« Palin’s style too folksy | Main | Political viewpoints »

October 07, 2008

Obama and Supreme Court

As Ellen Goodman noted (10/5, Opinion, “Fate of Supreme Court also hangs in balance”), the direction of the Supreme Court will fall to the nominees of the next president, who is expected to nominate up to three Supreme Court justices. Those nominees will determine the constitutionality of Rove v. Wade for the next 30 to 50 years, a ruling already responsible for making legal the slaughter of tens of millions of unborn innocents.

Sen. McCain has vowed to nominate justices who will support the right to life. Sen. Obama, as an Illinois congressman, supported the ghastly partial birth abortion procedure and opposed Born Alive legislation that would have protected those who survived abortion. He would undoubtedly nominate justices who would support Roe v. Wade.

If you support Sen. Obama, be prepared to answer the cries of millions more unborn who never had a chance to live, to explain why you refused to support their right to life that you gave your own children, and what greater good you believed a President Obama would achieve in exchange for their lives.

Glenn Gordon
Liberty

Comments

~JJ

While Obama did not support the state version of the Born Alive he did support the federal Born Alive legislation. If you are curious to the reasoning:

http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/04/02/washington_times_wrong_on_obam.php

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/lying_about_being_liberal.html

wildoaklane

Yes. We absolutely need the government mandating what we do with our unborn children... we need to set a precedent that all decisions about our mother's babies are determined by the laws of our country... like they do in China. So let's elect officials that make sure the government is in control of this aspect of our lives. More government, more regulation is better!

Marctnts

Engineer,

Good catch. It's kind of hard to argue that the "balance" of the court will be upset when you base your argument on "moderate and liberal" judges who could be replaced under the same type of conditions which provided two of the justices you esteem.

I'm sure it made more sense in her head...

Engineer

Of course Ellen Goodman refuted her own argument by pointing to Stevens and Souter, judges appointed by republican Presidents and approved by a Democrat congress. Roe vs. Wade is perhaps the worst Supreme Court decision ever as it in effect is a Constitutional Amendment by the Court, not an interpretation of the Constitution.

gwennie

You've made an excellent point!

NO MORE COAT HANGERS!

Vote Obama/Biden 08

 
About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright