Paper: Kagan's Support for Infanticide-Abortion Should be "Kiss of Death"

[juliee]

Paper: Kagan’s Support for Infanticide-Abortion Should be “Kiss of Death”

Washington, DC – The Washington Times released an editorial column today on the nomination of pro-abortion activist Elena Kagan to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court. The Times says Kagan’s supporting partial-birth abortion (infanticide) should be the “kiss of death” for her nomination.

LifeNews.com/nat6515.html

 

[DysonSphere]

Paper: Kagan’s Support for Infanticide-Abortion Should be “Kiss of Death”

Washington, DC – The Washington Times released an editorial column today on the nomination of pro-abortion activist Elena Kagan to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court. The Times says Kagan’s supporting partial-birth abortion (infanticide) should be the “kiss of death” for her nomination.

LifeNews.com/nat6515.html

If she’s honest, I don’t think her personal opinions on this issue matter much. We don’t know if Kagan really supports partial-birth abortion, only that she advocated for it when she worked for Clinton, she says, in order to best advocate his view (which may not be her own).

Even if this is her own view, it shouldn’t matter, if she’s honest. She committed to follow legal precedent and the constitution, and if she does this, she won’t legislate from the bench, and her personal political views should be irrelevant. Her views on the law should be of real concern, and they seem, to me, to be very strong and well-defended, though they sometimes differ from my own.

 

[shelby2014]

If she’s honest, I don’t think her personal opinions on this issue matter much. We don’t know if Kagan really supports partial-birth abortion, only that she advocated for it when she worked for Clinton, she says, in order to best advocate his view (which may not be her own).

Even if this is her own view, it shouldn’t matter, if she’s honest. She committed to follow legal precedent and the constitution, and if she does this, she won’t legislate from the bench, and her personal political views should be irrelevant. Her views on the law should be of real concern, and they seem, to me, to be very strong and well-defended, though they sometimes differ from my own.

If she’s honest? Did you read the article - she is not honest. She took a study by a medical organization and pressured them to change the results of their study to further her own agenda. That is the polar opposite of honest! Last time I checked, she was not a doctor or scientist, either…

It does matter if it’s her own view - we cannot continue to place people in positions of power who are determined to continue this infanticide tragedy.