I'm sure of it. People have talked trash about Teddy for decades and it hasn't made one bit of difference to his legislative effectiveness. I hope his influence is not waning, personally, because I like his politics, but the man is getting older, no doubt about that. And then we'll be stuck breaking in a new one.
I'm ashamed to admit that you are right. When I was in London I did bring back three kilts and several other things made in various tartans. I must have chosen well because the items all came with hangtags that gave the proper information so I knew what they were.
I wore those kilts until I moved to Florida where there isn't really a winter.
I wonder now if the reason Nu Yawkers didn't know was because like me, they only knew the word plaid.
Was it Gill who said something about a McCain/Leiberman ticket? In your wildest dreams did you ever dream there would be a contest that included such a group?
I guess that could be considered a sign of better times ahead. At least I hope so.
Constitutional Law was my specialty, so I'll take the hand-off.
Griswold was the Planned Parenthood case. Connecticut law provided for fines for use of contraception, and PlPhd was charged as an accessory for providing contraceptives to a *married* couple. "This law, however, operates directly on an intimate relation of husband and wife and their physician's role in one aspect of that relation." The holding was that government control "may not be achieved by means which ... invade the area of protected freedoms." (i.e., right to privacy in the marital bed)
Roe was an attack on Texas abortion laws making it a crime, except when necessary to save the life of the mother. "The right of privacy ... is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." It is "primarily, a medical decision, and basic responsibility for it must rest with the physician."
There was discussion in Roe that "the word 'person,' as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn," but right to privacy was the fundamental point of the ruling.
Thanks for the info. I did Google, and learn that I was wrong about it being a matter of spending federal funds.
I STILL believe that it should not be a political issue, but a woman's conscience!
I remember when my daughter went off to college in 1980 we had Mom/daughter talk. I remember telling her to be safe etc etc. IF she happened to get pregnant,without a deep involvement, abortion was a reasonable decision, in that she had her entire future ahead of her. I was surprised when she disagreed with me. That was when I first learned that she was an adult LOL.
any man who can not put his hand over his heart in respect for the pledge of allegiance to the flag or Star Spangle banner while he is running for president does not deserve the honor of pres due to his own of lack of respect for the country.
Hey, if that's what's important to you, go for it. I'm more interested in whether he stands by his word (rather than vetoing funding for contracts that he sent teams to negotiate) and is consistent in his politics (rather than voting to go to war but then complaining about how the war is run). Whether he puts his hand over his heart or simply stands attentively doesn't matter nearly as much to me as whether he's competent, but we're all allowed our own opinion and our own vote.
It's how we were treated when at Grammar School in the 1950s. Teachers always addressed boys by their surname and girls by their Christian name. There was a tendency for boys to refer to each other by their surname.
It's disrespect in my book. My students do it too. Jean-Jacques Rousseau is "Rousseau" but Mary Wollstonecraft is "Mary." I tell them that if they haven't been drinking with her, they can't call her Mary.
InspirePoint website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.