Posted on 10/10/2005 9:17:03 AM PDT by SmartCitizen
Stephen G. Peroutka, chairman of the board of governors for the National Pro-Life Action Center (NPLAC), issued the following response to President Bush’s nomination of Harriet Miers to replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor:
“Pro-life and pro-family conservatives supported President Bush’s campaign because he promised to appoint judges in the mold of Scalia and Thomas. With 45 million children’s lives lost to abortion, the on-going threat to the definition of marriage, and the continuing attack on the family itself, the stakes are too high to gamble on another ‘stealth’ candidate.
“While Ms. Miers may be satisfactory to President Bush, there is nothing in her record that should satisfy pro-lifers. It is incumbent upon President Bush to provide irrefutable proof that his nominee is, in fact, Scalia- or Thomas-like, and that he has not reneged on his campaign promise.
“Sadly, if the administration continues its attempts to hide their nominees behind the ‘Ginsberg cloak of silence,’ Ms. Miers will not be given the chance to establish whether she fully adheres to an American understanding of law and justice as defined by our Constitution. We believe at the very least, that Ms. Miers should answer the five basic questions that NPLAC submitted to the Senate during Roberts’ nomination.
“During those hearings, Judge Roberts stated that overturning stare decisis might ‘jolt’ the Court. It appears, instead, that the president is content to jilt those who put him in office. The time has come for pro-life and pro-family groups to hold this administration to a higher standard, instead of assuming a ‘cheerleader’ position that keeps their backs to the action.
“Abortion will not end in this country until we are unashamedly pro-life. Avoiding the subject-though considered strategic, coy and even intelligent by many-is not consistent with the expectations of those who elected Bush, the beliefs of our Founding Fathers or our obligation to God.”
NPLAC’s Five Questions are:
Do basic human rights come only from government or are they rooted in something that transcends government?
Is man’s inherent human nature fixed or does raw political power determine who is and is not a member of the human family?
Is law merely the construct of jurists and lawmakers or is it based on first principles of morals and justice?
Is the proper role of the judiciary to restrain/limit itself to interpreting law or does it possess de facto legislative powers?
Should the judiciary share power equally with the other two branches of government (the legislative and executive) or should its powers transcend them?
Post the exact portion of the story where it says they spent the money on anything but the daughters (which is illegal!), or shut your slanderous mouth.
I told you I beleive it is a life. Unfortunately our culture has no consensus on that.
Try answering my question: do you want an activist judge or not?
Fortunately, moral truth isn't decided by the "culture" - moral truths have already been established by a transcendant power. So, I don't give a flip what the sick and dying culture says. What we need is leadership, not someone who says that the country "isn't ready" to end abortion. That's not leadership. Leaders do the right thing regardless of majority opinion. Harry Blackmun was a nefarious blackguard but he was a leader in the sense that he didn't care what Americans thought of the Roe decision.
Oh, is this a threat from a morally superior Peroutka supporter?
Get a grip.
So do you dislike the other side's activist judges, and prefer ones you agree with?
Harriet Miers, ConservativeAt the risk of drawing the undying enmity of The Herd, I'm going to state categorically that conservatism is sitting pretty at this hour. That's because Harry Reid has just been hosed – and he doesn't even know it.
The navel gazers are nabobing about another Souter. That's silly. The Court will almost certainly move to the right as a result of the nomination and confirmation of Harriet Miers.
Columbine, disregard my post I just made to you as it was meant for the 'smart citizen' fellar/woman.
Finally, at least Peroutka is PROUDLY AND UNASHAMEDLY PRO-LIFE and will nominate an unambigous pro-life judge and FIGHT for that nomination - he doesn't try to hide it and down-play it and appease the liberals like Bush has done his entire tenure.
I don't like slanderous lies. You bush-bots remind me of the brownshirts.
Finally, at least Peroutka is PROUDLY AND UNASHAMEDLY PRO-LIFE and will nominate an unambigous pro-life judge
Hey, bud.
Your one month membership here along with your comments in this thread smells of troll.
Buzz off and kiss Peroutka's foot.
Winning isn't everything, especially when the winner is a few bricks short of a full load in the leadership department. All that shows is that most Americans were fooled into voting for the lesser of two evils. Let's see if the GOP can keep the wool over their eyes next time around.
Winning isn't everything,
Many well-known and solid conservatives are revolting over Bush's stupid pick for the Court. What Bush has shown by this pick is that he has no stomach for a fight with liberals. He would rather suck up to them than fight them and his record proves it. Who's the loser?
Who's the loser?
No, they were fooled into thinking G.W. Bush was a conservative. Now, many are seeing they've been duped because Bush is a faux conservative. On the other hand, if they had voted Peroutka, they would have got the man that they thought they voted for in Bush. Just think if all of the Christian leaders had pushed Peroutka instead of Bush - that alone is good for 20% of the vote.
The GOP is going to die a slow political death as it stands for nothing these days. Go ahead and root for your logo - that's all it is - an empty logo.
Now that I have had the last word, good day yourself.
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.