Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Conviction to Protect the Unborn -- Arlen Specter vs. Janice Rogers Brown
Human Events Online ^ | April 6, 2004 | Chris Field

Posted on 04/07/2004 6:29:55 AM PDT by bigsky

Last week President Bush signed into law the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (a.k.a. "Laci and Conner's Law"). The law, which makes harming a fetus a separate offense in a federal crime against a pregnant woman, barely made it through the Senate and raised the ire of many a liberal. They claimed that this law will strip women of their collective "right" to abortion if not overturned. Of course, these arguments are the type we've heard from the pro-abortion Left for years -- and will for years to come.

On Monday, the California Supreme Court ruled that a perpetrator can be convicted for two homicides in the killing of a pregnant woman, even if he is unaware of the pregnancy. The decision, which strengthened the state's own version of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, stated that "there is no requirement the defendant specifically know of the existence of each victim."

Involved in these events were two individuals whose future political careers could hinge on their positions regarding fetal homicide laws -- in the Senate we have liberal Republican Arlen Specter and in California we have conservative Justice Janice Rogers Brown.

For Arlen Specter, the Unborn Victim of Violence Act was probably a tough call. Rarely shirking the positions of the pro-abortion lobby, the liberal Pennsylvania GOPer first voted for the Feinstein "poison pill" amendment, which would have undermined the bill and likely resulted in its ultimate demise. Specter then turned around and voted for the bill in its final form, sending it to the President for his signature.

Not surprisingly, politics surrounded his vote: Specter is locked in a tough primary fight with conservative Rep. Pat Toomey for the GOP nomination for Specter's own Senate seat. A vote against the Unborn Victims of Violence Act surely would have hurt him in the polling booths of a state with one of the most pro-life senators in Washington (Sen. Rick Santorum).

Of course, Specter's vote will likely be treated with kid gloves by the Left. They know that the bill would have passed without the liberal senator's support, so they won't criticize him too harshly since they need Specter in the Senate to help promote the pro-abortion cause -- especially since Specter is likely to be the next chairman of the Judiciary Committee. From that perch, the liberal senator would have significant power over the judicial confirmation process, making it all the more difficult for a Republican president to see conservative judges confirmed to the federal bench, and more importantly, to the Supreme Court.

In California, Janice Rogers Brown may have sealed her fate in the quest for her confirmation to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia when she supported the decision that gave a boost the California's fetal homicide law. Brown, who was nominated for the Appeals Court by President Bush on July 25, 2003, has been blocked from confirmation by Senate Democrats and labeled "unqualified," "out of the mainstream," "unfit to serve," "notoriously conservative," "radical," "extreme right-wing," "hostile to constitutional rights," and "arch-conservative."

Some of Justice Brown's most vocal critics have been from the pro-choice crowd, and they've done their worst to see her nomination tanked by their liberal cohorts in the Senate. But that did not stop Brown from not only voting with the majority in the California Supreme Court on Monday, but also writing the decision for the majority.

Telling, isn't it? One person votes contrary to his traditionally pro-abortion stance in what likely can be described as an attempt to garner votes in an upcoming all-important primary vital to his career's future, and one person votes in accordance with her pro-life stance without regard to the likely negative impact it will have on her career's future.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Politics/Elections; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: abortion; antiabortion; arlen; brown; conner; election; gop; janice; janicerogersbrown; judge; justice; laci; nomination; nominee; pennsylvania; peterson; primary; prochoice; prolife; protection; rogers; senate; senator; specter; toomey; unborn; wifekiller

1 posted on 04/07/2004 6:29:59 AM PDT by bigsky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bigsky
If the Republicans lose the Senate over the short sighted people pushing this, the big picture implications will be huge.
2 posted on 04/07/2004 6:39:53 AM PDT by tkathy (nihilism: absolute destructiveness toward the world at large and oneself)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
KEEP AMERICA FREE

DONATE TODAY
SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server
Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
Become A Monthly Donor
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

3 posted on 04/07/2004 6:40:57 AM PDT by Support Free Republic (Freepers post from sun to sun, but a fundraiser bot's work is never done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigsky
Is there any hope of getting rid of Arlen Specter? Any hope for Toomey at all?
4 posted on 04/07/2004 6:45:01 AM PDT by DameAutour (It's not Bush, it's the Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigsky
I know all the arguments against Spector but I still have the impression that he was the reason that Justice Thomas made it through the confirmation process. I can't see him as anything but a Republican who would support the president's nominations if he chairs the Judiciary committee. Am I totally wrong?
5 posted on 04/07/2004 7:13:52 AM PDT by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tkathy
If the Republicans lose the Senate over the short sighted people pushing this, the big picture implications will be huge.

Are you saying the bill is short-sighted? Or getting rid of Specter is short-sighted? Or . . . what? Sorry, I'm a mite dense I guess.

I read somewhere yesterday that some doctor said fetuses can feel pain after 20 weeks. I'm not a doctor so I won't try to argue the scientific point of just EXACTLY when a fetus becomes a living being but I'll give you a relative example.

My grandfather used to be a commercial farmer. He planted tomatoes. One spring, two weeks after he'd planted, he got a flood to beat hell. His top soil was carried away and it would take a year for him to recover. His crop insurance paid off as though his entire crop had been ruined -- and hardly a sprig had broken the surface. The adjustor said the seeds had "germinated" so, legally, his company was obligated to pay under what he called an "Act of God" clause.

If that holds true for tomatoes, doesn't it make sense that AT THE VERY LEAST the same should hold true for the sanctity of human life? That as soon as the wily spermlet fertilizes the tantalizing egg, human life becomes "possible" so that's when the LEGAL clock really starts ticking?

This next part is a bit off the subject . . . but I tend to spend most of my life on the fringes . . . LOL. Please humor me.

I'd be willing to bet that I'm one of the few male FReepers who has actually witnessed an abortion. No, I wasn't in the operating room . . . but I saw enough when the nurses scurried in and lot. I saw the Vacuum Cleaner used. I saw the . . . please excuse my graphic language but there's no other way to describe it . . . I saw the Human Sludge that used to be a fetus. I saw the blood. I saw the gore. I saw the devastation it caused a girl I loved like no other.

This was in 1972. Abortions weren't legal in Texas then. But they were in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Two terrified teenages hocked everything they owned, stole a gas credit card from the boy's mother, and drove from Lubbock, Texas to Santa Fe, New Mexico -- sleeping in a 1965 VW Beetle and eating and drinking nothing but Pork Rinds and a six-pack of Dr. Peppers for three days.

I was a hippie then. I was Mr. Cool. I was a senior in high school, Mr. Top Athlete, Mr. Brainiac, Mr. Ain't I So Damn Cool, and I was 100% certain that the woman's vote on whether or not to have an abortion was the only vote that counted.

Standing in a Santa Fe hospital hallway, right outside the surgery room door, I changed my mind.

The baby, by the way, wasn't mine. The girl was a year older than me and man oh man was I gob-smacked with her. We'd only been "going together" for a month but I'd lusted after her for six years -- we're from the same hometown. She was a freshman at Texas Tech. A beautiful, gorgeous, intelligent, talented gal. I'm 50-ish now and walking away from her is without a doubt the biggest mistake I ever made. I've wished a thousand times that we had married like we'd planned. God help me, even now I miss her.

But we didn't marry. I'd only gone with her after she'd promised me we'd tell her parents when we got back. I didn't elicit this promise out of some noble cause. My parents weren't rich. They'd unknowingly financed the trip. Her parents were rich. I wanted my parents to be repaid.

So we told everyone. Her father lunged before she could finish her story. He missed twice . . . but I didn't. I broke his nose. She barely managed to yell that I wasn't the father just as her mother pulled and cocked her handgun.

Things only got worse from there.

We tried to stay together . . . but I finally decided the hassle wasn't worth it.

That was the worst decision I ever made. So to those who think the decision to have an abortion only affects the mother, I say . . . "You're wrong. I know. I've been there."

God I miss her.

What happened to her? She's an MD. Pediatrics is her specialty.

The repercussions from those days are still affecting us . . . even now. And it's been nearly EXACTLY 32 years ago.

Now if you're talking about Specter . . . well . . . I personally prefer to be able to identify and count my enemies so I know what I'm up against. Some FReepers counter with the valid argument that at least having the (R) by Specter's name helps us hold the majority. Okay, fine. What has this accomplished for us? We can't get conservative judges approved. We can't get "clean" budgets approved -- although it seems Republicans don't know how to do that either since pork has gone up and up under their watch. But at least we could ID and isolate the "pork-spending" Senators and hold them accountable if we had a filibuster-proof majority.

THAT is the key to me. Having 60 Republican Senators in our stable. 60 DEPENDABLE Republican Senators. With Specter, Snowe, Chaffee, Collins, and perhaps the biggest wild-card of all -- Senator "ME, ME, ME, ME, ME, ME" McCain, being schizophrenic at best, we never KNOW how a vote will go. I'm not saying all Conservatives should dance to the same music . . . I just wish they played harmonic instruments so Frist could at least attempt to push a Conservative agenda.

Did I cover your short-sighted comment? If not, man oh man, didn't I waste a lotta time? LOL.

6 posted on 04/07/2004 7:48:53 AM PDT by geedee (Surely if a brain-dead Village Idiot like me can be a monthly donor, the smarter FReepers could too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DameAutour
The latest polls have Toomey within 6 points of Specter, with all the trends going for Toomey. (With a 14% undecided, which tends to trend toward the challenger.) I think it will all depend on getting the voters to the polls on April 27; I can tell you that almost no one here in central PA likes Specter!
7 posted on 04/07/2004 8:52:21 AM PDT by Doug Loss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7; Badray; GeneralHavoc
I wouldn't support Specter for garbage man; that's too good a job for the likes of him. I am convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that HE ALONE was responsible for the failure of the Senate to convict clinton; his influence and unconstitutional vote supported clinton, the Democrats, and the other RINOs.

Politics is the art of compromise -- that is not the same as surrender of your bedrock principles for personal or party gain.

Ping.
8 posted on 04/07/2004 1:41:50 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brityank
I wouldn't support Specter for garbage man; that's too good a job for the likes of him.

I saw two Toomey signs in Thornbury today. None for Specter.

9 posted on 04/07/2004 1:48:33 PM PDT by Tribune7 (Arlen Specter supports the International Crime Court having jurisdiction over US soldiers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7
" I saw two Toomey signs in Thornbury today. None for Specter."

Here in eastern Montgomery County, I've only seen Specter signs in the past couple of days, and only two at that. There aren't a lot of Toomey signs either, but definitely more. Unfortunately Hoeffel is from this area, so it will be a tough race regardless of who wins the Republican primary.

Hereabouts, the most highly-charged race seems to be for the house seat being vacated by Hoeffel. There are primaries on both sides, and signs are popping up all over.

10 posted on 04/07/2004 9:00:28 PM PDT by Think free or die
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Think free or die
I'm rooting for Toomey. It might be coloring my view. I still haven't met anyone who said they're voting for Specter. Iguess I hang out witht the right people :-)
11 posted on 04/07/2004 9:05:45 PM PDT by Tribune7 (Arlen Specter supports the International Crime Court having jurisdiction over US soldiers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: tkathy
"If the Republicans lose the Senate over the short sighted people pushing this, the big picture implications will be huge."

You're right. We wouldn't be able to bring Bush's judicial nominees to the floor for a vote. We couldn't get school vouchers approved for the desperately poor children in DC for them to have a chance of getting an education. God knows that we would never get our agenda through the Senate without Arlen Specter.

Oh, wait. That's what happens now with the likes of Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe, Lincoln Chaffee, and the other RINOs.

If we are going to be serious about defeating liberalism, that means that we have to get rid of our own liberals. Send Arlen Back to Kansas with Bob Dole so we can get to work governing like Republicans.

12 posted on 04/08/2004 2:55:24 AM PDT by Badray (Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown. RIP harpseal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mercat; SamInTheBurgh; smokeyb
"Am I totally wrong?"

Nah, not totally wrong, but that's because none of us are perfect. ;-)

But you're close. Arlen has a well established pattern (what Toomey calls the Specter two step) of running as a conservative and actually behaving like one in the year prior to an election and then after winning, he reverts to his standard liberal ways. If Thomas had been nominated a year earlier or later, he'd be called Clarence Who?

Remember what Specter did to Bork? Wrong year for a conservative to decide to run for office. Even with Thomas, Specter immediately began apologizing to the left for it.

No, Specter cannot and will not be a 'good republican'. He just doesn't share the values that mean something to us.

13 posted on 04/08/2004 3:04:54 AM PDT by Badray (Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown. RIP harpseal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: brityank
Thanks for the ping.
14 posted on 04/08/2004 3:05:44 AM PDT by Badray (Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown. RIP harpseal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: tkathy
I have changed my mind regarding the arguement "DO WE KEEP THE RINO OR VOTE HIM OUT IN THE PRIMARYS ONLY TO LOSE THE SEAT TO A RAT IN THE GENERAL?" The wild spending and wacko votes witnessed by this congress has proven to me that the grass roots folks everywhere need to keep up the pressue on our elected members of congress. Should PA lose this seat to a RAT the balance wont change much in the senate....looks like republicans will pick up about 4 or 5 seats anyway. all the best
15 posted on 04/08/2004 3:14:30 AM PDT by rrrod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: geedee
Thanks for sharing your story.
16 posted on 04/08/2004 3:15:28 AM PDT by Siouxz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tkathy
If the Republicans lose the Senate over the short sighted people pushing this, the big picture implications will be huge.

Anyone who thinks that a Montgomery county latte liberal nerd like Joe Hoeffel who voted against the PBA ban would beat Toomey is either delusional or trying to keep the Republican caucus from becoming "too conservative."
17 posted on 04/09/2004 2:22:39 PM PDT by JohnBDay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson