Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BaghdadBarney
I think that to reverse Roe today a justice has to dip into a realm which, to date, John Roberts suggests is not within his judicial comfort zone: moral truth. Precedent matters a lot most of the time. But not when we are talking about fundamental matters of justice. To see that abortion is a fundamental injustice requires moral vision, which John Roberts no doubt possesses.

Abortion is no more a matter of 'moral vision' than any other law. Overturning Roe does not require anything other than a straightforward reading of the Constitution.

7 posted on 07/21/2005 10:37:46 AM PDT by Sloth (History's greatest monsters: Hitler, Stalin, Mao & Durbin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Sloth

Exactly. This "moral vision" crap is just that. Roe is bad law and unconstitutional. Legislators should have "moral vision", judges are supposed to judge the consitutionality of a law, no matter how moral or immoral.


15 posted on 07/21/2005 10:51:06 AM PDT by BaghdadBarney
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson