Posted on 07/11/2018 4:13:58 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
Tomi Lahren began her appearance on Fox and Friends this morning by saying she wanted to “clarify” her statements in which she argued against overturning Roe v. Wade. Instead, Lahren doubled down, adding fuel to the fire by saying that conservatives who want to go after Roe “might as well spit on the Constitution.” Said Lahren:
“My problem is with some of my fellow conservatives who have put it out there that we are, quote: “coming for Roe v. Wade. That is a mistake, because we are putting it out there and implying that we are sending a justice to the bench to carry out religious judicial activism which is a mistake and it’s unconstitutional. And if we as conservatives are going to imply that, if that’s going to be our messaging, we might as well spit on the Constitution.”
Get the rest of the story and view the video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at finkelblogger.com ...
Wonder if Sean Hannity is required to have her on his show?
Don’t recall what his response was when she first spoke of abortion rights .
BTW, she is friends with comedian Ben Gleib of Idiotest fame (?)
She hopes to be the next Ann coulter without a law license?
2004 BACKSTORY
In February 2004, then-US Senate candidate Barack Obama’s wife, Michelle, sent a fund-raising letter with the “alarming news” that “right-wing politicians” had passed a law stopping doctors from performing p/b abortions (stabbing half-born babies in the neck with scissors, suctioning out their brains and crushing their skulls).
Michelle Obama considers partial-birth abortion “a legitimate medical procedure,” and asked supporters for $150 to attend a luncheon for her candidate husband, b/c he would fight against “cynical ploys” to stop p/b sbortions.
(NOTE: nurses at an Illinois hospital in 1999 discovered babies were being aborted alive and placed on shelves in soiled utility rooms to die unattended.)
BACKGROUND Legislation was presented on the federal level and in various states called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. It stated all live-born babies were guaranteed the same constitutional right to equal protection, whether or not they were wanted.
BAIPA sailed through the U.S. Senate by unanimous vote. Even Sens. Clinton, Kennedy and Kerry agreed a mother’s right to “choose” stopped at her baby’s delivery. The bill also passed overwhelmingly in the US House.
NARAL went neutral on it. Abortion enthusiasts publicly agreed that fighting BAIPA would appear extreme. President Bush signed BAIPA into law in 2002.
But in Obama’s Illinois, the state version of BAIPA repeatedly failed, thanks in large part to then-state Sen. Barack Obama. It only passed in 2005, after Obama left. Obama articulately asserted that legislation protecting live aborted babies might infringe on women’s rights or abortionists’ rights (The very same judicial reasoning used to approve dismemberment of aborted babies).
In 2003, as chairman of the next state Senate committee to which BAIPA was sent, Obama stopped it from even getting a hearing, shelving it to die much like babies were still being shelved to die in Illinois hospitals and abortion chambers.
(NOTE As chair of that same committee, state Sen Obama once abruptly ended a hearing early, right before the parents of six children killed as a result of Illinois’ drivers licenses-for-bribes scandal, were to testify in favor of Choose Life.
THE PEDOPHILES AMONG US-—PLANNED PARENTHOOD IN OUR SCHOOLS K-12 This vile organization exhibits all the signs of avid, organized pedophilia. They are in our schools K-12 sniffing around the genitals of young people. DO THIS NOW demand to know how many of the PP types in your state are connected to pedophilia organizations-——and how many have been convicted of pedophilia.
THE PEDOPHILE CREDO Planned Parenthood Federation of America has proclaimed a “right to sexual enjoyment” as a basic human right for all people, including children, and is pushing that goal in every arena, including schools, community groups, and particularly the United Nations.
PP hires children as young as 14 to promote sex to their peers, and one affiliate recently posted a job listing for a state-funded peer educator position that requires that the teens must attend the annual gay pride parade in order to work for PP. (more below)
THIS JUST IN——PPhood’s newsest atrocity is texting children——a sex “educator” employed by Planned Parenthood—the organization that works constantly to drive a wedge between children and their parents-—will be texting your children without your knowledge or consent. When Planned Parenthood of Greater Northern New Jersey held its annual national sex educators’ conference, it promoted a website pushing such resources as “Unequal Partners, Teaching about Power and Consent in Adult-Teen and Other Relationships.” Planned Parenthood is actively involved in trying to push the boundaries that separate and protect children from sexual activity.
While this particular texting program has launched in the Denver area, it may well be a test program with plans for nationwide expansion. Parents must be very vocal in their opposition to Planned Parenthood texting their children. You can monitor your children’s phones for texting by noting the program’s acronym and number. The Planned Parenthood “In Case You’re Curious” contact info is obtained by texting ICYC to 66746.
PLANNED PARENTHOOD SEXUALIZING CHILDREN-—-—FODDER FOR PEDOPHILES
(CNSNews.com) – By the time they leave elementary school, children should be able to “define sexual orientation,” and by the eighth grade be able to “define emergency contraception and its use,” according to a report containing controversial new recommendations for sex education in U.S. public schools.
“Ideally, comprehensive sexuality education should start in kindergarten and continue through 12th grade,” says the “National Sexuality Education Standards” report, drawn up by a range of advocates, academics and public education officials.
The Future of Sex Education (FoSE), an initiative started by sex education advocates, developed the standards “to create a strategic plan for sexuality education policy and implementation.”
Also involved are the American School Health Association, the National Education Association Health Information Network – the non-profit arm of the nation’s largest teacher’s union, the NEA – the American Association for Health Education and the Society of State Leaders of Health and Physical Education.
An advisory committee includes senior officials from Planned Parenthood and the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN).
It has begun to leak out that some young women patronizing these “PP health clinics” for abortions have also been weinsteined-—sexually abused by abortionists. These places are hotbeds for potential sexual abuse. The lowlife abortionist has already sold out his conscience. So having power over young vulnerable women creates an ideal climate for sexual abuse.
<><>Another angle to explore: many of these women are minors impregnated by older men........a crime right there.
We need data on the number of underage women being aborted...that could lead to data on underage women being sexually molested by an abortionist.
Call President Trump:
Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
Contact Jeff Sessions
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
Comment Line: 202-353-1555
Switchboard: 202-514-2000
CONTACT CONGRESS:
Capitol Switchboard 1-866-220-0044
I got your sister right here, Nancy boy.
Cute. Now how about that coffee?
“Most (though not all) Conservatives I know would be just fine with a nominee who states they are not going to “go after” Roe v Wade, but will consider the Constitutional merits of any case that comes up that could potentially overturn it.”
Which was part of the point she was making.
There was a time when I had no religious beliefs, and yet still came to believe that abortion was wrong. In my lib days, I did not have any strong feelings about it. I eventually decided that if there was a chance that the fetus was a human life, it was better to err on the side of preserving the life.
However, the issue with Roe v Wade is the over-reach of the SCOTUS in finding a right that was not in the Constitution. The decision was so outrageous it has led to much more strife in the country than there would ever have been if they'd left things alone. I have to question Tomi's intelligence for taking this line. I expect it of a Chris Matthews, but not from an alleged conservative.
Well, I’m not your buddy. To be offended, you’d have to consider yourself one of the people jerking your knee. Go figure.
Agreed, my point was that she seemed focused on what I view as a minority view among conservatives.
She’s right about the stupidity of going after Roe, but not because its unconstitutional to do so.
It’s overreach, and it isn’t even a good goal.
The goal is to reduce abortions to zero. Convincing people that its the worst choice possible so that they never ELECT to have an abortion is the right way to go about that goal.
If she didn’t look the way she did, she wouldn’t have a program. I doubts she even understands Roe, its legal implications, etc. That Roe shredded states rights here and violated the 10th amendment is the legal point. Each state should have been able to make their own decisions on the matter.
Since when is Abortion a Religious Issue?
That’s like say Murder is a Religious Issue.
Roe was an abomination to the judiciary. It's the ultimate example of judges usurping power from the people.
Agreed - none of my buddies are infanticide advocates.
She’s not wrong. Either we oppose ideological requirements for judicial appointments, or we do not. The correct path is never the easy path.
Lahren is like most people when it comes to the various hot button issues, all emotion and no logic or common sense.
Roe for all it was and is, is basically a flawed decision from the court going back to Wickard v Filburn in 1942, that held that a farmer who grew a crop for his own internal consumption — that of his family and his animals on said farm, never entering one grain of same into commerce, was nonetheless subject to federal regulation on how much of said crop he could grow or whether he could grow it at all.
The claim was that because his act of growing same would mean he wouldn’t need to buy as much, or none at all, of the same product or something that provided the same benefit (e.g. was food and thus sustained life) that affected interstate commerce.
There are certainly other examples even the 17th amendment that allowed for Direct Election of Senators was a case the court the should have held unconstitutional.
Lahren needs to get a grip and research a little more into how the Constitution really works. Roe, if overturned, would just put the issue where it needs to go, back to the states and let it get sorted it out there.
She MUST defend her crime(s) to the bitter end or until Jesus changes her life.
Pro Abortion (Choice) Christian? NO SUCH THING! (Some THINK they can fool God, the hubris of some people!)
Exactly! I always say, it is fruitless to debate a guilty conscience.
Hey Tomi read the Roe decision. Those justices were either stoned or just utterly ignored precedent and laws on the books for decades. The decision is a perfect example of how a supreme court justice should not be made.
In college in a government class in the 1980’s I had liberals looking at the decision and after reading it they were scratching their heads going WTH? How? Where? This makes no sense, but we support it!
My daughter used to love her until she came out pro-abort.
Roe v Wade only broadly decriminalized abortion. I have no problem with that under current (insufficient) definitions and those who take the other extreme are beating a dead horse in promoting a neverending political conflict and, as Tomi states, spit on the Constitution.
The first part of your reply is correct. Abortion is not a "right".
But you are dead wrong about the second point. The whole reason for the debate is that the SC in 1973 did indeed wrongly claim that abortion was a "Constitution Right". They made it up from whole cloth using a nebulous "penumbra" argument tied to the "right to privacy" which is also not in the Constitution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.