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 ...
If someone holds these views in their mid-to-late 40s, what do you think will cause an earthshaking mindset change by her early 60s?
You might say "religion", but in response, I'd say that someone who can sway their opinions so wildly in one direction late in life could easily swing them back. All it takes is the right circumstances, and the left is more than willing to bring those circumstances to bear.
Besides, we have NO idea what her stand on abortion is now, and given the SC Justice approval system, she won't even get a chance to claim her view has changed.
She's done, or I'm done with Bush.
"Trying to figure out exactly what she is saying is like wading through mud."
I bet she feels the same way. When I see the same phrase doubled in sentences (whether it is Harriet Miers or the kid next door), I immediately suspect systemic sloppy thinking. One is tempted to see an image of "The girl who was supposed to be bright". Harriet hides the fact that she isn't, by mirror imaging her sentences so they look complex but in fact contain piffle. Sorry to be mean, but that's what I see.
>>If we get Gonzales, that would just about be the final nail in the coffin.<<
Actually, I think Miers was the final nail in the coffin. Gonzales would be the dirt on top of the grave.
I would suggest that all concerned freepers deluge their senators with copies of this speech tomorrow. They need to be made aware of this outrage. I would focus on Brownback and Coburn. Both are Judiciary Commmittee members and ardently pro-life. THIS WOMAN MUST BE STOPPED.
LOL!!!!!!
Family Research Council: Her use of terms like criminalize abortion to characterize the pro-life position and guarantee freedom to describe the pro-choice position should have sounded alarms in the White House during the vetting process.
The FRC nails it.
She won't sinceshe is the most qualified person GWB could find.
ping
A cunning linguist she isn't.
L
Are you beginning to see why many of us here have said she wasn't vetted properly?
Having the person who A) suggested you for the job and B) will replace you if you get the job handle the vetting process is not the way to handle it.
We've been had.
Almost permanently.
so much for the early claims about how "Bush knows her so well". like I said the first day, they have a business relationship. I work with alot of people, some for 20 years, none of them "know" me in any sense outside the context of that business.
We don't know now. As for when she gave that speech, it is very unlikely she would have ruled to overturn Roe v. Wade. Partial Birth abortions and Parental Notification would probably get the right vote from her then, but not Roe v. Wade.
She's done, or I'm done with Bush.
I wish I knew what he knew about her. There has not been a President as prolife as George W. Bush. Reagan appointed Rehnquist, O'Connor and Kennedy. Only one of them was a likely vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, and that is only one of the issues of importance facing the Republic. I support President Bush. I prefer Luttig as the nominee. I don't trust Brown.
"Abortion clinic protestors have become synonymous with terrorists and the courts have been the refuge for the besieged"
There is no ambiguity here at all. The courts have been hammering abortion protestors with outrageous judgments, killing the first amendment. Those inside the clinics are "the beseiged" protected by the courts. She is approving the stifling of dissent with bogus RICO judgments because abortion protestors are her enemies too.
I am not convinced by your argument.
>>She won't since she is the most qualified person GWB could find.<<
Abortion, schmabortion...
That lady is one awesome bowler!!!
I agree. I have no problem with simple sentences as such. In fact, a good style is a speaking style. I always enjoy reading my friend Denis Donoghue's books because he has that Irish gift of writing, so you seem to hear him speak. The same is true of Norman Podhoretz when he is at the top of his game. Or to take the instance of another writer who is popular here, there's Mark Steyn. I've never heard Steyn speak, but when I read his columns I seem to hear his voice.
Wouldn't hurt to hit House Republicans with messages, as well as Governors, state legislatures etc... Apparently House Republicans are starting to speak out and exert pressure worried about their own hides.
http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/102705/news3.html
We need to create an avanlanche from local Republican dog catchers up the top of the food chain. make them all feel the heat, so they turn it on those that can make the difference.
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.