tvc184

True but that is a completely different issue.

She is not culpable. There are many such protections under the law. For example when a woman has in vitro fertilization, fertilized eggs might be intentionally or accidentally destroyed. Do we charge a doctor with Capital Murder and sentence him to death? I am sure by some if the responses here that would be a good option.

No it isn't. I disagree with many of their decisions from abortion to eminent domain to Obamacare, etc. It is however the law and people including the states must comply until overturned. That means the article, like I have shown, is bogus in its claims or implications. Instead of commenting on your article you are now hung up on a SCOTUS ruling from 160 years ago. So here is the deal. At the moment TX is forced to comply with the mandate. TX has even gone so far as making it as difficult as possible to get abortions by passing a law that has reduced the number of locations where one could be performed. The article that you posted specifically brings up a 13 year old law that protects unborn children except in the case of those required abortions. Apparently you agree with the article and think that law is ridiculous.

What was shocking about the performance?

Yep. What does that have to do with this? Texas has to allow abortions. Unless the SCOTUS changes their ruling, that is the law. The Texas laws are like other states and other situations where there is a distinction between parties to an offense. Like I showed, by the letter of the law a doctor commits either a felony or misdemeanor every time he/she gives a shot or performs many other medical procedures. For that reason laws have to have stated exemptions. That same is true for parents, football players, various workers, etc. They all violate the law if those exemptions were not built into the law. In this situation where the law must allow abortions and must therefore have those exemptions for doctors and the mother, should the killing of children by other people then be exempt? Let's a relative of yours is pregnant and some criminal commits a crime against the her and it kills the unborn child. It could be an assault, traffic accident, attempted murder or anything else. Should that person get away with the killing of the baby because abortions are legal? That is roughly the point that the article is making. If abortions are legal, how can you charge another person for criminally killing an unborn child. If that is your belief, great. Since abortion by a medical professional is legal then any killing of an unborn child should be legal.

A bunch of ultra liberal Yankees vote for two guys that were born in NY, NY. Stunning............

I don't completely disagree with you but it is a common statement in many discussions to say, "how far we have fallen" or "today we blah blah blah". In truth people have always been that way. I think you might find some eras in the past where there was much more debauchery than in current times. In the area of abortions, I would not be surprised to find abortions before Christ was born. There are no new sins. Some may be more in the open now.

This is a typically slanted article that ignores reality or many other similar laws or situations. It is made to look like TX has stupid laws.... which they may but not in this instance. Of course if you are anti-abortion then this seems like some valid point, which it isn't. First, like it or not, the US Supreme Court has said that abortion is legal and must be legal in all states. Since that is a legal fact, do you then let another person get away with murder simply because abortion is legal? Do people believe that life does legally begin at conception allow a person other than a doctor to kill an unborn child? But let's forget about abortion for the moment. By the letter of the law, if your doctor gives you a flu vaccine, he can get a year in jail. If he gives your 10 year old child the same thing, he can get up to 10 years in prison. If a police officer arrrests a 16 year old, the officer can get 10 years in prison and so on. If your son tackles the quarterback on an opposing high school team then he can spend years in juvenile detention or the county jail depending on his age. All of those laws say something like "this law does not apply to_______" or "it is an exception to this offense if committed by a _________" or "it is a defense to prosecution that _________". This is typical in all laws and it has to be that way. If not and a guy breaks into your home and you have to kill him to defend your family then you might go to jail for life. Again however, the law says killing in that situation is lawful. I am against abortion in belief but this article is for the most part nonsense.

Cyclical. Toss in world travel, particular from third world countries and mass migrations. You can add insult to injury by 24 hour media that sensationalizes a story. There are almost 100 million cases of Dengue Fever each year from almost 400 million infections according to Webmd. Get over 200 in the USA on a tropical island and it is made to seem like the Second Coming is at hand.

I can't remotely see this happening. That simply is not the way politics works. You would have 2 Hispanic American sons of Cuban immigrants. It would be like Hillary choosing another old white female to run along side of her. I am not knocking the choices, just can't see it happening.

I think that was the plan all along. The guy wanted to see how much press or posts he could get just like someone putting out that some celebrity has died when the celebrity has not. Let's start a rumor and see how far we can run with it or see what kind of emotion it stirs up. And naturally, the masses complied..............

Sanders has the same appeal to people as Trump. The details do not matter. They love the outspokenness of them and view their words with rose colored glasses. It matters little of what they say but how they say it. Although they generally say opposite opinions during the campaign, it would not surprise me if Trump or Sanders don't get the nomination that the supporters of either switched to the other guy. That would mean that a person would support two people of completely opposite opinions simply because of the way they say it.

I saw Trump on the television tonight say that Carson was a great guy and something like an honorable man and was cheated and blah blah blah. A couple of months ago he was calling Carson a liar because in his book (from several years ago) he was claiming to have a bad temper and had overcome it. Trump said that Carson cannot be trusted. Trump never tried to slam Cruz early when Trump was beating up on everyone else. He said that he might choose Cruz for his VP. Then Cruz came up in the polls and a couple of weeks ago Trump called him stupid. Now he thinks that the Iowa Republican caucus should take all of Cruz's votes away.... giving Trump the win. Anyone else see a pattern in this?

I was at a Subway in Port Arthur about 10 years ago with a coworker. He asked for a 6" something or other. When it was my turn I asked for a 12" sandwich with wheat bread and blah blah blah. The girl behind the counter answered, "Sorry we don't have that". I tried again thinking that she didn't understand me... I want a 12" wheat. "We don't have that". Okay, make it a 12" white. "Sir, we don't have that. At the time I am looking at the bread rolls and wondering what she was talking about. When I tried to order again she said (and I am glad I had a witness), "Sir, all we have is foot long and 6" sandwiches..... we don't have 12" sandwiches". After a few seconds of my coworker and I looking at each other dumbfounded, I apologized for my mistake and ordered the 12" wheat.

They are just games. The good players or teams are not allowed to participate? If it is "just a game", why all the whining? I can't think of any better person to learn against other than the best.

I don't know how old the little dribblers were but this story is about high school aged girls. This year in football Nederland got beaten in the second round of the football playoffs 63-30. Was it a flubbed game by Nederland or was George Ranch that good? They won the state championship game by a score of 56-0. Imagine a team good enough to go against the final team left standing in the state and beat them like they were a junior high school team. I think maybe Nederland was cheated along with all the other schools because they played a team that was too talented and coached. Let's strip GR of their championship, they should have been denied playing as they were too good. Fair enough? Oh yeah, while we are at it, every team that made the playoffs needs a state championship trophy...... Sorry but when they reach high school age, there is no excuse for kicking teams out. Five and six year olds? I can understand that to a point.

Yep, he is a whiner and a crybaby when he doesn't get his way. Apparently that is what a lot of people are looking for although we already have one in office now. In a lot of ways he reminds me of Obama but merely claims to be from the other side of the aisle.

As to tonight's debate, Trump's hard core followers will still be following him tomorrow. The only issue is how much of his support will drop by fence sitters or independent voters. I think it is a coin toss. It might hurt him badly as in maybe a 10% drop in support but with Trump, it could result in an increase by the same amount with absolutely nothing to justify it other than his rock star status, much like Obama.

Yes, Fox threw Trump out and refused to................. In truth Fox had nothing to do with the Miss USA pageant controversy. Uuuuultra liberal NBC dropped the pageant and the some (or all) judges dropped out after Trump made comments about illegal aliens. Fox had nothing to do with anything other than reporting it like every other news media.

Except the good team that could actually earn one ..................

Is what they did against the law? If not how are they "above the law"? Not liking something doesn't mean that it is illegal or above the law. Rollover is a man made pass that changed the ecosystem for fun. People that are adamant about keeping it always talk about the memories like that is a good reason not to change. I am not sure that closing it won't result in better fishing and end the unnatural erosion that man put in for "fun". I am not against the pass but kind of like the idea of going back to its original condition.

It might be hard to believe but the above post was in humor.What is not a fallacy is that I did shake hands with Ronald Reagan at the same airport and I would never mess up that memory by putting Hillary in the same category.

I didn't have time to do a live thread of the event. I was too busy taking out a bank loan so I could donate $2,700 to my hero and get a photo with her. Now I will be working for another 5 years to pay it back but well worth the sacrifice.

No I don't understand that. Let me google it. Wow, I thought it meant definitive or factual. Now I find out it is akin to a supposition or theoretical. Or perhaps you don't understand the term "facetious" which is a caveat I put after my statement. So how you can google facetious and caveat.

Taste might be the most subjective thing to discuss. One person can absolutely love something and another might think it is the worst tasting food on the planet. That being said......... If you aren't eating at Chaba Thai on Lucas in Beaumont...............