To: Hillary's Lovely Legs
On the basis of what authority should federally appointed judges be outlawing abortions?
2 posted on
01/31/2004 8:28:41 PM PST by
Huck
(Hold on to your wallet--the President's awake!)
To: Huck
The Patriot Act is more nuanced that strongly for or strongly against. Kerry, who for all I know voted for the thing, says he wants to take out some provisions. I heard him mention the infamous "sneak and peek" provisions. I don't remember the details, but I recall looking at that subject and I think I wanted sneak and peek out, too. I wonder what the President's position on that is. I don't have to wonder what Ashcroft's position is.
4 posted on
01/31/2004 8:31:53 PM PST by
Huck
(Hold on to your wallet--the President's awake!)
To: Huck
They don't have the authority.... abortion is a purely state matter and it should be sent back to the state legislatures.
7 posted on
01/31/2004 8:34:13 PM PST by
GeronL
(www.ArmorforCongress.com ............... Support a FReeper for Congress)
To: Huck
Constitutionally, abortions are none of the court's business. They inserted themselves into it with Roe v. Wade. The congress should write the laws (actually the state legislatures should write the laws). Your statement makes no sense, as the judges currently are overturning laws passed by the elected representatives. Bush wishes to appoint judges that will recognize the constitutional limits on their authority.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson