The Alito leak brought abortion front and center again
A leak out of the Supreme Court suddenly made abortion and Roe v Wade the main topic of outrage from the Left.
But, aside from whether or not the opinion aligns with yours, what are the reasons that the Roe and Casey decisions should be overturned? Are there reasons (that are not religious ones or regarding morality) that those decisions don’t hold up legally?
Listen in to find out. As a bonus, I’ll read the introduction to the Alito opinion after the main show so you can some of his reasoning.
Yet another YouTube video was create of some guy claiming to be a doctor and claiming that lockdowns should not be the way we deal with this virus. But this is not just another crank.
The nomination hearings for Judge Amy Coney Barrett went on last week and they demonstrated the stark difference between how Democrats and Republicans view the role of the courts.
When Facebook and Twitter block posting of an article, there’s clearly something going wrong with social media (and clearly it’s an article worth reading).
The death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Trump’s nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to take her place has turned DC more upside down than it already was.
How does Trump’s choice really change the makeup of the Court? And should the seating of a new Justice really be this big of a deal?
The Supreme Court did it again. Once, they created a “right” to abortion out of whole cloth. Another time, they redefined the word “marriage”. Now they’ve redefined the word “sex” in such a way that it could very well bleed through to other parts of law and culture.
Is this how a “representative republic” is supposed to work? (Hint: No.)
There they go again. Democrats are ready to declare Brett Kavanaugh guilt over one more unproven allegation. We have a judicial doctrine in this country; innocent until proven guilty. The Left have decided to dispense with it yet again.
Instead, it’s all about politics. Listen in to this episode which is slightly-more-than 10 minutes or less.
I think we can sometimes go overboard looking for ill intent in comment from “the other side”, whichever side that may be. Some conservatives did just that, in my opinion, over some comments about the Notre Dame fire.
The Supreme Court will be hearing 3 cases next session that will be part of a continuing effort in this country to reconcile the rights of various groups of sexual identities and preferences (groups that seem to be created daily) with the First Amendment right to freedom of religion.
Is it OK to rape if the culture you come from has normalized it?
Why is Havana crumbling? What are the costs, and is it affecting their great (according to Michael Moore) health care?
And is depicting bullying necessary when telling an anti-bullying story? Some people don’t think so. Let’s let Rudolph demonstrate why it is. Merry Christmas!
Right on the heels of the last episode, comes this one. I’ve held off saying too much about the confirmation process for Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. That’s mostly because so much was changing so fast that anything I said about it would be old and stale by the time it got to you. Some of the political podcasts I listen to had that problem, so I wasn’t going to get too detailed with my comments.
But he’s been voted out of committee, and I heard both sides during the hearings, both from Ford and Kavanaugh, and from friends and pundits, that I think my thoughts have solidified. I’m releasing this earlier than normal because it seems the FBI investigation is going to start changing the conversation further, and I don’t want us to forget what happened during the actual hearings.
I can usually figure out what I want to say pretty early in the week, but this week I just couldn’t get excited about any particular topic.
It’s not that there wasn’t any news worth discussing or topics worth pontificating on. It’s that sometimes I wonder if we’ve lost the ability to have a good, honest discussion. You know that “honest conversation” this country is always wanting to have about race or poverty or abortion? Is that even possible?
