Posted on 07/21/2005 8:41:55 PM PDT by CHARLITE
The Republicans' ideal Supreme Court nominee is someone who might overturn Roe v. Wade, but won't. That makes President Bush's choice of John G. Roberts pure genius.
If defenders of abortion rights condemn the pick, so much the better. Social conservatives will think they won. And when a court ruling later proves they haven't, Republican leaders can comfort them. So far, all is according to plan.
Roe v. Wade is the 1973 Supreme Court decision enshrining a federal right to abortion. If Roe went down, two bad things would happen to Republicans.
One is that it would arouse America's pro-choice majority. Religious conservatives say they put Bush in the White House, but actually, so did a significant bloc of pro-choice women. We speak of the "security moms" who in 2004 cared more about terrorism than about abortion.
They also never thought the right to abortion was at risk. Bush has always balanced his social-conservative talk with reassurances that abortion would remain available. When he urges abortion foes to fight on, pro-choice sophisticates dismiss it all as background noise.
But serious incursions on the right to abortion would change that. I wouldn't want to be a Republican politician the day that suburban mothers learn there's no legal way to end their 16-year-old daughter's unwanted pregnancy.
The other problem in overturning Roe is that it would send the abortion issue down to the state level. Republicans don't want angry pro-choice voters rushing to the polls in 50 states.
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
Social conservatives will think they won. And when a court ruling later proves they haven't, Republican leaders can comfort them.Social conservatives will then feel used, drop out of the political process and let Democrats run the country. Good plan!
INteresting indeed, but an unfortunate truth.
While it would be terrible to lose elections, Roe V. Wade should be overturned not for political benefit but because MURDERING BABIES SHOULD BE ILLEGAL! I don't want one more baby to die at the hands of abortionists!
We'll do just fine if/when Roe crashes and burns. The pro-aborts are losing strength every year.
It is probably true the legal reasoning on Roe vs Wade was erroneous (privacy rights). However, I do not believe it is good public policy to make abortion unlawful.
Why?
If abortion is made unlawful, we will go back to the days of 'back alley abortionists'. This means many women will be injured and die from bungled procedures. Thus, we must make our decisions based on the total implications of the issue, instead of dogma.
I agree that there would be a huge backlash. I wish the abortion issue would be voted on, instead of by judical activism on either side. Then get it out of politics. Many moderates (myself included) are sick to death of hearing about it.
Science has rendered the "pro-choice" stance impossible to maintain with any sense of credibility. This is why there would be no negative consequences for conservatives if Roe were to fall. Support for legal abortion is falling in America.
Even the liberal media can't hide the truth about abortion anymore. Look at all the TV commercials that show unborn babies.
The author of this article is living in the pre-ultrasound world when pro-aborts could speak casually of "blobs of tissue" and people wouldn't automatically wince at their stupidity. Those days are over.
"Look at all the TV commercials that show unborn babies."
Yes, and the Drew Carey show, or the production company I guess, showed a little fetus as their credit visual. Very cool I always thought.
Remember the first one of these? I think it was a Volvo commercial, emphasizing the vehicles safeness. The libs were outraged! But sonogram technology has outpaced their outrage. God works in mysterious ways, sometime via TV commercials.
Thanks Char!
I'd like to see the wording of the polls you cite.
There is a current FR poll right now in which 42% of registered Freepers are in favor of a constitutional ban on all abortion and 40% are in favor of a ban "with some exceptions". That's very telling considering where Freepers are positioned on the spectrum.
My guess on where the public is at large would be something like:
-20% endorse abortion at all times, right up to the morning before labor begins
-25% oppose abortion at all times, even if it's a raped 12-year old carrying an anencephalic baby
-55% oppose abortions of convenience and abortions performed after fetal survival is possible, but do not object to very early term abortions and those performed after rape/incest or when the child will be born cataclysmically deformed.
That should give a clue as to where I think state laws would go in a post-Roe era.
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.