Jay: I’m not arguing just for the sake of arguing. We either obey the laws as written or we allow judges and prosecutors to get creative with the law to achieve our desired outcome. The latter is judicial activism which is often derided by the Republicans.

Criminal acts are judged at the time they were committed not at the time the crime is detected or the accused is caught. Ms. Cruz’s bad act happened the moment the cocaine entered her bloodstream while pregnant. The fact that the bad act wasn’t detected until Ms. Cruz gave birth doesn’t change the time when the act occurred.

It’s perfectly fine to argue that Maryland law is wrong and should extend child protection laws to the mother’s womb. But that isn’t current Maryland law and to encourage a prosecutor and judge to go outside current law or creatively interpret current law is judicial activism of the worst kind.

If an addiction turns someone into a worthless parasite not worthy of rights or life, you’d better line up a good chunk of the US population against a wall. (Start with Rush Limbaugh)

As a contributor here, a defender of the cause, and the resident Bulldog, it is my duty to run trolls like you off. I have noticed one revisionist type history post on that sham of a blog that you created. BTW, it’s been flagged.

And you are still using that mailguard. Quit hiding.

You have no more right to dump on Jay’s thoughts as mine, or Zaphs, or Lobo’s, or Bob’s, or Amy’s, or Kathy’s or anyone else who has the privelege of contributing on this site.

Start taking a risk in life and I’ll leave you alone. But you are not going to use this as your forum. Now that you have a blog, use it.

You said it was just your commentary I couldn’t post to it. You going back on your original statements?

Troll somewhere else.