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 ...
Kavanaugh isn’t going to overturn Roe v. Wade.
And if he did, it would devolve to the states, which could then make their own laws regarding abortion.
Roe was hideous law - with judges finding ‘penumbras’ and creating rights never mentioned in the US Constitution, nor covered by the 9th or 10th Amendments, while ignoring the one relevant piece of law: the 5th Amendment: “...nor be deprived of life...”
>>common sense abortion control
I interact online with some Lefties; I’ve been saving that one up. I expect the screeching will be substantial.
Fox doesn’t agree with all attractive blondes. What about Hillary?
The Bubble headed Bleach Blond comes on at 5:00.
Hardly knee jerking, IMO.
The woman at Fox makes the mistake of assuming Roe v Wade is a litmus test for all conservatives, and it isn’t.
Though as clearly seen, it IS indeed a “single voter issue” for the Left, who would not only willingly throw all their eggs in that basket, but would throw all their eggs in that basket because it is their PLAN. (Because that is the way they do business on the Left)
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.
After all, what more can we ask? We want things considered in the framework of the Constitution, not on the basis of ideological or personal standing.
And we, as conservatives, are safe having that on our side, because we UNIVERSALLY want what the Constitution enumerates.
The Left doesn’t. It is that simple.
Never trust a young woman named Tomi, is my policy.
There you go! What we need is common sense abortion control.
That was exactly my point, and the point of people who understand how these things should be decided, that Roe v Wade was a deeply flawed decision.
It has remained all these years as a bedrock of “the right to an abortion” not because it was a sound decision, but because of the emotional and political firebombing that it can be used for by the Left.
Yes, that’s just what I meant. Whether it’s what Ms. Lahren meant, only she knows.
Perhaps we should rid the law of every crime with an obviously religious antecedent. Crimes like murder, theft, perjury. After all, they’re all part of the “guaranteed” right to privacy under the Third, Fourth and Fifth Amendments, aren’t they—even if they’re not committed exclusively in the home? Why not? The logic is identical.
Logic, however, appears nowhere in the Roe majority opinion. The justification for its repeal lies solely in its utter wrongheadedness and overreach (ask Justice Ginsberg), not in its defiance of natural or religious law (although it obviously violates both).
The “judicial activism” occurred with the Court’s ridiculous ‘73 decision. Returning to the status quo prior to Roe cannot then also be deemed judicial activism. Lahren is wrong on the facts and the logic.
I’m sure.
Well, we all know Hillary like dark haired women with olive colored skin.
Hey Tomi - You can have a moral and legal problem with Roe /abortion without being Christian or religious at all. All it takes is the belief that humans have a right to life and that human life begins at (conception, heart beat, 2nd trimester, whenever you believe it does). In fact, you can argue its morally imperative using just documents from our founding fathers - including, but not limited to, the DoI and Constitution - without any religious belief whatsoever.
With a HT to sodpoodle whose daily jokes illustrate this well for us!
*********************************************************************
A senior couple returned to a Corvette dealership where the salesman has just sold the car they had been interested in to a beautiful, leggy, busty blonde in a mini skirt and a halter top.
The old man was visibly upset. He spoke to the salesman sharply, “Young man, I thought you said you would hold that car till we raised the $85,000 asking price. Yet I just overheard you closed the deal for $72,000 to the lovely young lady there. And if I remember right, you had insisted there was no way you could discount this model.”
The salesman took a deep breath, cleared his throat and reached for a large glass of water. “Well, what can I tell you? She had the cash ready, didn’t need any financing help, and, Sir, just look at her, how could I resist?” replied the grinning salesman sheepishly.
Just then the young woman approached the senior couple and gave the car keys to the old man.
“There you go,” she said. “I told you I could get that idiot to lower the price. See you later Dad, Happy Father’s day.”
*********************************************************************
Women who understand this dynamic have a clear edge over men who don’t...:)
Overturning Roe is IN LINE WITH The Constitution, dumbass
For goodness sakes, learn about Constitutional Law before going on national TV and making a fool of yourself
Feminists need to protect abortion. Abortion allows men to have unprotected sex as often as possible without concern for romance, commitment or financial responsibility.
Feminists need to protect abortion. Abortion allows men to have unprotected sex as often as possible without concern for romance, commitment or financial responsibility.
“religious judicial activism which is a mistake and it’s unconstitutional”
The MISTAKE was the “judicial (legislative) ‘activism’” in the first place. Roe was the worst “decision” EVER
Wake up, stoopit
Thirty years ago I supported a large city construction department. When any of the guys needed to have work done on their personal cars, and were in a hurry, they’d have me take them in to the dealership or repair shop. The car was immediately put to the very head of the line. (Wouldn’t happen now - LOL.)
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.