The courts have said otherwise. Women can choose to have them.
Enjoy sitting out the election.
Courts can say what they will.
To invite me to sit out the election is to invite a republican to sit out the election. How many can do that and the republicans still emerge victorious?
If the last election is any indication, my state of Ohio made the difference. A change of a mere 60,000 votes would have President John Kerry readying for a second run for the presidency.
A change of some 700 votes in Florida in the 2000 election would have made Al Gore president.
Wouldn't it be far better to find a candidate on whom we can agree about life?
Do you think those originalist judges are now there on the bench because us pro-lifers are apathetic to this issue?
Rudy Giuliani just did an "in your face" yesterday to every pro-lifer in America. He said he personally believes in a woman's right to choose. First, there is no right to choose. How do I know, because the right judges will overturn it. If there were some "right to kill babies" in the constitution NO ONE in that profession would be denying it.
It is not activism to deny the existence of a right to kill babies, when that right is not present in the Constitution. What is happening is that an interpretation of law has been imposed upon America by judicial fiat....the worst form of activism.
There is only an interpretation of law that permits abortion.
There is no "right to choose."
Careful, just when you point out how things ARE, some idiot will come along and accuse you of advocating it's how things SHOULD be. People who do not care for reality don't like being reminded of reality, and will hold you responsible.
Once the courts said we all had the right toown an African. Had you been alive then, I'm sure you would have defended that, too. Am I wrong?