Replies

To all the people on our side who are doubting judge Roberts, please go ahead and join the left to prevent his confirmation. How does the this sound guys? What the hell do you want guys? Someone who proclaims that once he is a judge he will overturn Roe vs. Wade? Do you know that there is no way he will be confirmed if he says so. In fact he will be violating his judicial ethics if he said that he want to overturn Roe Vs. Wade before he hear any case in front of him as judge.

read this and learn how to shut up before you open your mouth and spew doom and gloom, and lies:

Why does NCJW (Rabid left wing group) oppose John Roberts' nomination?

While serving as Deputy Solicitor General in the Bush Administration, Roberts argued for the gag rule in Rust v. Sullivan (1991), by which the federal government barred doctors working in family planning programs receiving federal funds from even discussing abortion options with patients. The brief also argued that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided – a question not even posed in the case. The Supreme Court upheld the gag rule on the narrower ground that the rule itself was not unconstitutional.

As Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts also argued in an amicus curiae brief in Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic (1993) that protesters from Operation Rescue and six other individuals who blocked access to reproductive health care clinics did not discriminate against women, even though only women could exercise the right to seek an abortion. The year after the Supreme Court endorsed this narrow interpretation, Congress enacted the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE) to protect women and health care providers from violence, clinic blockades, and harassment.

Roberts also co-authored an amicus brief for the administration in Lee v. Weisman (1992) in support of letting public high schools include religious activities in their graduation programs. In that case, the court ruled against the government.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1447277/posts

A quick point. In those briefs Roberts makes ample use of the word "We". WE believe Roe was wrongly decided, etc., etc. He was a lawyer arguing for a client...

With a viewpoint like that, I assume you don't think Janice Rodgers Brown should be a judge, since she has written extensively about her opinions on many matters.

All some of us are trying to say is, is that we wish we had a better feel for where this guy stands on the issues which matter to us.

I don't need him to specifically say "if appointed I will do everything in my power to overturn Roe"... although that would be nice :)

I would settle for some writings he has made in the past which call into question the legal basis behind roe.

Most legal scholars agree that roe was a travesty, even those who agree with the pro-choice movement.

Most of these people are anti-Republican anti-Bush and they think no one realizes it.

Perhaps it would have been better had they, themselves, been "stealth" candidates and not outted themselves in opposition of everything in the last five years.

They are the minority opinion. They are becoming as much of a joke as the Liberals, because you know what they'll say before they open their mouths. Whereas the people supporting Roberts did NOT jump in the air when speculation was on Clements. These people did, however release the same talking points on her they have used on Roberts. They had the form ready, they only needed the name.

Why does NCJW (Rabid left wing group) oppose John Roberts' nomination?

I don't know. Why did the rabid left wing groups oppose Souter? Because he was nominated by a Republican. It's the only reason they recognize.