Sandra Day O'Conner and the Supreme Court
Get ready, the war for the Supreme Court will now commence. Already, you have the Democrats demanding that the President not change the court by selecting someone who disagrees with their views. They will of course, spin this as a "reproductive rights" issue. Silly euphemism as that is, for the destruction of innocent life, simply because it is temporarily at your mercy.
The problem with all the hysteria that will be raised, is that all the Supreme Court would really do is overturn Roe vs Wade. This merely places abortion regulation in the hands of the states, from which it never should have been taken in the first place. Obviously, there will be a range of decisions across the country. Some states will severely restrict abortion, others will not.
Something else that needs to be kept in mind is that the baddest conservatives on the Supreme Court protected our property rights in their dissent to the Kelo decision. True, Justice O'Connor was also part of the dissent, this time, but her history of judicial decisions give no guarantee that she could be counted on to always make such decisions.
This shouldn't be surprising, when someone makes the middle their ideology, they really have no solid bearing. They are merely splitting the difference between what they perceive as extreme positions. But how do they define extreme and why should one assume the extreme is always wrong or that splitting down the middle is correct? Perhaps, the split is 60/40 to the right or 80/20 to the left. Shouldn't truth be the guide, no matter where it leads? Yes, that takes courage and will not win you applause from the NY Times. But why should someone care about that?
The problem with all the hysteria that will be raised, is that all the Supreme Court would really do is overturn Roe vs Wade. This merely places abortion regulation in the hands of the states, from which it never should have been taken in the first place. Obviously, there will be a range of decisions across the country. Some states will severely restrict abortion, others will not.
Something else that needs to be kept in mind is that the baddest conservatives on the Supreme Court protected our property rights in their dissent to the Kelo decision. True, Justice O'Connor was also part of the dissent, this time, but her history of judicial decisions give no guarantee that she could be counted on to always make such decisions.
This shouldn't be surprising, when someone makes the middle their ideology, they really have no solid bearing. They are merely splitting the difference between what they perceive as extreme positions. But how do they define extreme and why should one assume the extreme is always wrong or that splitting down the middle is correct? Perhaps, the split is 60/40 to the right or 80/20 to the left. Shouldn't truth be the guide, no matter where it leads? Yes, that takes courage and will not win you applause from the NY Times. But why should someone care about that?
Author: Mark K. Sprengel | 9:42:00 PM |
|
| 
Save To ~ Social Bookmarks | My Bookstore |
