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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (166561)	7/20/2005 12:11:55 AM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

With Roberts, women will become childbearing cattle on becoming pregnant as soon as he can make it happen. It's why the chimp picked him. Other than that, he might be a pretty good pick. I'm glad it's not an issue for me.

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (166561)	7/20/2005 1:21:43 AM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Just to make one matter clear, I am pro-choice. HOWEVER, the language you cite simply makes my point: there is no real justification in the Constitution for the decision in Roe v. Wade. The Court knew what decision it wanted and invented constructs to justify its wants. Roe v. Wade CANNOT be justified from the Constitution. It is the most egregious example of legislation from the bench I know of. The proper way to handle the matter would have been a specific Constitutional amendment legalizing abortion. The pro-abortion forces no there was no way they would ever get that, however. This is also the reason they are so nervous about Roe v. Wade being overturned: they know there is NO WAY they will ever get a Constitutional amendment passed to actually make it legal and they must rely on the Supreme Court finding matters in the Constitution that are not here to justify their position. Those liberals supporting Roe v. Wade should ask themselves one question: Does the rule of law matter or does it not?