Okay... Roe v Wade = Dred Scott.....
the other cases may be overload, my point was that the SCOTUS is no stranger to making bad decisions.
Here we are on the side of Lincoln, and Obama is on the side of Stephen Douglass.
The exact point the Bishop made. But I would tend to disagree with the Bishop on a minor point of 'nit picking' historical accuracy.
Douglas was politically neutral on slavery. His political position was that he didn't care one way or another about slavery -- i.e. his Popular Sovereignty doctrine as expressed in the Kansas-Nebraska Act.
Obama, via his statements ("punish my children with a baby") and his unquestioning support of Roe v. Wade, is obviously a strong proponent of a single national law that allows abortion anywhere, at any time, for any reason and with no restrictions and no respect for popular sovereignty for states to choose their laws as they see fit.
In that sense, I'd say that Obama is closer to Jefferson Davis who proclaimed slavery as a positive good that should not be restricted anywhere for any reason.
Roe v Wade, like the Dred Scott, decision, is the opposite of Douglass' 'Popular Sovereignty' policy.
Lincoln vs. Jefferson Davis would be a far better analogy, but that's just my nitpicking and I can forgive the Bishop for not being a history buff. The point he was making in equating abortion on demand with slavery is totally valid.
One way or another, I fear we will eventually have hell to pay for this policy, just as we had for the sin of slavery.