Kakki wrote: > > I don't know about that. Conservative judges are not known for being > judicial activists, but rather for uphoding consitutional law rights.
I've heard that lately from conservatives, including Bush himself I think, on tv so I've also heard the scornful tone of voice. It's strange to me that only liberal judges would be "activists" when all judges, even the Supreme Court ones (as the election debacle showed), are not completely impartial and base their decisions somewhat on their personal viewpoint and prejudices. So, what does this "activist" thing mean anyway? Conservatives seem to think only they see the Constitution purely. From my point of view, they're just as activist (although their activism is to move us backward, as in back to the 1950s if some conservatives had their way). I could tolerate conservatives' attitude a lot more if they honestly said "we want the action to go our way." Just admit it rather than scornfully talk about those liberal judges. I get annoyed at the self-righteous "we see it all purely and those liberals don't" attitude. That's just not the case. (And, Kakki, I'm not even hinting that there's any scorn in what you've written so please don't spend even a second thinking that. I'm recalling what I've heard from politicians.) > I think a number of states had legalized abortion before Roe v. Wade and > some like California tightened up the state consitution after that decision > as insurance in the chance Roe v. Wade was ever overturned. Good for California regarding the tightening up. I hope it works. It seems like if the Supreme Court outlawed abortion then abortion would not be allowed in any state, but maybe that's not the case. > Where I start to have a problem with the rhetoric is when I hear people > start bashing and automatically lumping in ALL Christians and conservatives > universally as "extremists" and anti-choice and various other and sundry > terms with regard to this issue. I don't know about ALL anything. There are liberals who are anti-abortion because they are also anti-death penalty and it doesn't make sense to them to sanction death of any kind, so people's views can be quite complex and even contradictory sometimes. Most people do put themselves somewhere on the political spectrum because most (not all, but most) of their beliefs fit into a consistent world view, but where someone is on that spectrum is their business, although it does usually show in their actions and attitudes. My statements about conservatives are about politicians who have said or by their actions shown they have a certain agenda, which they themselves would label conservative, or about radio talk show hosts, who also label themselves conservative, usually proudly so, and push their viewpoint on the airwaves. Both groups are making their viewpoints public so disagreeing with them seems fair to me, especially when they're politicians whose actions may have some effect on my life. It gives me the creeps and in more paranoid > moments makes me think that there are many in the U.S. who would like to > totally disenfranchise Christians and conservatives from any participation > and representation in government. Really? I think the conservatives (some of whom are Christians but I don't automatically assume they are) are doing very well these days. Even the president is one! So how are they being disenfranchised? Conservative candidates have a lot of money to spend, there are lots of places to vent on all those talk shows where they can freely make fun of liberals, and they almost have control of Congress (although I hope that changes this fall). If anything, from my point of view they'd like to wipe out all liberals. When it comes to government policies and > laws these groups have many other issues and concerns other than abortion. > It also seems that some of the disagreements have nothing to do with the > right to abortion per se, but rather to the taxpayer funding of abortions in > other countries, or whether 12 year old girls should have the right to have > an abortion without their parents' knowledge. There are valid questions, > IMO, that have nothing to do with the right itself, yet they seemed to be > all lumped into an anti-choice, "extremist" category. I agree that there are many side issues that get put under the abortion concern, and not all people who are anti-abortion are extremists. Talking about each single issue can get quite complicated, which is why it often is all lumped together and made to seem very simplistic. Plus, abortion is such an emotional issue, not only in the awareness that it's about loss as well as choice, but also in bringing up questions about the worth and purpose of a woman's life, so it's a hard subject to speak of in depth; much easier to talk about laws and rights and taxpayer money, and sometimes argue about all that. Debra Shea
