RE: Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Thu Feb 06 2003 - 18:07:32 MST

  • Next message: spike66: "Re: Fuel Efficient Cars (was Oil Economics)"

    The reservations that I have about "Roe V. Wade" are well
    summed up by Judge Bork:

          I objected to Roe v. Wade the moment it was decided,
          not because of any doubts about abortion, but because
          the decision was a radical deformation of the Consti-
          tution. The Constitution has nothing to say about
          abortion, leaving it, like most subjects, to the
          judgment and moral sense of the American people and
          their elected representatives. Roe and the decisions
          reaffirming it are equal in their audacity and abuse
          of judicial office to Dred Scott v. Sandford. Just
          as Dred Scott forced a southern proslavery position
          on the nation, Roe is nothing more than the Supreme
          Court's imposition of the morality of our cultural
          elites.

    Unfortunately, since that time Bork has become wildly anti-abortion:
    http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9612/articles/bork.html

    But his original reasons, above, to oppose the ruling
    still stand in my opinion.

    But sooner or later in the United States it seems, everything
    must be decided globally by the Federal Government and its
    "one size fits all" mentality.

    Lee Corbin



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Feb 06 2003 - 18:03:54 MST