Glad you are back sound like you enjoyed your vacation. Good for you, I am sorry to see while you are back another favorite news anchor from Russian TV the Alyonoa Show is leaving and heading somewhere in California. I do not know if the things SHE covers will EVER get covered here or elsewhere. I will miss the segment what the Mainstream Missed each day. You come close in covering controversial events...but...imho you don't follow up well enough. Like Bradley Manning trial and thee is NO 'Mainstream Media" down covering the hearing, no reporting on decisions or treatment. The waste and fraud in Defense Dept and of course Building 7 in New York. The Republican War on Woman you do the BEST job there is out there so keep at that, even though I "lost" a child to choice...I still remain firmly in the category it was HER decision even if I wanted to keep it. I just dated and married older women who already had children and didn't want any more to avoid the emotional roller coaster. Romney has no opinion that is solid is except what fits the moment in the company and surroundings he's in. He'll be a disaster worse than Bush-Cheney ever were and THAT is saying a lot. But it cannot really hurt Obama to keep calling him out on GitMo, Manning, another Drone Strike in Pakistan that they cut of supply routes again...AND a "new" scandal about generals and senior pentagon officials and a Kabul Hospital where patients looked like they were in Nazi Germany instead of a country receiving BILLIONS in aid for that stuff alone. There's been only ONE hearing in Congress, no mention from DOD or WH and the General is still serving without reprimand or "flack" for this two year story that broke out by three whistle blowers. In these times I wonder if the Whistle blowers will get Obama's blow-back rather than the Generals and the DOD? Oh and since I still am not smoking cannabis, though still tout and post about its legalization, the US Government is holding 17,000 yes Seventeen thousand patents that show it KILLS ... not just "cures with side effects" but KILLS Cancer Cells while leaving regular cells alone and even improving regular cell growth and vitality. Laws of Marijuana Defies All Reason and Logic http://www.ow.ly/c5qHs

Specifically all 17,000 in a pdf : http://norml.org/pdf_files/NORML_Clinical_Applications_for_Cannabis_and_Cannabinoids.pdf

So welcome back ... did you try a man yet? You once said on air you might give a go. :)

All the Best

Bob...:D

IRANIAN BANK FRAUD NETS DEATH SENTENCES

For those of you that haven't been put to sleep, here's a related story to the above links about Iran, the economy, and financial evildoers (I'm looking at you, Mittens!):

An Iranian court just sentenced four people to DEATH for financial misconduct in a big prosecution involving fraud and theft of government bank funds. Two others got life sentences in Iranian prisons. A Bunch more got 25 years or so in Iranian prisons for participating in the conspiracy. Link to follow.

Why can't our prosecutors learn something from Iran and start sending our financial miscreants to Attica (or the equivalent)??

Yeah!!! I too,,, want to thank youses for what is almost a militant leftist place...

I like to see the right outflanked by the progressives pushing for the death penalty for rapists and, placeing tracking devices in all felons so as to put an end to crime generally,,.

Amazing how insightful, even prophetic this man was. As far back as 1968 Pope Paul VI had wisdom beyond the times in which he lived.

Humae Vitae'

Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.

Limits to Man's Power

Consequently, unless we are willing that the responsibility of procreating life should be left to the arbitrary decision of men, we must accept that there are certain limits, beyond which it is wrong to go, to the power of man over his own body and its natural functions—limits, let it be said, which no one, whether as a private individual or as a public authority, can lawfully exceed. These limits are expressly imposed because of the reverence due to the whole human organism and its natural functions, in the light of the principles We stated earlier, and in accordance with a correct understanding of the "principle of totality" enunciated by Our predecessor Pope Pius XII. (21)

Concern of the Church

18. It is to be anticipated that perhaps not everyone will easily accept this particular teaching. There is too much clamorous outcry against the voice of the Church, and this is intensified by modern means of communication. But it comes as no surprise to the Church that she, no less than her divine Founder, is destined to be a "sign of contradiction." (22) She does not, because of this, evade the duty imposed on her of proclaiming humbly but firmly the entire moral law, both natural and evangelical.

Since the Church did not make either of these laws, she cannot be their arbiter—only their guardian and interpreter. It could never be right for her to declare lawful what is in fact unlawful, since that, by its very nature, is always opposed to the true good of man.

Further one reads:

Appeal to Public Authorities

23. And now We wish to speak to rulers of nations. To you most of all is committed the responsibility of safeguarding the common good. You can contribute so much to the preservation of morals. We beg of you, never allow the morals of your peoples to be undermined. The family is the primary unit in the state; do not tolerate any legislation which would introduce into the family those practices which are opposed to the natural law of God. For there are other ways by which a government can and should solve the population problem—that is to say by enacting laws which will assist families and by educating the people wisely so that the moral law and the freedom of the citizens are both safeguarded.

Seeking True Solutions

We are fully aware of the difficulties confronting the public authorities in this matter, especially in the developing countries. In fact, We had in mind the justifiable anxieties which weigh upon them when We published Our encyclical letter Populorum Progressio. But now We join Our voice to that of Our predecessor John XXIII of venerable memory, and We make Our own his words: "No statement of the problem and no solution to it is acceptable which does violence to man's essential dignity; those who propose such solutions base them on an utterly materialistic conception of man himself and his life. The only possible solution to this question is one which envisages the social and economic progress both of individuals and of the whole of human society, and which respects and promotes true human values." (26) No one can, without being grossly unfair, make divine Providence responsible for what clearly seems to be the result of misguided governmental policies, of an insufficient sense of social justice, of a selfish accumulation of material goods, and finally of a culpable failure to undertake those initiatives and responsibilities which would raise the standard of living of peoples and their children. (27) If only all governments which were able would do what some are already doing so nobly, and bestir themselves to renew their efforts and their undertakings! There must be no relaxation in the programs of mutual aid between all the branches of the great human family. Here We believe an almost limitless field lies open for the activities of the great international institutions.

To Scientists

24. Our next appeal is to men of science. These can "considerably advance the welfare of marriage and the family and also peace of conscience, if by pooling their efforts they strive to elucidate more thoroughly the conditions favorable to a proper regulation of births." (28) It is supremely desirable, and this was also the mind of Pius XII, that medical science should by the study of natural rhythms succeed in determining a sufficiently secure basis for the chaste limitation of offspring. (29) In this way scientists, especially those who are Catholics, will by their research establish the truth of the Church's claim that "there can be no contradiction between two divine laws—that which governs the transmitting of life and that which governs the fostering of married love." (30)

And those Catholic Drs and Nurses faced with the recent HHS mandate?

To Doctors and Nurses

27. Likewise we hold in the highest esteem those doctors and members of the nursing profession who, in the exercise of their calling, endeavor to fulfill the demands of their Christian vocation before any merely human interest. Let them therefore continue constant in their resolution always to support those lines of action which accord with faith and with right reason. And let them strive to win agreement and support for these policies among their professional colleagues. Moreover, they should regard it as an essential part of their skill to make themselves fully proficient in this difficult field of medical knowledge. For then, when married couples ask for their advice, they may be in a position to give them right counsel and to point them in the proper direction. Married couples have a right to expect this much from them.

The ends do not justify the means:

Neither is it valid to argue, as a justification for sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive, that a lesser evil is to be preferred to a greater one, or that such intercourse would merge with procreative acts of past and future to form a single entity, and so be qualified by exactly the same moral goodness as these. Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good," it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (18)—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general. Consequently, it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong.

Lawful Therapeutic Means

15. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever. (19)

All that from as one of the most profound exericises of wisdom as far back as 1968. Warning of the currently stated "slippery slope theory" Paul VI warns of pending doom is governments are allowed to coerse populations of citizens (China) into acts against nature. Forced abortions. One child policies etc. We didn't listen then. Maddow wants you to by deaf on these words today. but what goes around comes around.

You are what you kill. So should the next generation exclude YOU from life and this world's goodness (euthenasia) you have no one to blame but YOU.

Good Luck

Wait, let me get this straight....

Romney wants to "overturn Roe v. Wade [a federal Supreme Court decision] and return these issues to the States" yet at the same time "absolutely" would support a Constitutional amendment that would have established the definition of life at conception...

So, what's his criteria to let the States decide something versus having the federal government impose its will on the States?

Once again, the usual Maddow fails. Starting with a false pajorative and exacting/ compounding lie upon lie to make a false point. Will she ever learn?

More over:

Maddow tweets:

On question, Mr Romney: Do you agree with what your party is doing: re-abortion bans for rape/incest victims? @ maddow

The "Rhodes Scholar" can't type? On question? Heck I can do better than that! And I s@ck at typing.

You wonder why the Romney camp doesn't respond? Because your question is based on a LIE stupid! Just like the entire segment was. Based on a false presuppositon. A LIE! So your demanding a presuppositional apologetics.

Go back to the White House and get your name once again on the WH guest list when you get your latest "marching orders" from the Obama campaign.

Geeesh, what a "John Kerry" maddow moment.

Arizona's Pro Life Victory Law! vs Maddow's false abortion laws story.

Arizona abortion law is upheld by court

Associated Press

Post a comment

ALSO ON PHILLY.COM

Judge says Arizona's abortion ban can take effect

PHILLY.COM's TOP FIVE PICKS

City cleans up after water-main breaks

Killings shine light on quiet community

Airships take off again at Lakehurst

Has Corbett declared war on women in Pa.?

Book excerpt: The betrayal of the American Dream

PHOENIX - Arizona's ban on abortions starting at 20 weeks of pregnancy will take effect this week as scheduled after a federal judge ruled Monday that the new law is constitutional.

U.S. District Judge James Teilborg said the statute may prompt a few pregnant women who are considering abortion to make the decision earlier. But he said the law is constitutional because it does not prohibit women from making the decision to end their pregnancies. He also wrote that the state had provided "substantial and well-documented" evidence that a fetus has the capacity to feel pain during an abortion by at least 20 weeks.

Republican Gov. Jan Brewer signed the measure into law in April, making Arizona one of 10 states to enact types of 20-week bans.

Arizona's ban, set to take effect Thursday, prohibits abortions starting at 20 weeks of pregnancy except in medical emergencies. That is a change from the state's current ban at viability, which is the ability to survive outside the womb and which generally is considered to be about 24 weeks. A normal pregnancy lasts about 40 weeks.

The New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights said it and another group that challenged the law plan to file an emergency appeal of Monday's decision with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

"Today's decision casts aside decades of legal precedent, ignoring constitutional protections for reproductive rights that have been upheld by the United States Supreme Court for nearly 40 years and threatening women's health and lives," said Nancy Northup, the center's president and chief executive.

Teilborg held a hearing Wednesday on a request from abortion-rights groups that he temporarily block the law's enforcement.

The abortion-rights groups' lawyer said during the hearing that the ban crosses a clear line on what U.S. Supreme Court rulings permit, and it intrudes on women's health decisions at a key point in pregnancy. Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery said the state legislature was justified in enacting the ban to protect the health of women and shield fetuses from pain.

A second Arizona antiabortion law enacted this year also faces a court challenge. That law would bar public funding for non-abortion health care provided by abortion doctors and clinics. Both laws are among many approved by Arizona's Republican-led legislature. The other laws include restrictions on clinic operations, mandates for specific disclosures, and a prohibition on a type of late-term abortion.

Attorney Janet Crepps of the Center for Reproductive Rights argued at Wednesday's hearing that under Supreme Court decisions starting with the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion, states can regulate only how abortions are performed, not ban them, before a fetus is viable.

Mitt Romney will be the next Bill Clinton. He will bring prosperity back to America. Let's give him a try.

Same story, different angle. truth or Maddow Lies.

One source, The Hill, politics and interest intended:

Pro Life source, the political significance of a judicial decision's affects on a congressional vote Tuesday, today!

U.S. HOUSE VOTES TUESDAY ON D.C. LATE ABORTION BAN, AS

WASHINGTON (July 30, 2012) — One day before the U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on a bill to overturn the current policy in the District of Columbia of allowing legal abortion, for any reason, until the moment of birth, a federal judge in Arizona today upheld a new state law generally prohibiting abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy (18 weeks fetal age), based primarily on “the substantial and well-documented evidence that an unborn child has the capacity to feel pain during an abortion by at least twenty weeks gestational age.”

The ruling by U.S. District Judge James A. Teilborg came in a legal challenge brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights and the ACLU on behalf of abortion providers, which asserted that the law was unconstitutional because it restricted abortions prior to “viability.” The Arizona law generally allows abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy (18 weeks after fertilization) only when necessary to prevent the mother’s death or “serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function.”

Judge Teilborg specifically found that “by 20 weeks, sensory receptors develop all over the child’s body” and “when provoked by painful stimuli, such as a needle, the child reacts, as measured by increases in the child’s stress hormones, heart rate, and blood pressure.” Teilborg quoted a U.S. Supreme Court decision describing the D&E method of abortion used at this age: “[F]riction causes the fetus to tear apart. For example, a leg might be ripped off the fetus . . .” He described another method also used: “In an induction procedure, the fetus is injected with a medication that induces a heart attack.’”

Judge Teilborg continued, “Given the nature of D&Es and induction abortions, . . . this Court concludes that the State has shown a legitimate interest in limiting abortions past 20 weeks gestational age.”

“This recognition by a federal court that a general prohibition on abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy is constitutional, based chiefly on ‘substantial and well-documented evidence that an unborn child has the capacity to feel pain during an abortion,’ makes it even more indefensible for any House member to vote to continue the current policy of legal abortion for any reason until the moment of birth in our nation’s capital,” said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC).

The bill to be voted on Tuesday by the U.S. House, the District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 3803), is strongly backed by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the nationwide federation of state right-to-life organizations.

The Council of the District of Columbia, employing authority delegated by Congress, repealed the entire D.C. abortion law. Thus, in the nation’s capital, abortion is currently legal for any reason through all nine months of pregnancy. (See confirmation by the Associated Press, here.) H.R. 3803, sponsored by Congressman Trent Franks (R-Az.), was approved by the House Judiciary Committee on July 18, and is being brought to the House floor on a fast-track procedure. In the bill, Congress adopts findings that by 22 weeks of pregnancy (20 weeks after fertilization), the unborn child has the capacity to experience great pain. (Note that this is two weeks later than the line established in the Arizona law upheld today.) The bill prohibits abortion after that point, except when an acute physical condition endangers the life of the mother. Seven states have already enacted legislation very similar to H.R. 3803 (Nebraska, Kansas, Idaho, Oklahoma, Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana); no court orders have blocked enforcement of any of those laws.

“This roll call will be a landmark – the House has never before voted on the question of whether to endorse legal abortion for any reason until birth,” said NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson. “Under the Constitution, members of Congress and the President are ultimately accountable for the current abortion-until-birth policy. Any lawmaker who votes against this bill is voting to ratify the extreme policy currently in effect in the nation’s capital, where abortion is perfectly legal for any reason until the moment of birth.”

“If we can achieve a big majority on this groundbreaking initial vote, it will lay the foundation to achieve legal protection for pain-capable unborn babies in the not-distant future,” Johnson said.

The District Clause of the U.S. Constitution (found in Article I, Section 8) provides that “Congress shall . . . exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District . . .” Like any other “legislation,” of course, it is subject to the president’s review. The White House has not yet taken any position on H.R. 3803, although it has 223 House cosponsors.

According to a nationwide live telephone poll of 1,000 adults (MOE +/-3.1%), conducted July 12-15, 2012 by The Polling Company, Inc./WomanTrend, 58% of American adults would be more likely to vote for lawmakers who support this legislation (62% of women were more likely). In a separate question, 63% favored a policy of not permitting abortion anywhere “after the point where substantial evidence says that the unborn child can feel pain unless it is “necessary to save a mother’s life.” (The questions and response totals are available in a document here.)

The NRLC website provides links to abundant documentation on the scientific authorities that support the bill’s findings that unborn children, by 20 weeks fetal age if not before, have the capacity to experience great pain, here. A compilation of citations to medical journal articles on the subject is posted here. The abortion method most often used at this stage, the “D&E,” is depicted in a medical illustration, here. The poll results and other information on the legislation is also posted at http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/Fetal_Pain/index.html

Founded in 1968, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of 50 state right-to-life affiliates and more than 3,000 local chapters, is the nation’s oldest and largest grassroots pro-life organization.

Rachel, I love your show and think your political researchers do an incredible job. What you don't know about energy however is substantial and you are clearly listening to advocates and ideologues, not energy technologists. Please consider having someone on your show, for example, who understands that you get natural gas in your faucet from shallow gas pockets (ubiquitous) and not from hydraulic fracturing that occurs thousands of feet below the surface. There must have been at least 10 technical errors in your discussion of hydraulic fracturing. You are too good and too fair to include energy nonsense in your narrative.