.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

 

WaPo: Alito code-words the abortion issue - Jan. 11

Nominee Avoids Detailing Views on Controversial Issues

By Charles Babington and Jo Becker, Washington Post Staff Writers - Wednesday, Page A01

Alito Introduces His WifeSupreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr., seen at right introducing his wife to the Senate Judiciary Committeesaid yesterday that his 1985 assertion that the Constitution does not protect the right to an abortion was a "true expression of my views at the time," but he told senators he would "approach the question with an open mind" if confirmed to the high court.

Repeatedly asked about abortion rulings that date to the 1973 Roe v. Wade case, Alito said long-standing decisions deserve great respect. He stopped short of saying Roe could not be overturned, however, saying that the doctrine of following precedent is not "an exorable command" -- the same language the late Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist once used in arguing to overturn Roe.

Full Washington Post story.

D.H.: This has been very carefully choreographed.  He says enough about Roe v. Wade being established precedent to keep pro-choicers asleep.  But he says enough about precedent being reversible -- while smiling when Republican senators rail against Roe not being Constitutionally sound -- to keep the religious-right faithful standing in the Republican line waiting forever.  A magnificent con-job by a con-stitutional scholar, par excellance.  When this type thing is done in business, it is considered a deceptive trade practice. 

Dave Haigler, Abilene, Texas
lawfirm webpage: www.haigler.info
 
If those links don't work, try our political blog: http://demlog.blogspot.com.

Comments:
Willys said:

Couldn't agree with your comment more. I am pro choice, but not pro abortion. I was a medical student, intern and resident before Roe vs Wade. I had to deal with the horrors of the system and I will never forget what I saw. This business of allowing abortion if the mother's life is in danger is flawed. The definition of "in danger" is very subjective and if a doctor thinks he is going to be tried for murder because of performing an abortion, he will not do one no matter the circumstances. The pro life groups sit out on the sidelines and prosetilitize (sorry cannot spell that word today for some reason) but never crawl down into the trenches where I have been.

Willys
 
thanks for your comments, Willys.

this is an important point of view, which needs to be shared.

i am going to recommend you to speak to our TDW meetings.

-Dave
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Donate to DemLog, a project of Marcus Comton (click on box below to go to PayPal and donate). Thank you very much: