Skip to comments.Rights for the unborn
Posted on 08/09/2010 2:19:13 PM PDT by jeffq73
President Obama's selection of Elena Kagan, the most demonstrably pro-abortion Supreme Court nominee in recent memory, presented a daunting challenge to pro-life leaders, as her 63 Senate votes during Thursday's confirmation attest. Not unreasonably, observers have asked: Why then, do we bother? The question resonates for this particular political confrontation but applies equally to the larger issue as a whole as we near four decades of abortion on demand in America post Roe v. Wade. We bother because, in the end, we will win.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
It’s obvious that she was put on the court because she is for abortion. Just a reward to the feminazis who elected the one.
Watch the cat-fight as the left defends citizenship for the Hispanic unborn, while declaring that the unborn child of citizens doesn’t even have a right to life.
As far as a simple vote about abortion is concerned, Kagan and Stevens would always deliver the same vote. Kagan will crank the reek factor up by an order of magnitude, though.
And concerning commentary about Kagan, where did the folks go who were making such a big deal about Harriet Miers’ inexperience a few years ago? Cat get their tongue? I mean, agreed, Roberts and Alito made more sense than Miers, but Miers could wrestle Kagan to the ground with one arm tied behind her back.
This reminds me. Haven’t there been convictions of double murder for killing a mother and a child in the womb?
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.