There's a difference between personal and professional opinion...

[Seeing Red]

Before I say anything else, let me just state for the record that I, along with most of you, it seems, believe that it is disturbing that John Roberts thinks that Roe v. Wade was decided "in error." With that said, I also believe that he was being genuine when he said that he accepts Roe as the "settled law of the land."

Any person, whether he is a liberal college student or a Supreme Court Justice, is entitled to hold his or her own personal opinions, whatever they might be. If Roberts dislikes Roe, then let him. The real question is, how will he APPLY the Constitution towards any future decision that may or may not be made regarding that historic case, and THIS is what we should really look at, and here, I do not see any threat to Roe.

[merh]

1. Good luck -- you can't explain this to folks.

But thanks for the effort.

[Norquist Nemesis]

2. A direct threat, no.

But an effective overturning, yes.

[Forever Free]

3. I totally agree with you.

I mean, honestly, would there have been ANY nominee we would have NOT hated?

Robert Bork's America is one of "segregation" and zero reproductive freedoms right?

For all we know, Roberts could be the next Souter. And I'm sure Roberts is a decent family man, who like Seeing Red said, would MOST likely separate personal opinion from professional rulings.

So seriously, stop acting like its the end of the world.

With that said....flame away.

[AverageJoe]

5. Any nominee we would have NOT hated?

Probably not. But I sincerely believe that the Democratic party should use all of its power to undermine the Treason Monkey at all times, fight everything he does. I don't care who he nominates for anything--they should be opposed.

[Geoff R. Casavant]

8. First Flame

PEACE!

[AverageJoe]

9. Self delete

[Hosnon]

4. When he said that Roe was decided 'in error' he was working on

a case to try to strike down the decision. That is what he had to do on that job. Lawyers are taught to fight for the side you're hired for - it is the judge or jury's job to make the final decision.

That said, he made the comment that Roe is 'settled law' as a Judge.

VERY IMPORTANT distinction for me. His anti-Roe stance was when he was being paid to be anti-Roe, his pro-Roe stance was when he was being paid to simply be a judge and decide the law.

Anyone that reads Roe can see that it is a well-reasoned opinion. He's a good judge and I'm confident he sees that as well.

[genius]

6. I must be in the wrong underground!

He's argued that Roe should be overturned. How much is the swamp land? I assume yo have some for sale.

[AlGore-08.com]

7. But Roberts doesn't have enough of a record to know

Whether he would always ignore his personal opinions over the law. He may be the next Souter, but then again, he may be the next Scalia, who seemed really reasonable and moderate when appointed, but turned out to be a hard right conservative.

Why, after surviving through 5 years of Team Bush bsing about everything from budgets to WMD to social security does anybody give Smirk the benefit of the doubt any more?

[ComerPerro]

10. The question is, then, can Roberts separate his personal and professional

opinions

[peacetalksforall]

11. So if we are starting to hear arguments for Roberts on the abortion

issue saying that he was only arguing for the client, it implies that may not be his personal opinion. That makes it legitimate for Senators to cross-examine him. (I got the impression that Senators may hesitate to want to bring up the issue.)

In the meantime we must know, Roberts is a member of the Federalist Society and was recommended by the Federalist Society with C. Boyden Gray leading the charge. A fair question to ask Fed Soc members is whether any of their members have argued on any law suit or funded any law case that would aid in overturning Roe vs Wade or whether the FS has a collective member position. Somehow, I have a feeling that I know what the answer would be.

The Federalist Society is the backbone of the right wing. There might be wives and former girlfriends of FS members who have had abortions and members may have a touch of pro-choice in their blood, but they know that the maniacal who complete their voting base are passionate and unreasoning abortion haters.

The Fed Soc is determined to rewrite our Constitution and Bill of Rights.