True. I would be more inclined to single-issue voting if it actually had significant results. It has been almost 40 years since Roe v Wade was passed, and I’m not going to spend anymore time falling for the GOP’s lip service.
The GOP is not anti-poor, they are anti-blanket entitlement.
Thats fine if you want but who will represent you? If you are “Libertarian”…isn’t that a party…or it is what they think it is.
Thats fine if you want but who will represent you? If you are “Libertarian”…isn’t that a party…or it is what they think it is.
He wrote libertarian with a small "L". I believe he is referring to the principles of libertarianism, not the official party.You can’t overturn Roe V Wade with a simple majority in congress. The president nominates justices who in turn get approved or rejected by the Senate. The Democrats have rejected justices who would likely have gone on to overturn Roe V Wade such as Robert Bork. Timing is also a factor: a president might be pro-life but have few or no opportunities to nominate supreme court justices. We have four solid constructionist justices who would likely overturn Roe V Wade if given the opportunity. All were nominated by a Republican president. We have solid pro-Roe V Wade justices - all were nominated by either Clinton or Obama. Then there are the “wild card” justices like Anthony Kennedy that usually come from the GOP after their original pick was rejected ( in this case Bork and Douglas Ginsburg). To accuse the GOP of only paying lip service to the issue of abortion because Roe V Wade hasn’t been overturned yet is way too simplistic. If you want to know why Roe V Wade is still the law of the land you might ask the Democrat catholic senators who voted to reject Bork. You might also ask the Democrat catholic voters who voted for Obama, thus ensuring the next two vacancies would be solid pro-Roe V Wade justices. While you’re at it, ask the Catholic independent voters (the true believers!) who voted for a 3rd party - taking votes away from McCain and indirectly helping Obama get elected. There’s lots of blame to go around, isn’t there?
There were other issues with Bork that kept him from being accepted - his rather rigid judicial philosophy, for one.
No blame there whatsoever. We are NOT obligated to vote Republican, and those Catholics who voted for Chuck Baldwin’s Constitutional Party did nothing wrong. Perhaps they believed that that party’s platform was superior to that of the GOP. Whatever reason they had was totally legitimate.
I doubt it as well.
If 2/3rds of the House and Senate support an amendment to the Constitution and it gets ratified by 3/4ths of the states, we could end Roe v. Wade.
I would like to at least see the attempt made even if the votes aren't there so that every Senator and Representative will be forced to vote it up or down.Apparently according to ishii one is at fault for voting for parties not likely to win the presidency, Funny, i didn’t know “might is right” was part of Catholic teaching.
kiddingIn the case of abortion, it will take might to end it. Until “pro life” democrats set aside there differences and join the real pro life crowd, abortion will continue as is.
IMO Many people think this way, mistakenly.
There are MANY things, And MANY chances this last administration of so called, Pro-life Democrats,has had opportunistic advantages of supporting pro-life issues As I mentioned in a previous post ]…I’ll let their record speak for them.
What is “the real pro-life crowd”?
Those of us who understand the current reality of our voting choices.
George Will: “Abortion’s ‘So-What’ Factor”
Overturning Roe v. Wade would not make abortion illegal. It would return jurisdiction on abortion to the states.
