Showing posts with label the courts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the courts. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

The Early Objections...

... to Judge Sonia Sotomayor's nomination leave something to be desired.
Megyn Fox was playing devil's advocate on Fox News this morning, but perhaps she was playing too hard for Mr. Franks, whose main argument seemed to be that he can read the president's mind. (Also, the issue of abortion, via that conveniently co-opted phrase "right to life," was, in his view, first and foremost in the minds of the nation's founders when they were drafting the Constitution.)

REP. TRENT FRANKS, R-ARIZ.: She, you know, has been touted as a bipartisan pick, but she is a reliable liberal on the Supreme Court. And I think Mr. Obama knew that, that she would probably very likely have a pro-abortion perspective that would overcome any right to life, that really is the whole foundation of the Constitution.

And there is clearly a liberal bias in her -- in her votes, and that's borne out in the -- in the record, across the board.

MEGYN KELLY, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: But where do you get that from? I mean, I've looked back at her opinions, and granted, it hasn't been that long that we've been poring over her history, but I see no pro-abortion ruling on there. I see one ruling she issued that was actually pro-life.

FRANKS: Yes, no, I'm not -- I'm not pointing out the life issue, in particular, in any rulings that she's made, but I'm convinced that Mr. Obama knows what her perspective there is.

Thursday, June 28, 2007

Friday, June 01, 2007

Welcome back, Jack

Dr. Kevorkian leaves prison after serving eight years.

Eight full years... and you think about some of the violent criminals who spend far less time than that, for crimes that don't seem to compare, either in degree or kind.

Monday, April 23, 2007

Casualties of the media-savvy anti-abortion movement's first significant victory...

... first in a long war. And the "fair and balanced" media has often been only too happy to play into the hands of whichever side comes up with the catchiest phrases.

This comment in reply to the article illustrates just one example of the real consequences of the court's decision:

If one of your daughters had the terrible misfortune to have a wanted pregnancy go terribly awry because of profound fetal anomalies that were not compatible with life, I doubt that you, as a good, nurturing, loving mother would want one of her daughters to carry a fetus without a brain, or liver or kidneys, or organs all growing outside his or her body for any more weeks than necessary. She would spend those weeks in the most profound kind of torment and misery knowing that the wanted pregnancy would result in death once the fetus tried to take its first breath.

Before the D&X/D&E procedure was developed, the method used was in utero dismemberment. That procedure ran the considerable multiple risks of uterine perforation and all that it can bring. The D&X/D&E is safer and allows grieving parents to hold their wanted child and at least bury it with some dignity.

Many of these profound fetal anomalies are not able to be determined until very late in a pregnancy.