Re:Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
by remarkEon on Thursday June 30, 2022 @08:06PM
(#31940398)
I can't parse what this means. Is the idea that we are to assume malice of intent to the reasons the Court does things, and that "consistency" is not a legitimate reason to argue about it? How do you know what the "true" reason is?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
[dead]
Re:Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
by Tomte on Friday July 01, 2022 @12:52AM
(#31942518)
It would be nice if you at least kept up the appearance of polite discussion.
Faux "quotations" make you look much worse than your nemesis. Projecting invented intentions is not okay, either. Not to speak of clearly breaking the site's guidelines.
Re:Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
by rayiner on Friday July 01, 2022 @12:41AM
(#31942458)
What is this “right” to an abortion and who decided it exists?
It’s worth noting that the EU Court of Human Rights has repeatedly refused to recognize a “right” to abortion under the EU Convention on Human Rights: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A,_B_and_C_v_Ireland
There’s no right to an abortion in most of Europe. Legislatures allow abortion to varying degrees, but it’s seen as a matter of legislation, not “rights.”