Bob, I've been looking around and I can't find it. Joe is against abortion because he's orthodox Jew, right? Or not? I mean, I was upset more by the senate than the house simply because of your post about Steven resigning sometime soon. If Joe-mentum is on our side on abortion then maybe we can get someone through who will overturn roe. What do you think?
Afraid not. Orthodox Judaism- and Judaism generally- points out that it was when God breathed His ru'ach (Spirit, spirit, breath)into Adam that he became a living soul. They interpret this to mean that a person is not truly alive until he draws his first breath. As a result, though Judaism puts a very high value on children and would frown upon an abortion sought for any but weighty reasons, it does not oppose abortion per se. Lieberman is pro-choice, at least as far as early abortions are concerned. However, I doubt that he would be as inclined as other Democrats to oppose a qualified nominee just because that nominee might turn out to be pro-life.
Frankly, the Republican defeat on Tuesday probably ended any real chance for the one more strict constructionist justice that would probably be necessary to revisit Roe, Cruzan. and other such dubious decisions to reach the court under the current administration. The best chance for that to happen now is for a Republican to be elected president in 2008, and the Republicans to re-take the majority in the Senate.
One encouraging factor here: even if that Republican were Giuliani or Rice- who are both personally pro-choice- both are also strict constructionists who would almost certainly nominate justices who would likely vote to reverse or modify Roe and other such decisions simply because of their judicial philosophy. McCain and Romney, who are both recent converts to the pro-life cause (McCain is stil pro-fetal stem cell research, in fact) would likely turn out to be even safer on abortion. I have a real crisis of conscience, personally, as to whether I could vote for either, though, because either would minimize restrictions on fetal stem cell research.
In any case, the GOP must retake the Senate in 2008. That is as important as retaining the presidency.
Comments
Frankly, the Republican defeat on Tuesday probably ended any real chance for the one more strict constructionist justice that would probably be necessary to revisit Roe, Cruzan. and other such dubious decisions to reach the court under the current administration. The best chance for that to happen now is for a Republican to be elected president in 2008, and the Republicans to re-take the majority in the Senate.
One encouraging factor here: even if that Republican were Giuliani or Rice- who are both personally pro-choice- both are also strict constructionists who would almost certainly nominate justices who would likely vote to reverse or modify Roe and other such decisions simply because of their judicial philosophy. McCain and Romney, who are both recent converts to the pro-life cause (McCain is stil pro-fetal stem cell research, in fact) would likely turn out to be even safer on abortion. I have a real crisis of conscience, personally, as to whether I could vote for either, though, because either would minimize restrictions on fetal stem cell research.
In any case, the GOP must retake the Senate in 2008. That is as important as retaining the presidency.