Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (9895)	8/3/2001 5:41:34 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 10042

I don't recall the Earl Warren court fulminating against judicial activism or against liberal interpretations of the Equal Protection Clause, as the current majority has. This doesn't mean I don't have problems with Roe v. Wade, but you can't argue that the Warren Court sacrificed its own principles. Just principles that you think it ought to have had. The Warren Court followed its own principles.

To: jlallen who wrote (9895)	8/4/2001 4:49:16 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

For some reason its OK to "sacrifice" for demolib causes like abortion but not for anything conservatives might favor. Not that that happened in Bush v. Gore but there certainly is precedent for your version of facts and I don't hear any liberal indignation over Roe v Wade..... I am pro-choice. And yet if Roe v. Wade was not legislation from the bench, what was it? I have spent years looking throught the Constitution for a "right to privacy"; it's just not in any copy I can find.