Tuesday from a Georgia woman seeking to reverse a 1973 Supreme Court ruling giving her the right to an abortion." "...Sandra Day O'Connor, who generally supported access to abortion, has retired from the bench, replaced in January by Justice Samuel Alito. The change did not appear to make a difference in the latest challenge." "Next month, the justices will hear an important abortion appeal dealing with the federal ban on a late-term procedure critics call "partial birth." Three federal appeals courts have ruled the ban unconstitutional because it does not include a health exception to protect pregnant woman who suffer a medical emergency."
Originally Posted By FaMulan Yes it is. And I hope they revisit the late-term issue as I feel that needs a medical emergency exemption.
Originally Posted By fkurucz So much for the fears that Bush's "right wing" appointees would "turn back the clock".
Originally Posted By woody The Supreme Court should not make any ruling on Abortion until there is a supermajority of conservative judges. There could be more retirements in the next few years.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder woody has no concept apparently of how the Court decides to hear cases.
Originally Posted By woody spp: You're irrelevant. I wasn't commenting on this particular ruling, but others cases that may come to the court's attention. Even so, I was only saying the Abortion ruling should be decided with a supermajority of conservative judges.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder woody: why are you guys suddenly stealing my lines? Got nothing else? The Court will decide an abortion case when the law requires it. There's no such thing as waiting for a "super majority".
Originally Posted By woody I wasn't aware I was taking your lines. You have no concept apparently of how people write posts. (I stole a few key words here with full knowledge)
Originally Posted By woody >>The Court will decide an abortion case when the law requires it. There's no such thing as waiting for a "super majority".<< Nice distraction. It will take a majority to overturn the abortion laws. It is my opinion that a supermajority is better than a mere majority. Nonetheless, you still need a majority, which isn't present in the current court.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder woody, once, just once, write a response without being a prick.
Originally Posted By woody You started this with your prickly response. Do I have to remind you what you said?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Raspberry Torte You really can't get much easier than this, and no one will believe that it took you a whole 2 minutes to make this elegant dessert. The graham wafers turn soft and cakey during the refrigeration time. You can double it, too - to serve more than 4 people I would. Use 2 cups berries (reserve 1/2 cup for garnish), 1 teaspoon of almond extract and 4 cups of whipped topping. Ice 2 sets of 7 graham wafers, set them end to end and ice the whole thing. Ingredients: 1 cup fresh raspberries 1/2 teaspoon almond extract 2 1/2 cups frozen whipped topping, thawed 7 graham wafers (5 x 2 1/2 inch rectangles) Directions: Puree raspberries in food processor. Reserve 1/4 cup. Fold remaining raspberries and almond extract into the whipped topping until blended. Spread one cracker with about 2 heaping tablespoons of raspberry mixture. Top with a second cracker. Continue layering all the crackers with topping. Using a pancake lifter, carefully turn the torte onto its side on a serving plate, so that the crackers are vertical. Frost the top and sides with the remaining topping. Cover and refrigerate for at least 6 hours or overnight. To serve slice into 6 slices. Garnish each slice with a spoonful of reserved raspberry puree.
Originally Posted By FaMulan A little civics lesson. I found the "Rules of the Court" the Court uses and petitioners must use. <a href="http://www.supremecourtus.gov/ctrules/rulesofthecourt.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.supremecourtus.gov/ ctrules/rulesofthecourt.pdf</a> Everything is spelled out as to all the minute details required to file a petition to ask the SCOTUS to review a case and from my scan, there are a very many technicalities that can make the case get no farther than a clerk's office.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By MissesAnngie here is the most best solution to our supreme court problem. why not let that arm and not the other legs be amputated from our our goveornmet body so the other two legs will share the amputated power. we could have a 2 appendige government like very old englend which is in Europe.
