Leaderboard

The other card-carrying woman here (though I have been absent a bit!). Anyone impregnated should be able to get her own treatment from a provider who is trained and still willing to perform the procedure. "Late term" is not a thing. "Later abortions" happen after a fetus is expected to be developed to viability and can survive outside the uterus but are necessary due to something non-viable about the fetus (it will never be viable outside a uterus). To force someone to continue growing a fetus that will never grow a brain, or statistically speaking has a 98% chance of not surviving due to ruptured amniotic sac or other complications, or for myriad other medical issues that none of us NOT trained in obstetrics fully understand, is cruel, dangerous and unethical. Anyone trained in the science who is willing to perform the procedure in-office or by medications (has taken an oath to do no harm and still feels the procedure is appropriate), should be able to provide that health care to the patient who wants it.

Late term abortions done for shits and giggles do not happen so going there is going nowhere. Nor is the decision made by a back room coin toss. I can hardly think of a more serious, weighty, and difficult decision to be made. As such, it must be made without any interference by any organization and only by the woman and her doctors. What that means is that I would always err on the side of the chance for abortions being made in error or owing to bad medical advice and not at all owing to some arbitrary point in time you and I agreed upon for what can only be seen as specious reasons.

I'd throw in some "thoughts and prayers".

You're right.

So we actually have something in common. Who would have guessed.

Webersburg in Stellenbosch. really nice place!

Hi Keith, So it would seem: And he warned Trump that additional violations could land him in jail. Donald Trump held in contempt for violating gag order in New York trial - Live Updates - POLITICO Jerry Baumchen

I just knew I'd make something of myself someday. Thank you.

Not for Trump. He gets treated differently than "little people" criminals.

You call this internet complaint line publishing?

Seems to be an issue that may cost the GOP some votes, specially if DNC can create a perception the GOP is gunning for a full national ban.

Before the judge wagging his finger? Jailing him would be lovely but I'm not holding my breath. Better would be a dose of public humiliation, maybe making him stay after court for an hour or two sitting in a corner.

Then in all fairness your post was unsupported slander based on political leanings and not facts or personal knowledge. Might I suggest a retraction?

Might want to remove Barr from the list.

I will say, McCain was a much clearer speaker. Wendy P.

He came out to the winery we were going to jump into. Too windy to jump.

You mean, for example, banning abortions after a "fetal heartbeat" standard? Or negotiating with other men another but more middle ground standard? But in every case taking a degree of autonomy from a women to make their own health care decisions in accordance with their own beliefs? Yes, that would be icky, for sure.

In short, I was playing along with the beat me up game and turning the tables a bit to find the "icky" part. My position still remains the same and I do wish that RvW had not been revoked - because I do believe in the end, the women have a lot more to consider in their personal situation about the issue than men. Cause, ya know - not all men can be trusted to do the right thing.

The Liberal justices really missed an opportunity to ask: If Biden were to order the assassination of the conservative members of this court because of their inability to place law before politics, do you believe Biden would have presidential immunity?

No. You keep wanting to define when the fetus is 'alive'. Well, the sperm cells are alive before fertilization and conception. I'll guess you don't want to go back that far. In ancient times, a baby was considered in various situations after 'quickening'. That is, once it started to move in the womb. There were legal ramifications after that. Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quickening That's typically around 20 weeks, roughly halfway. Ironically, modern medicine can keep a premature baby alive from about the same time. I'd be mostly comfortable with free access to abortion until the fetus is viable outside the womb. After that, for the health of the mother. Which, despite what all the self righteous morons claim, is how it's been. The idea that people are aborting viable fetuses for 'birth control' is ludicrous. And a lie.

This has been his position all along. Wendy may take objection but in my opinion it was time to make him say the icky part out loud and give up the claim of being a moderate. If you would take away agency from another human being based on non-scientific, religion based beliefs, you are not a moderate, you are a part of the far right. If that's who you are so be it, just don't pretend otherwise.

Regardless of your opinion over what goes on inside a woman's body, what right do you claim to force your opinion on that person by legislation. It's none of your business.

Provocation Fridays….. This is the group to ask… If you care to share.. Have you ever had an interesting dream about Cooper or gone on a Cooper inspired adventure? In your dreams have you ever met Cooper? Have you met someone that knew him, a stew, a pilot, an acquaintance of his, or hey - even a spirit …? Have you ever dreamed you solved the case and found Cooper or that missing clue? In your dreams have you ever talked about Cooper with a spouse, an acquaintance, a fellow Vortex member? Has anyone dreamed on one or multiple specific case details in an unusual manner? Have you ever had sequential Cooper dreams day after day? If you could direct your dream to focus on one aspect of the case what would it be? How do you interpret any of these dreams? I'm sure more of your than just myself have been haunted in their dreams by this case...This is all for fun.. if you care to share. .

When you prosecute democrats for their crimes you are "tough on crime." When you prosecute republicans for their crimes you are "weaponizing the justice system."

I’m no longer holding my breath, either. With their antics, DeSantis and Abbott have made the border a national item (it’s high on Massachusetts residents’ priorities because of housing). And the Repubs are refusing to bargain in good faith. My prediction: Trump will make it his top campaign item. He’ll do just as shitty a job this time as last time, but he will head us in a spoils system direction (as opposed to relying on the Civil Service). Theodore Roosevelt would be banging his head against the wall. Im holding my breath now that Trump will die or deteriorate too much before the election. Because Nikki Haley probably beats Biden, and while I don’t love that, she does believe in fixing what seems broke, instead of blowing it up. Wendy P.

yeah I love how state rights are 100% solid and constitutional when it comes to abortion and carrying guns, but trump... well, we really can't trust the states to run elections.

He’s Canadian, he really doesn’t have a dog in this fight. Wendy P.

I agree that transparency is a must. But there is something to be said about protection of the individual being subjected to a disciplinary hearing. Some things should be probably should be handled in private. Perhaps we should give the accused the option of making their case public. But at any rate, pontification in cyberspace doesn't actually do anything. Maybe you should put together a motion and present it at the next BOD meeting that outlines exactly how matters of personal privacy and transparency should be handled in the future.

One thing I'd add is that this is a motion, not a final decision. I'm not a legal beagle, but I'm pretty sure that a judge has to sign the last word in the case, not the plaintiffs lawyer. So I wouldn't expect USPA to hand over a dime until ordered to do so and after exhausting all options.

That's some major pot stirring there, whoever you may be! Well, I'll take a bite.... Interesting to see these "secret" things about the USPA be opened up to view. While the PDF above has a pages of legalize about why the USPA is obligated to pay up the $150,000 as agreed, it all came about because of the stuff described below: (Which must be about the Lodi tandem fatality and all the shady stuff going on there when it comes to fake certifications of instructors.) Mr. G sued the USPA, the court sent it to Mediation and came to an initial sort-of agreement, but the USPA wanted one more change, but Mr G didn't agree. The court then decided that the initial agreement was legally an agreement. So the USPA had agreed to pay the $150,000. Part of the deal was also confidentiality on both parties -- One of those things that's common in the legal world but often seems really slimy to someone not in that profession. The case involves the USPA and so USPA members should have a right to know if something got screwed up, that's costing their organization. I have no dog in this fight but just wanted to summarize what's hidden away in the PDF. Others are free to do a better job. Anyone got a link to the old Lodi fatality thread, or some thread that gets into whatever license suspensions took place, and all that mess with Tandem Instructors having to requalify because their instructor wasn't considered to have been properly rated? One thing I'm wondering about is the statement: I suppose that has been previously established, and agreed to by the USPA prior to the court case? Is there info to that effect available publicly? It sounds like the USPA was pretty upset with all the Lodi stuff, and in effect did an "emergency revocation" of ratings.... but didn't pull out the manual to do so in the prescribed manner, allowing the defendant to make a proper defense.