[genxer]

3. Has Giuliani said that a “strict constructionist” reading of the Constitution would end abortion?

Well the answer is No because strict constructionist judges wouldn't end abortion. They would give the ablilty to get an abortion back with the states, which is where it belongs, in the state houses. I suspect NY and NJ will keep it legal and the south will have stricter laws. Over turning Roe, does not end abortion and to suggest it means you are either not informed on the issue or being intentionally misleading. Roe can go and lets put the decision back with the states where it belongs in the first place.

[Gondring]

Over turning Roe, does not end abortion and to suggest it means you are either not informed on the issue or being intentionally misleading.

The Schiavo/Schindler case was where the dishonesty of Randall Terry came out, showing that his true aim was not to return the issue to the states. I guess it was looking like the fight against Federal protection of abortion was going well, so he had to set back the fight to keep his nice gig going. :-(

[Ol' Sparky]

A strict constructionalist would vote to overturn Roe. Giuliani has tried to claim one could uphold Roe, tipping his hand as to the kind of judges he would nominate to the courts.

[Prokopton]

They would give the ablilty to get an abortion back with the states, which is where it belongs, in the state houses.

Do you really think SCOTUS will rule that the protection of human life is not guaranteed by the Federal Constitution but is a "states rights" issue?