[governsleastgovernsbest]

This is the first NY Times editorial I've read in a long time. Substance aside, I was shocked by the mediocre quality of the writing itself. Standards at the Times have evidently declined.

As to the substance, I note this line:

"Alito . . . took the extreme position that . . . the outrageous requirement that a woman show that she had notified her spouse" was constitutional.

This is typical results-oriented liberal-think on the constitution.

If you don't like a law, if you think it's "outrageous," why then, it should be overturned. Note that the Times doesn't offer any substantive argument demonstrating the law's unconstitutionality.

[goldstategop]

Hardly extreme. After all the purpose of the provision to give a husband a say in the life of his child. Its not just the wife's baby. It takes TWO people to conceive a child. A fact that seems to be lost on the Left.

("Denny Crane: Gun Control? For Communists. She's a liberal. Can't hunt.")