Posted on 10/26/2005 7:54:50 PM PDT by USAConstitution
...when you hear the Courts blamed for activism or intrusion where they do not belong...Stop and examine what the elected leadership has done to solve the problem at issue and whether abdication to courts to make the hard decisions is a not too prevalent tactic in today's world....
Where else do we hear a lot today about the Courts.[sic] The law and religion... Abortion clinic protestors have become synonymous with terrorists and the courts have been the refuge for the besieged... The ongoing debate continues surrounding the attempt to once again criminalize abortions or to once and for all guarantee the freedom of the individual women's right to decide for herself whether she will have an abortion. Questions about what can be taught or done in public places or public schools are presented frequently to the courts.
The law and religion make for interesting mixture but the mixture tends to evoke the strongest of emotions. The underlying theme in most of these case is the insistence of more self-determination. And the more I think about these issues, the more self-determination makes the most sense. Legislating religion or morality we gave up on a long time ago. Remembering that fact appears to offer the most effective solutions to these problems once the easier cases are disposed of... Where science determines the facts, the law can effectively govern. However, when science cannot determine the facts and decisions vary based upon religious belief, then government should not act...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Indeed.BTTT.
I don't think it's affirmative action.
I think it's classic schmoozing and butt kissing to get to the top.
She may be a good lawyer, but if you look at the stands she's taken...there haven't really been any. She's put herself in a position to be heard without really saying anything. Her writings as the head of the texas state bar show that very well.
She spends 1000 words or so writing fluff about a subject but never really taking a stand either way. It's busywork to get peoples attention on you. But nothing is ever really said, because if she took a stand, somebody might get upset and hurt her career path.
It's a classic career climber at work.
Uh-oh is right. Ossified writing style aside(This was a delivered speech after all,) it is clear that when she gave the speech she thought abortion was a "right to decide" which needed to be "guaranteed."
*sigh*...George, whaddya doin here.
Shame on ya.. Why not wait until she sits down and takes a beating and see if she keeps on ticking?.. :)
My thoughts exactly. Reading the speech, before reading the FRC's fax, I had the same reaction. Terms like 'criminalize abortion' are the type of terms the pro-aborts use.
Frankly, I am somewhat in shock. These 'protesters' who she believes are synonomous with 'terrorists' happen to include my son. He's a freshman at Christendom College near D.C. and every Saturday afternoon, when he could be sitting and drinking beer watching college football,(not that there's anything wrong with that) he instead climbs into a car with other similarly-minded young men and women and goes and prays in front of an abortion clinic.
That a president who I voted for twice -that I donated money to- should turn around and appoint a woman to the SC who thinks my son and these other caring young people are terrorists doesn't even outrage me.
Instead, it just leaves me depressed.
its not a racial comment.
let me re-phrase, Miers is an a*s-kisser. OK.
Either comment is unacceptable being a personal attack. It shows very little moral character or strength of position. In light of her indefensible speech, there is not excuse for your speech.
butt kissing. good phrase, I should have used that.
I bet that FR poll is burning you up...isn't it?
She's ticking alright.
"Is Brown a "black nose?"
You say you're hanging tough for Miers, and yet you're stirring the pot as far as a second nomination. The comment itself is pretty thin-ice, too.
Good point, as in e.g. "what a terrible time we live in, when abortion clinic protestors have become synonymous with terrorists." It changes the whole picture, doesn't it? I'm not saying that's the context, but AM saying that context does matter.
I read on FR that when vetted she may have had a "libertarian" point of view and I distrust that point of view entirely. I think Luttig is a very good choice.
Here is were we may have a disagreement .. I absolutely believe the legislators are spineless about stepping up to the plate with the hard problems that we know some liberal court has overstepped their authority..I cannot understand how we Republicans with the majority behind us, can allow a lone judge make laws that should be overturned by an elected officials.. The education, housing, and the prison systems come to mind..
I support President Bush and hope it all works out, even though I do not understand it. If she does not win confirmation, I hope the nomination is Luttig. This speech by her is indefensible and a genuine cause for concern.
"I read on FR that when vetted she may have had a "libertarian" point of view and I distrust that point of view entirely"
OK. So, why do you think Luttig is a very good choice, then?
you'll have to go after flashbunny in post 103 then for using the term "butt kisser". we are both trying to express the same sentiment about her career mobility.
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.