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

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist; wideawake; livius; Antoninus; Tax-chick; ArrogantBustard; ninenot; ...
EEE: The idea of merely returning the abortion question to the states will guarantee the institutionalization of abortion for many years to come. Not that Paul has the slightest chance of nomination by any real political party, but he would nominate what to the SCOTUS??? Libertoonian moonbats??? People who spend their waking hours in pseudo-"constitutionalist" contortions???

Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo would not waste time looking for libertoonian crazies but would nominate SCOTUS justices in the mode of Scalia or Thomas or Roberts or Alito. When Roe is no more, then we go for federal personhood, hopefully in the same decision after about two more SCOTUS appointments.

On abortion as on war, paleoPaulie is a gutless two-faced do nothing wimp. He will never be acceptable as a GOP nominee for POTUS.

373 posted on 09/12/2007 2:09:07 PM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies ]


To: BlackElk
The idea of merely returning the abortion question to the states will guarantee the institutionalization of abortion for many years to come.

Two battles, the decision belongs to the states imo, and overturning Roe would be a plus, but there's a legitimate federal role to pursue under the Constitution.

380 posted on 09/12/2007 2:22:07 PM PDT by SJackson (isolationism never was, never will be acceptable response to[expansionist] tyrannical governments)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | View Replies ]

To: BlackElk
EEE: The idea of merely returning the abortion question to the states will guarantee the institutionalization of abortion for many years to come.

Brush up on your history skills in addition to your English and grammar skills. Abortion was regulated by the states prior to Roe vs Wade. Overturning Roe vs Wade would send the decision back to the states so it can be duked out locally instead of federally.

Not that Paul has the slightest chance of nomination by any real political party, but he would nominate what to the SCOTUS??? Libertoonian moonbats??? People who spend their waking hours in pseudo-"constitutionalist" contortions???

Well, it's moot anyway since Paul ain't going to win, right? Hypothetically if he were elected, Paul would nominate constitutionalists to the bench.

Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo would not waste time looking for libertoonian crazies but would nominate SCOTUS justices in the mode of Scalia or Thomas or Roberts or Alito.

So would Dr. Paul. Good grief, have you even looked at Paul's positions outside of his foreign policy? He runs rings around the other GOP candidates.

When Roe is no more, then we go for federal personhood, hopefully in the same decision after about two more SCOTUS appointments.

You overturn Roe FIRST then you go for the Constitutional Amendment. Do you know how long it will take to pass a Constitutional Amendment? Do you think CA or NY or IL will ratify it? Send the decision back to the states and you'll save more babies in the interim than farting around trying to amend the Constitution as more babies die on the vine. Use your head.

On abortion as on war, paleoPaulie is a gutless two-faced do nothing wimp. He will never be acceptable as a GOP nominee for POTUS.

You are completely smoking crack if you believe Dr. Paul is pro-abortion. The man delivered over 4,000 babies. Well, I guess they were those toy babies that single first-time mothers use then.

390 posted on 09/12/2007 2:42:01 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | 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