Thoughts on John Roberts…
Washington DC must be a fascinating place to live, sometimes.
These two paragraphs made me laugh aloud as I ate my lunch today:
NARAL-Pro Choice America announced its opposition to Roberts even before Bush formally made his selection public in a prime time televised White House appearance on Tuesday. The group planned an “emergency demonstration” against the nomination across the street from the Capitol at midday.
On the on the other side of the political equation, Progress For America called a news conference to announce a television commercial to begin running soon. The group, which coordinates its efforts with presidential aides, pledged in advance to spend at least $18 million on advertising and grass roots activities to buttress the confirmation prospects of whomever Bush chose. Entire article…
Can you disagree with a law and still respect it?
I don’t understand why some Democrats don’t think that it is possible to disagree with a law and still respect it as the law of the land. I believe that Roberts is saying that it is wrong to use his power to change a law from the bench.
I hate abortion. It is wrong. It is murder to kill a developing child because you don’t want it. I pray that God will use talented law experts and the loving witness of all Christians to turn the hearts of people so that abortion will not be an accepted practice in our country; until then I can respect that it is the law of the land. The question would be that, if the majority of people in this nation rose up with a loud voice and had the law changed, would the dissenters show the ability to respect the new law of the land. The answer is, of course, no and that is why “they” don’t understand Robert’s respect for the law.
Democratic concern over Roberts’ abortion views stem from two seemingly contradictory positions that Roberts took on Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.
In a brief that he filed with the Supreme Court while serving as deputy solicitor general in the administration of the first President Bush, Roberts said that Roe v. Wade “was wrongly decided and should be overruled.”
Several years later, he told senators during his 2003 confirmation hearings for his current appellate court post that the decision was “the settled law of the land.” Read more…
Hugh Hewitt on Roberts
“Judge John Roberts may be the smartest lawyer I have known, and he combines that intellect with a graciousness and good humor that will make it hard for any except the most extreme ideologues to oppose him. Here’s his bio, but it cannot fully convey the great intellectual force which Justice Roberts will bring to the Supreme Court Of The United States.”
Be sure to check out Powerline blog for their thoughts on how the left will attack Roberts.
Discussion Area - Leave a Comment