From: Lee Daniel Crocker (lee@piclab.com)
Date: Thu Feb 06 2003 - 20:40:22 MST
> (Lee Corbin <lcorbin@tsoft.com>):
> The reservations that I have about "Roe V. Wade" are well
> summed up by Judge Bork:
>
> [Old "abortion isn't mentioned in the Constitution" stuff]
My essay concentrated on biological arguments rather than legal
ones, but Bork's argument is just as much nonsense as the religious
arguments, and just as dishonest. People who claim to be
reading the constitution literally will point out amendment ten
when it suits their pre-chosen agenda, and conveniently ignore it
when it doesn't. The idea that a right cannot be protected just
because it isn't mentioned is a direct contradiction of the plain
English text of that amendment, and is not an argument worthy of
any respect.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lee/> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Feb 06 2003 - 20:42:21 MST