PDA

View Full Version : Miers Backed Abortion Ban



LoungeMachine
10-18-2005, 12:23 PM
October 18, 2005 |

ABC News

Miers Backed Ban on Most Abortions in '89

Court Nominee Miers Indicated in 1989 Questionnaire That She Supported Banning Most Abortions


By JESSE J. HOLLAND Associated Press Writer
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON Oct 18, 2005 — Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers pledged support in 1989 for a constitutional amendment banning abortions except when necessary to save the life of the mother, according to material given to the Senate on Tuesday.

As a candidate for the Dallas city council, Miers also signaled support for the overall agenda of Texans United for Life agreeing she would support legislation restricting abortions if the Supreme Court ruled that states could ban abortions and would participate in "pro-life rallies and special events."

Miers made her views known in a candidate questionnaire the White House submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is expected to hold hearings on her Supreme Court nomination next month. The one-page questionnaire was filled out, but unsigned, although the Bush administration affirmed its authenticity.


The document surfaced as the White House struggled to reassure conservatives who have been critical of Miers' appointment, depicting her as a crony of President Bush who lacks the background or qualifications to sit on the high court.

There was fresh evidence of trouble for Miers during the day, when Sen. David Vitter, R-La., issued a statement saying, "My top questions are: does she have a consistent and well-grounded conservative judicial philosophy and what objective evidence is there of it from her life's work?"

Miers, 60, meanwhile, continued meeting privately with senators during the day, part of a round of courtesy calls that precede the opening of confirmation hearings.

The 1989 questionnaire was designed to gauge candidates' views on the drive to ban most abortions, either by constitutional amendment or by state law in the event the Supreme Court overturned a 1973 ruling that established abortion rights.

"If Congress passes a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution that would prohibit abortion except when it was necessary to prevent the death of the mother, would you actively support its ratification by the Texas Legislature," asked an April 1989 questionnaire sent out by the Texans United for Life group.

Warham
10-18-2005, 03:00 PM
Sounds good to me.

BigBadBrian
10-18-2005, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Sounds good to me.

Me too.

Let's hope the Democrats kick this broad to the curb so Bush has to nominate someone more conservative.

Then Frist will get to "Go to War."

Roe v. Wade is history, either way you look at it.

:gulp:

FORD
10-18-2005, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian


Roe v. Wade is history, either way you look at it.

:gulp:

Not a chance, for two reasons:

1) Barbara Bush is openly pro-choice (though unfortunate that she didn't think about that about 60 years ago) She won't allow her idiot son to overturn Roe v Wade. Also, the availability of abortions is crucial to the Eugenics "science" which the BCE has been a part of since before Prescott started writing checks to Adolf.

2) Without the lure of overturning abortion, the Republicans have nothing left to keep the religious reich voting block. As long as they can claim they're just one judge or one pResident away, they'll get the votes.

The Republicans need Roe vs Wade even more than the BCE needs a phony war.

Nickdfresh
10-18-2005, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
...
Then Frist will get to "Go to War."

...
:gulp:

With the prosecution?:confused:

FORD
10-18-2005, 03:30 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
With the prosecution?:confused:

No, with the cats. But this time they're ready for his ass.....
http://www.triv.org/journal/images/loaded_cat-tm.jpg

Nickdfresh
10-18-2005, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by FORD
No, with the cats. But this time they're ready for his ass.....
http://www.triv.org/journal/images/loaded_cat-tm.jpg

Ahhh yes! Kitty-hit man, MR. PICKLES everybody...Stay away from Fristy...

Guitar Shark
10-18-2005, 03:37 PM
The question I want answered is whether Miers will get an abortion herself if she somehow gets pregnant. She should not be reproducing.

FORD
10-18-2005, 03:40 PM
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
The question I want answered is whether Miers will get an abortion herself if she somehow gets pregnant. She should not be reproducing.

She's 60, so the odds of that happening aren't very good.

Thank God!

Warham
10-18-2005, 09:06 PM
If Roe vs. Wade gets overturned, the religious right will have to keep voting Republican to keep getting conservative justices on the bench so that they won't overturn it BACK.

Besides that, until Democrats stop supporting gay marriage, a majority of the religious right will NEVER vote for them.

FORD
10-18-2005, 09:21 PM
Originally posted by Warham
If Roe vs. Wade gets overturned, the religious right will have to keep voting Republican to keep getting conservative justices on the bench so that they won't overturn it BACK.

Besides that, until Democrats stop supporting gay marriage, a majority of the religious right will NEVER vote for them.

The BCE Supreme Court will rule in favor of gay marriage when the case comes to them. Under the 14th ammendment, they won't have any other realistic alternative, considering this is the precedent used by both the Vermont and Massachussettes state courts.

And Junior's newly appointed Chief Justice might have some personal feelings on the subject......
http://underneaththeirrobes.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/roberts_scherer_lazarus_1.jpg

Warham
10-18-2005, 09:33 PM
The federal government should never refer to Massachusetts for any precedent. It's a cess pool of liberal waste. I should know, I live right next door.