[Cboldt]

You are missing the reason Miers gave for "being against" the resolution. The reason wasn't because of it's contents. The reason was that she wanted the entire ABA membership to have a vote, instead of just the ABA leadership.

Like advocating direct vote for President, instead of choosing a President by a vote of Congress. It says nothing about which candidate one supports.

The ABA was impatient to get a position on it's books. Chances are the position taken by a majority of ABA members would be pro-choice.

[dirtboy]

Chances are the position taken by a majority of ABA members would be pro-choice.

Nationally, yes. For the Texas state ABA, probably not.

I've never seen so much leaping to conclusions in my life. Cripes, she's been the nominee what, three hours now? People must be in mortal wrist pain from all the hand-wringing I've seen.

Let's see what comes out over the next few days...

[LikeLight]

You are missing the reason Miers gave for "being against" the resolution. The reason wasn't because of it's contents. The reason was that she wanted the entire ABA membership to have a vote, instead of just the ABA leadership.

You are missing the historical context. The ABA leadership officially adopted a Pro-Abortion position. Much of the general membership was outraged. The tactic used by the alienated Pro-Life membership in response to the Pro-Abortion leadership was to demand a full vote of all members. This was the "Pro-Life" position in this controversy. You need to understand this.

[Heatseeker]

I did a little more research. You are right, though I don't think we can infer her position on abortion from this particular isssue, one way or the other.

I suspect we'll know more very soon.