Skip to comments.
Pro-Life Drudge Features History-Making Affidavit of Norma McCorvey [aka Jane Roe]
Smoking Gun Via Drudge ^
| 6-17-2003
| Norma McCorvey
Posted on 06/17/2003 2:25:16 PM PDT by Notwithstanding
Norma McCorvey, the woman whose 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case helped make abortion legal in the United States, today petitioned to overturn the historic Roe v. Wade decision. Known for years as just Jane Roe, McCorvey (pictured right) filed the below affidavit in support of a motion in U.S. District Court in Dallas. McCorvey, 55, stated that the landmark case "was built upon false assumptions" and had "caused great harm to the women and children of our nation." McCorvey, who has been stridently pro-life for nearly 10 years, noted that when she filed her original lawsuit 30 years ago, she was unsure of what the term "abortion" even meant. "I had heard the word 'abort' when John Wayne was flying his plane and ordered the others to 'Abort the mission,'" she writes. In petitioning the court to re-open and overturn the case, McCorvey and her attorneys have submitted affidavits from 1000 women who say that they, too, regret their abortions. (11 pages)
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; janeroe; normamccorvey; roe; roevswade
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-107 next last
To: Alamo-Girl
To: Alamo-Girl
To: Notwithstanding
God bless her for her stand here. I wonder if this can work. Never seen it done before.
23
posted on
06/17/2003 2:55:21 PM PDT
by
GreatOne
(You will bow down before me, Son of Jor-el!)
To: RedBloodedAmerican
Don't be so petty.
To: Diddle E. Squat
You're right. Regular abuse of posting guidelines by the same person is not my concern. The ends justifies the means, I suppose. I'll drop it.
To: Notwithstanding
Jeepers! A false affidavit. I don't see how they could not set it aside.
To: RedBloodedAmerican
You must not have read the posting guidelines, which note that "When you post an article, be sure to include the original title
where appropriate."
Here, there is NO title at the source - so it is not appropriate to include that which does not exist.
To: Notwithstanding; RedBloodedAmerican
Notwithstanding is right. As with so many other stories in the news, the way the media handles it is just as important as the story itself. Anyone who thinks otherwise should ask himself how a mediocrity like Bill Clinton could ever get elected, and how a frumpy socialist like Hillary could be hailed as the smartest, saintliest, most elegnant woman ever born. If more people were aware of the media's ability to shape the opinions of voters, maybe there would be a demand for more objective and thorough coverage of stories like the Norma McCorvey affidavit.
28
posted on
06/17/2003 3:03:59 PM PDT
by
giotto
To: Alamo-Girl
Go figure. While I am hopeful, I do know that a sitting SCOTUS generally doesn't like to make prior SCOTI look bad.
To: Alamo-Girl
So what if the district court overturns it but the SCOTUS refuses to hear. Confusion?!?
To: Notwithstanding
The original title of the article on Drudges site is "McCorvey Affidavit", and links to TSG. That is Drudges title for what you posted.. Just thought I'd help clear it up for you.
To: Notwithstanding
Pretty powerful statement. I hope it works. At the very least it will draw national media attention to the fact that abortion clinics do not disclose all the facts to the patients, all the risks, nothing, they just run them through as fast as they can.
I hope that in my life time I see Roe V. Wade overturned.
32
posted on
06/17/2003 3:08:03 PM PDT
by
cherry_bomb88
(Are you on the right side of the wrong issue or the wrong side of the right issue?)
To: RedBloodedAmerican
Actually, I linked to The Smoking Gun, where there is no title for the article. Apparently the monitors don't agree with you.
To: Notwithstanding
Drudges site which is in your title has the title of their link. most people would be able to figure that out. But your history of posts should let anyone know that.
To: RedBloodedAmerican
Bright people can go to Drudge themselves where they will see Drudge actually refer to this news event as history-making:
"History In The Making: 'Roe' Files Motion to Re-Open Roe vs. Wade ..."
To: cherry_bomb88
At the very least it will draw national media attention to the fact that abortion clinics do not disclose all the facts to the patients, all the risks, nothing, they just run them through as fast as they can. Oh, I think the press will print a few selective quotations from her affidavit and present some slanted and distorted factoids to try to make McCorvey look stupid. Expecting that as usual, the consumers of the toxic brew known as the daily noose will be too torpid to go check out the facts. And sadly that is not an unrealistic expectation, though the web is chipping away at this little by little.
To: RedBloodedAmerican
You are mad that this is breaking news.
Sorry to hear that.
Go to a pro-abortion website and perhaps you can find some peace and fellow travelers.
To: RedBloodedAmerican; Admin Moderator; Jim Robinson
So go ahead and whine to the admin moderators. Look I have pinged His FReepness, Jim Rob himself, for you. A snowball in the infernal regions has a greater chance than your whine.
To: RedBloodedAmerican
To: RedBloodedAmerican
This could be a very momentous document. Now is not the time to be so petty about some trite posting rule.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-107 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson