Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: EternalVigilance

You seem bent on opposing the first guy ever to hold real promise to persuade the American people that Roe vs. Wade must be repealed.


117 posted on 08/19/2007 9:04:04 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed ("We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them, I won't chip away at them" -Mitt Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]


To: Beelzebubba
You seem bent on opposing the first guy ever to hold real promise to persuade the American people that Roe vs. Wade must be repealed.

The only real basis for overturning Roe is contained within the decision itself. The judges who decided the case wrote that if the personhood of the unborn were established, that they would be completely protected under the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments.

So, to take the position that the states have the right to decide whether unalienable rights are to be observed in this country is to undermine the very legal, intellectual and moral arguments you need to overturn Roe in the first place.

You also overthrow any justification for overturning abortion in the states.

This question was supposedly settled in the GOP decades ago. The "states' rights on abortion" position was the Gerald R. Ford position. The Ronald Reagan position, the one I am positing, prevailed in 1976 and became part of the platform.

120 posted on 08/19/2007 9:21:39 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (States' rights don't trump God-given, unalienable rights...support the Reagan pro-life platform)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies ]

To: Beelzebubba; EternalVigilance; Reagan Man

“You seem bent on opposing the first guy ever to hold real promise to persuade the American people that Roe vs. Wade must be repealed.”

It’s nothing personal Beelzebubba, EV has a problem with every candidate who has a ghost of a chance of getting nominated and beating Hillary. All but one of the current Republican presidential candidates declared support for repealing Roe v Wade. The exception being Rudy. This is amazing progress, considering how wobbly many in the GOP have been on life and abortion in the past.

Nothing is good enough for EV. He won’t be happy unless an uncompromising absolutist like his idol Keyes is made the standard-bearer.
Of course, even if the miracle happens and we get that person nominated, they will likely do as well as Keyes did against Obama (that is, miserably, a total wipeout), and we will have a liberal Democrat triumph.

There is a lot at stake in 2008 and one of the key things at stake is appointing judicially conservative Judges to the Supreme Court who don’t engage in liberal activism. if we ever want to change laws on abortion, our next step is repeal of Roe v Wade. Thompson “gets it”, Romney “gets it”, the rest of the candidates (Rudy excepted) are on board, several contenders have spoken forcefully and well on the issues; the conservative base sure as heck gets it: We have to have a President who nominates and get confirmed solid judicial conservatives if we are ever to get away from our ‘abortion-on-demand’ current situation.

The next Republican President (Rudy again excepted) will of course be much much better than Hillary on the matter - the difference between another Alito or another Ginsburg - and better probably than Reagan himself, who appointed O’Connor and Kennedy.


189 posted on 08/19/2007 4:36:38 PM PDT by WOSG ( Don't tell me what you are against, tell me what you are FOR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson