McCain on abortion

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ajg1959, Aug 28, 2008.

  1. ajg1959

    ajg1959
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Messages:
    1,383
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is from McCain's website

    http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm


    Human Dignity and the Sanctity of Life

    Overturning Roe v. Wade

    John McCain believes Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned, and as president he will nominate judges who understand that courts should not be in the business of legislating from the bench.

    Constitutional balance would be restored by the reversal of Roe v. Wade, returning the abortion question to the individual states. The difficult issue of abortion should not be decided by judicial fiat.

    However, the reversal of Roe v. Wade represents only one step in the long path toward ending abortion. Once the question is returned to the states, the fight for life will be one of courage and compassion - the courage of a pregnant mother to bring her child into the world and the compassion of civil society to meet her needs and those of her newborn baby. The pro-life movement has done tremendous work in building and reinforcing the infrastructure of civil society by strengthening faith-based, community, and neighborhood organizations that provide critical services to pregnant mothers in need. This work must continue and government must find new ways to empower and strengthen these armies of compassion. These important groups can help build the consensus necessary to end abortion at the state level. As John McCain has publicly noted, "At its core, abortion is a human tragedy. To effect meaningful change, we must engage the debate at a human level."


    AJ
     
  2. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't take my statement from an Abortion perspective but should the laws of this land change as the make up of one court changes? if so then it means the court is not interpreting the law, they are deciding based on their beliefs.
     
  3. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,429
    Likes Received:
    72
    While in general, I could agree. However, when a bad decision is enshrined into precedent, it is no injustice to remove that decision.
     
  4. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0

    But the court supposedly decided by interpreting the constitution. I don't get it, we respect the supreme court as the final decider of what the constitution does and does not say. You saying these experts are no expert? If this decision is bad or wrong then how many decious should we trust.

    I still say we need to have congress or a president send though a law that way there is no decision that has to be made. it will be the law of the land...

    They can even put something on a ballet and let the people vote. Either way, I don't think the court is the answer.
     

Share This Page

Loading...