The E wrote:Juuust gonna hijack this thread for a bit.
It's funny. Back when the whole Kavanaugh thing went down, one of the issues raised was that an ideologue like Kavanaugh would, inevitably, cause harm to women's liberty by working against Roe v Wade.
Guess what:
Here's them trying (and failing, thank Satan) to do just that.
What I would like to point out here is Kavanaugh's dissent. He argues (and this is mind-boggling to me), that to block a law before it has taken effect would be premature; He opines that since that law allows for a transitional period, the right time to object to a law would be only after that transitional period has begun and thus the law's impact could be assessed.
Yo, TFLY, resident Galaxy Brain: As designated intelligent Trumpet, I call upon you to explain how incredibly stupid that argument is.
In further Supreme Court news:
The establishment clause is apparently void.
Apparently, it is perfectly fine under the US Constitution to deny a person about to be executed the spiritual support they desire.
(Just imagine the outrage if the person to be executed was christian and the prison only provided an imam...)
One of the liberal slogans is KEEP ABORTION SAFE AND LEGAL.
The logical implication is that if abortion is outlawed, many pregnant women will get "back alley abortions" from unqualified hacks which will result in high, maternal mortality. (The preborn infant mortality rate is nearly 100% with some survivors actually being executed after they are born alive). The Louisiana law simply requires that abortionists have admitting priveledges at a nearby hospital.
This obviously ensures that if there are serious, life threatening complications to the mother the procedure, the patient can promptly receive more advanced care at a hospital from her abortion provider who is familiar with her case history rather than loose valuable time for admission and for another physician to evaluate her.
More importantly, this obviously ensures that the abortionist is a qualified physician in good standing with his/her peers rather than an incompetent physician who has lost his admitting priveledges because his peers believe that he/she has demonstrated incompetence or negligence can not get admitting priveledges because hs/she is not qualified. Hospitals are a patient's primary defense against incompetent, negligent or unqualified physicians who have not screwed up badly enough to loose their medical license. Physicians who can not obtain and maintain admitting privedledges to a local hospital have very limited options for practice. Performing abortions is one of those options in many states.
Of course I have despaired of arguing the Pro Life pisition and now advocate that ABORTION SHOULD BE SAFE, LEGAL, MANDATORY AND RETROACTIVE. Hell, Immight efen become an abortionist myself by offerring post birth abortions to adults who have demonstrated that they are a miserable excuse for a human being.
As for the condemned rapist/murderer wanting to have his Iman present at his execution, I imagine that the prohibition was distressing. His Iman had no doubt comforted him by explaining that under Sharia law, raping and killing infidel women is not a sin.