Liberal Logic – Talking Points: I’m pro-choice

10400055_10153194399313598_5473502152612928775_n

See also Liberal Logic – Talking Points: It’s a Choice

Liberals love to claim the label of the ‘Pro-Choice Party.’

Using the word ‘choice’ to refer to abortion makes them feel nice, warm, and fuzzy. It erases the guilt of supporting organized mass murder for profit from their conscience, and instead replaces it with the happy feeling of doing something good by supporting a woman’s so-called ‘right to choose.’

The only problem with this is that liberals are only the ‘party of choice’ when that choice adheres to their preconceived agendas. Specifically, liberals only support ‘choice’ when it comes to a woman’s decision to abort (read kill) an unborn child. Continue reading →

Liberal Logic – Talking Points: It’s a choice

360px-Prochoice.svg

See also Name-calling

This is easily the most cited argument in support of what the blogger Matt Walsh has called “the highest sacrament in the Church of Liberalism.” (Matt Walsh on TheBlaze) Namely, abortion.

Many liberals seem intellectually unable to come up with better support of one of their most prized social reforms. Granted, there are some truly intelligent liberals, but they are rare and few in between. Continue reading →

Daily Signal – What You Need to Know About Gay Marriage and the Supreme Court

By Mike Licht

by Ryan T. Anderson, Daily Signal, April 21, 2015


One week from today, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments about gay marriage. Here’s what you need to know.

  1. There simply is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that requires all 50 states to redefine marriage. Whatever people may think about marriage as a policy matter, everyone should be able to recognize the Constitution does not settle this question.

Unelected judges should not insert their own policy preferences about marriage and then say the Constitution requires them everywhere. Continue reading →

Contracts – Defenses to Formation

In contract law, four requirements must be met in order for there to be a contract. The first three elements are offer, acceptance, and consideration. They are dealt with fully elsewhere. The fourth is applicable defenses. It is vital to fully understand every defense because a single valid defense can render an entire contract voidable, unenforceable, or even completely void.

Contracts are also unenforceable if there is no consideration, but that also is a whole different subject, with its own special exceptions, limitations and other nuances. So, instead of trying to get an overview of the entirety of the law of contracts, let us get a general overview of the defenses to formation of a contract.

There are nine defenses. They are the statute of frauds, incapacity, illegality, the parol evidence rule (which is more of an evidence rule, as its name indicates), unconscionability, mistake, misrepresentation, duress, and undue influence. Continue reading →