Posted on 11/12/2004 9:07:10 AM PST by cpforlife.org
To: National Desk
Contact: Amber Matchen of the American Life League, 540-903-9572 or amatchen@all.org
WASHINGTON, Nov. 11 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Judie Brown, president of American Life League, issued the following statement in response to news that White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales is being considered as the replacement for U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft:
"President Bush appears to be doing all that he can to downright ignore pro-life principles. There can be no other explanation for his recommendation of Alberto Gonzales as attorney general. Gonzales has a record, and that record is crystal clear.
"As a Texas Supreme Court justice, Gonzales' rulings implied he does not view abortion as a heinous crime. Choosing not to rule against abortion, in any situation, is the epitome of denying justice for an entire segment of the American population -- preborn babies in the womb.
"When asked if his own personal feelings about abortion would play a role in his decisions, Gonzales told the Los Angeles Times in 2001 that his 'own personal feelings about abortion don't matter... The question is, what is the law, what is the precedent, what is binding in rendering your decision. Sometimes, interpreting a statute, you may have to uphold a statute that you may find personally offensive. But as a judge, that's your job.' Gonzales' position is clear: the personhood of the preborn human being is secondary to technical points of law, and that is a deadly perspective for anyone to take.
"President Bush claims he wants to assist in bringing about a culture of life. Such a culture begins with total protection for every innocent human being from the moment that person's life begins. Within the short period of one week, the president has been silent on pro-abortion Sen. Arlen Specter's desire to chair the senate judiciary committee, and has spoken out in favor of a judge with a pro-abortion track record to lead the Justice Department.
"Why is President Bush betraying the babies? Justice begins with protecting the most vulnerable in our midst. Please, Mr. President -- just say no to the unjust views of Alberto Gonzales."
http://www.usnewswire.com/
-0-
I didn't vote for him or Kerry.
Ted Olson weighed in with a strong brief against racial preferences, arguing that discrimination cannot be used to achieve racial diversity. Bush agreed to intervene, but Gonzales started carving up Olson's language. This was not a matter of the president presiding over a debate between Olson and Gonzales. The solicitor general never got to talk to the president, except through Gonzales.Gonzales's views on affirmative action became widely known in Washington last year when, at a meeting of the conservative Federalist Society, he announced his support of preferences.
He had pulled the Texas court leftward, including decisions favorable to trial lawyers on tort cases. What most disturbed conservatives was his majority opinion invalidating a statute requiring parental notification of abortion by a minor. Democratic senators who last year blocked confirmation of Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen as a federal appellate judge repeatedly cited Gonzales's attack on her minority opinion as an "unconscionable act of judicial activism."
That alone led prominent Catholic conservatives and other foes of abortion to inform the White House that Gonzales is unacceptable for the high court.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/printrn20030123.shtml
=== The real sentiments of certain posters always bubbles to the top.
You're calling folks racist for objecting to the normalization of ILLEGAL aliens or the appointment of an ethnic pro-abort to the bench after being sold a bill of goods on how judicial appointments mandated we hold our noses and vote for the "pro-lifer" Bush?
You are nothing if not smarmy.
The difference is that legislating from the bench got us Abortion on demand. the people calling for judges that would rule "morally" is exactly what started this mess in the first place. the lefties thought it was "moral" to kill the unborn if it inconvienenced the Mother. Now the same people that devried this standard are calling on Bush to name judges and AG's that will flush the constitution. For Years we have been trying to get constitutionalist judges on the bench. We know there is no right to an Abortion in the constitution. Yet some of the comments here are making me think some of us have lost our way.
Ah.
An unborn baby in its mother's womb is a human being. That's a fact, not a judge's "whim." A law that regards an unborn baby as less than human is an unjust law, which is to say, no law at all.
Anyone who fails to understand the significance of abortion is unfit for holding public office of any kind, including dog-catcher.
What about laws that are intrinsically evil?
Did we learn anything from the Nuremburg trials?
Askel, you are such a predictable Bush-basher, I can count on you to pile on with the rest of the neanderthal far-right nutcases who are also predictable in their trashing of Bush.
I delight in the misery of those on the left and the right who were praying for Bush to lose.
If that includes you, good.
There is no law saying unborn children are not human. Roe vs. Wade removed the penal destraint on performing abortions in the name of a misguided liberty, it did not say unborn children are not human, nor is it a law.
In reality, most laws criminalizing abortion are still on the books. They are simply unenforceable until such time as the Supreme Court rejects the judicial legislating in Roe v. Wade.
Gosh. I hadn't ever thought of that before..... /sarc
Here in the real world, though, abortion is permitted because the whims of judges made it so. It is indeed an atrocity and should be stopped.
However, we should not fight the atrocity by demanding that judges exercise their whims in the opposite direction. When we replace "rule of law" with "whim of judge," the net results are almost guaranteed to be bad.
I delight that he's back in, if for no other reason that it raises the aggravation factor of the right-wing fringies on this website.
The difference is that we're right and they're wrong. Abortion is intrinsically evil. All laws that uphold abortion are intrinsically evil and therefore null.
Folks, this is a positive thing, not a negative thing.
Wake up!
Head fake. The AG is not where the Pro Life action is. Gonzales has been touted as a potential SC nominee. By putting him in as AG he removes him from that list. He lulls Dems to sleep with a moderate replacing Ashcroft.
These idiots want activists Judges.
Then they want to complain about activist judges.
How can people actually breathe with their heads stuck so far up their...?
In effect, it did. It was up to individuals to define the meaninging of life, and all that.
The judges' failure to protect innocent unborn life in law is a grievous sin of ommission equal in magnitude to a positive command to mass murder. Agnosticism in the face of evil is as bad as, if not worse than, a positive embrace of evil.
"I wish that you were hot or cold..."
--Jesus
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.