The Left is horrified with a child being ripped from its Mother’s arms but fine with ripping the arms off a child.
God bless Justice Thomas.
Thomas should have been made Chief Justice. Another f-up by W. I do not want any of the Red state abortion laws going to this SC.
We have a once in a generation chance to roll back some of R v W
but Trump needs another pick because Roberts has dropped all pretense of being a conservative.
While he's specifically addressing abortion, the same thing is true for a number of the USSCs decisions since the 1940s. Even further back than that if you consider the fact that Maubury vs. Madison back in 1803 is essentially unlimited rather than narrowly targeted at specific categories of laws that are subject to judicial review.
We must stop these immoral ghouls from murdering babies and chopping them apart for sale to the highest bidder.
HOORAY Clarence Thomas! Thank you, sir.
This is why I throw up nearly every morning. Soulless ghouls, is what they are. Disgusting is an understatement.
You must speak out to save your soul.
Who can deny the simple logic of Mother Teresa, who, at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, DC on February 3, 1994, stated: "And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"
The sole reason these rights were deemed unalienable is that both are derived from the Creator--not from the mother or father, and not from government or judicial decision. What is "granted" by human decision also can, by implication, be withheld.
"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them (life and liberty)," said Thomas Jefferson.
"The world is different now. . . and yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forefathers fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God." - John F. Kennedy, Inaugural Address
That understanding underlies every other consideration embodied in our Declaration of Independence and every protection of our Constitution. It is the very basis of our rights to life and liberty, of laws to protect them, and it distinguishes ours from other forms of government.
When we fail to acknowledge that foundation of our liberty, then we risk liberty itself for future generations, for where does the right to choose who lives and who does not really end?
That is why the question is of vital importance in each election. Already, we have deprived millions of their Creator-endowed rights to life and liberty, and our nation must be weaker for their loss. We need leaders who understand the implications and potential consequences of departing from our founding principles.
In recent decades, technological advances have enabled us to observe the characteristics and actions of God's tiniest creations in the womb. Unlike previous generations who could not see, we have no excuse for imagining that these are mere blobs of tissue labeled "fetuses." In their early weeks, we now can see that they are living babies who will continue on to possess life and liberty if we do not "destroy" both. Indeed, they are simply smaller versions of ourselves.
Questions on the economy, taxes, threats from terrorists, health care--all are considerations at election season. One, however, is basic to all others. Who will best protect the underlying premise of our Constitution--and the lives and liberties of millions yet unborn?
Promises are illusive and cheap. This voter will examine each candidate's previous voting record carefully on all issues, because past actions are the best predictors of future decisions.
One more - just one more conservative....
After all this time since Roe v. Wade, people, including Supreme Court justices have unsurprisingly become desensitized to the heinousness of the murdering of unborn children.