Thursday, November 17, 2005

GOP Leader Fears Backlash If Roe v. Wade Overturned - Or, Why I Am No Longer A Republican

Exhibit # 239 as to why I no longer consider myself a "Republican" voter:
WASHINGTON -- The Republican lawmaker who helped guide the GOP to an expanded majority in the House three years ago warned yesterday that a Supreme Court ruling overturning a woman's legal right to an abortion -- a possibility if the high court shifts further to the right -- could hurt his party's political prospects and cause a ''sea change" in suburban voting habits.

Representative Tom Davis of Virginia, who chaired the National Republican Congressional Committee through the 2002 election, said that if the Supreme Court threw out Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that established that abortion rights were protected by the Constitution, ''you're going to have a lot of very nervous suburban candidates."

At a breakfast gathering of reporters, Davis said Republicans have a political cushion with voters as long as Roe is intact. Currently, ''you can be prolife and no one feels that's a threat to someone having to make a difficult decision" if abortion is illegal, he said.

Davis's comments came days after the disclosure of a 1985 document in which Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr. said he believed the US Constitution ''does not protect the right to an abortion."
My Comments:
"It's okay to talk about not killing babies. But if we actually get serious about doing something to stop the slaughter, we might lose some votes."

Just so long as you got your priorities straight there, Tom.

2 Comments:

At 11/17/2005 5:44 PM, Blogger Fredi said...

Well this explains a lot.

This explains why they claim they're prolife but keep increasing Planned Barrenhood's funding. Why they can't seem to pass a human life amendment even with a so-called 'Pro-Life' majority.

Thanks for clearing that up, Tom.

JacqueFromTexas

 
At 11/17/2005 9:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why they can't seem to pass a human life amendment even with a so-called 'Pro-Life' majority.

First, a constitutional amendment requires two-thirds of both houses to vote for it and then it needs to be ratified by three quarters of the states. A simple majority simply won't do it. Second, there isn't a pro-life majority in the Senate.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

hit counter for blogger