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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (228319)	4/8/2005 8:15:39 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573419

The basis for Roe vs Wade is firmly rooted in the Constitution. The constitution doesn't mention a right to privacy, Yes, it does.....in at least two of its amendments. And I think other places as well. nor does it state that this right to privacy specifically applies to abortion. No, of course not. They are applying the right to privacy to abortions because that is the Constitutional provision that is the most appropriate when determining a woman's right to choose. It makes the most sense when looking at a woman's right to control what happens to her body. The constitution gives the federal government no power to regulate in this area but it also places no limitation on state governments. Again, you just don't understand the courts and their powers. Their powers are much broader than you are willing to allow. The courts rule on a subject mainly because of the law. It does not matter what the little guy thinks about the subject, nor the president nor the church. That's why the courts are the best branch of the gov't because they are least affected by bias. Are they prejudiced? Of course........every human is and we have judges who lean right or left. But in the end, they must interpret the Constitution fairly and apply its provisions with even measure, or they will be overruled by a higher court. For an example, there would be very little divergence on the ruling in the Schiavo case whether the judge was liberal or conservative. The law appears to be very clear in this matter. That's why the federal courts declined to review it. And that's the incredible beauty of the courts. They are the fairest, most democratic branch in our gov't. And I will fight to the end in their defense because over the centuries, it is they who have best defended our democracy......not Congress, not the GOP, not the Dems, not the president, not the people. The courts. ted