Gingrich: Kamala Harris Is an ‘Openly Anti-Catholic Bigot’

[Suudy]

Thus you get the point. They aren’t in there.

Oh, sure. I understand. It seems you don’t. They found a “right” to abortion through Griswold’s tenuous “emanations of a penumbra.” But its not just my opinion. Even lefty, pro-abortion types admit Roe was bad law.

Ely, a well respected legal scholar, thinks abortion should be legal, but Roe was wrongly decided (from here, emphasis mine):

And at bottom Roe signals the Court’s judgment that this result cannot be justified by any good that anti-abortion legislation accomplishes. This surely is an understandable conclusion–indeed it is one with which I agree–but ordinarily the Court claims no mandate to second-guess legislative balances, at least not when the Constitution has designated neither of the values in conflict as entitled to special protection.

And Edward Lazarus, a very strong pro-“choice” lawyer says (see here):

But as a matter of constitutional interpretation, even most liberal jurisprudes – if you administer truth serum – will tell you [Roe] is basically indefensible.

Read the linked article. He talks about how bad Roe is and better ways to achieve a pro-“choice” result.

And he’s not alone. Roe is not good law and really has no basis in the Constitution at all.

 

[Cathoholic]

Nepperhan on support for abortion that is allegedly in the Constitution . . .

“We, the people …”

Only if you RE-DEFINE certain “people” as less than people.

Your citation actually works against your thesis Nepperhan.

 

[1cthlctrth]

1cthlctrth:

Please quote for all of us the specific text in the Constitution where abortion is declared legal. Thanks.

“We, the people …”

Thanks for admitting that you were unable to find any quote in the Constitution that declares abortion legal. Not everyone has the guts to admit when they are wrong.