Posted on 07/02/2018 3:04:37 PM PDT by MarMema
The JJ Ping list. Let me know if you want on or off...
From National Republic:
“Perhaps the Court would not have been so determined to uphold Roe if it had more seriously considered the fundamental flaws in that original decision. One prominent abortionist involved in the case, Bernard Nathanson, later admitted that he and fellow abortion proponents in the medical field cooperated to falsify statistics on the number of illegal abortions and maternal deaths in the decades preceding Roe. When Nathanson later realized the horror of abortion and quit the practice, he explained publicly how he and other key individuals used the false information to convince the Court that legalizing abortion would be safer than allowing it to continue illegally.”
Question—Isn’t that Fraud Upon The Court?
The Life At Conception Act would render Roe v. Wade an irrelevant arcane piece of U.S. legal history. It doesn’t technically overturn Roe v. Wade but it does remove the basis for it, the definition of “personhood,” so Roe v. Wade would be meaningless.
It is Congress + a president that could and should eliminate Roe v. Wade not the judiciary.
late ping for akalinin
On please!
You are added! Thanks.
Put me one please; thanks.
You are there. Thanks!!
After all those conservative appointees, R v. W remains the law of the land despite the caterwauling by the libtards and the MSM.........And it will long after I pass away......
This is nothing more than fake news and fake crisis that every Republican president since Reagan had to deal with..........
Now, all we need to do is help him retire Debby!
Do your duty, Michigan!
Make us proud!
45 years since R v. W, so why hasn't it happened? If I recall, every Republican president in the past 45 years has been opposed to abortion...........
Accept the fact that it ain't gonna happen in our lifetime..........
The answer to you first question is, in part, because no one came up with the concept until recent years. Not to mention all but Reagan were RINOs.
I see no reason to accept that it won’t happen in my lifetime even though I agree that it likely won’t. That’s a defeatist attitude that I won’t indulge in. At any rate my comment wasn’t based on expectations.
Do your "recent years" also include Thomas, Alito, Roberts and Gorsuch?
Why is it that only Republican nominees come under the spotlight of abortion rights and become a major MSM issue and not Democrat nominees?
Why is it that only Republican political candidates are put under the spotlight of abortion rights and not Democrats?
Is it possible that not all Democrat politicians support abortions but are immune from MSM scrutiny on that subject? Of course it is.........But you'll never hear them called on the carpet to defend their beliefs.
Pro Life is the biggest red herring that the MSM uses to divide Republican politicians from the voters in virtually every election while the Democrats get a pass........
I don't see a connection between proposed legislation and SCOTUS justices.
Why is it that only Republican nominees come under the spotlight of abortion rights and become a major MSM issue and not Democrat nominees?
Because over 90% of all MSM journalists are Democrats.
Thank you...you got the point.
I got your point before but it’s a non-sequitur to my original post and subsequent replies.
On.
We need outside the box thinking on this. If R v W cannot be directly overturned some sort of go around might be the answer. Right now Obamacare technically exists but some of its main components are being removed through various means. Perhaps gutting Ocare might serve as an example of how to neutralize abortion.
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.