Replies

Perfectly valid question/point.

Reagan wrote a book "Abortion and the Conscience of a Nation."

I see the primary effect of Governors/Presidents on the issue is in appointing judges/"justices" who will enforce the constitution, rather than re-write it to reflect their radical tendencies that usually have nothing to do with the will of the people.

Rehnquist - Nixon/Reagan (chief justice)
Ginsburg - Clinton
Bryer - Clinton
Stevens - Ford
O' Connor - Reagan
Scalia - Reagan
Kennedy - Reagan
Souter - Bush I
Thomas - Bush I

With a few notable "mistakes" I think conservatives tend to appoint conservative judges.

Also the laws and how they are enforced falls largely to the executive branch, laws such as RICO (anti-mafia of organized crime) statutes being used to persecute/prosecute American abortion protesters who were trying to exercise free speech rights.

Bush II is trying to get qighly qualified conservative/constitutionalist judges on the bench at the District Court levels, and hopefully will do so at the Supreme Court level. This may lead to the overturning of legalized baby murder in America, if God gives us enough grace to survive that long.

Note how vigorously George W. is being opposed in the Senate on judicial nominations, because they understand. The haters of America and unborn babies have drawn their line in the sand and might as well be saying "We will not go back to decency and morality" because that is what they truly mean.

Even Governor Davis understands the judicial appointment issue and has rapidly stepped up the appointment of liberal justices in California in order to do much more damage in his (hopefully) short time left in office.

That is how executives thwart the will of the people (remember, legalized abortion was never voted on by the people, and is a result of political activism and a judicial usurpation of power not granted to it in the Constitution). The people's will is routinely thwarted by the courts in the name of the "law."

So how do you propose "the people" stop abortion?

So how do you propose "the people" stop abortion?

The answer is both simple and incredibly difficult at the same time: If enough people refuse to tolerate any policy except abortion only in severe circumstances, the government will follow. Change the minds of the people and the government will [slowly] change to meet the new will -- and hopefully without bloodshed.

Government does not lead on moral issues, it follows after the fact. Prohibition demonstrated that in an earlier era. And the aboltion of slavery demonstrated that [with blood] in an even earlier era.

Regardless of the number of good appointees to the Supreme Court, the Court will not alter the current status quo, if it thinks that the action will cause bloodshed or open rebellion. We talk a lot (out of our hats mostly) about a rebellion on the right (election of Hillary being an example). But rebellion on the left is possible in many densely populated regions of this country. The Court will not cause such a spark, even if it had the numbers to correct the situation.