United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: SAY NO TO NEIL GORSUCH FOR SUPREME COURT
Source:
News With views
URL Source: http://www.newswithviews.com/Nelson/kelleigh387.htm
Published: Jan 26, 2017
Author: Kelleigh Nelson
Post Date: 2017-02-03 13:16:58 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 6022
Comments: 16
One of the reasons I changed — one of the primary reasons — a friend of mine’s wife was pregnant, in this case married. She was pregnant and he didn’t really want the baby. And he was telling me the story,” Trump told Brody. “He was crying as he was telling me the story. He ends up having the baby and the baby is the apple of his eye. It’s the greatest thing that’s ever happened to him. And you know here’s a baby that wasn’t going to be let into life. And I heard this, and some other stories, and I am pro-life. —Donald J. Trump Our 45th President told us he would put pro-life judges on our Supreme Court. However, those who helped him with the list of conservative judges were both the Federalist Society, and the Heritage Foundation (called Heretic Foundation by many of my well-educated friends). The latest choice we’re now hearing is at the top of the list is Neil Gorsuch. Neil Gorsuch is NOT pro-life. His selection would violate Trump's pledge to nominate a pro-life justice to the Supreme Court. Roe v. Wade would not be overturned for 40 years if the 49-year-old Gorsuch is picked. Forty million more babies would be murdered in their mothers’ wombs with this choice. The pro-life movement has only a few hours or days to object, protest, criticize, and veto the nomination of this pro-choice candidate. Trump floats these trial balloons to see if people object. We must strongly object, and please speak out loudly now. Gorsuch has never said or written anything pro-life. Andy Schlafly knew him in law school and afterwards, and has reviewed his opinions and his book. He's written multiple opinions that demonstrate he is not pro-life. For example, in the case of Pino v. U.S., Gorsuch discussed whether a 20-week-old "nonviable fetus" had the same rights as a "viable fetus." Gorsuch, showing that he is not pro-life, indicated that his answer is "no" unless the Oklahoma Supreme Court specifically found rights for the "nonviable fetus." Rather than render a pro-life ruling, Gorsuch punted this issue to the Oklahoma Supreme Court for it to decide. Gorsuch's approach is similar to the unjust approach based on viability that underlies Roe v. Wade. More information, including how Gorsuch opposes overturning precedent even when it is wrong, is here. He supports special rights for transgenders, too. And he is no Scalia, as Gorsuch was not even on the Law Review in law school. We've been down this road before, and it doesn't work for Republican presidents. Andy Schlafly recently spoke at a large conservative conference in Michigan, a state Trump carried by barely 10,000 votes based on immense efforts by pro-lifers there. That margin disappears if Trump is misled to break his pro-life pledge for the Supreme Court. Evangelicals spoke out and vetoed the previous top choice, Bill Pryor. Now it is urgent that pro-lifers speak out immediately and veto Neil Gorsuch. These choices are coming from the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation. The Federalist Society is attempting to get a pro-Roe judge chosen instead of another Scalia. The Federalist Society, is allegedly an organization of conservatives and libertarians seeking reform of the current American legal system in accordance with a textualistic or originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. It is one of the nation's most influential legal organizations, masquerading as something they are not. The Federalist Society began at Yale Law School, (home of Skull and Bones), Harvard Law School (that bastion of higher liberal learning), and the University of Chicago Law School, (home of Bill Ayers and where protestors disallowed Trump rally). It originally started as a student organization which challenged what its members perceived as the orthodox American liberal ideology found in most law schools. Doesn’t this actually make you laugh when these three Ivy league schools are known as having a Marxist agenda? Pro-Lifers Need to Respond There are ways to respond, and as my friend Devvy Kidd said, “We have to flood the White House with calls, tweets, emails. This has worked in the past if enough people do it.” The comment phone number is: 202-456-1111. The caller simply needs to say: I strenuously object to Neil Gorsuch as a supreme court justice nominee. He is not pro-life. I urge President Trump to nominate: Justice Charles Canady - number one choice, or: Judge Jennifer Elrod or Judge Edith Jones You can also tweet Donald Trump, Kellyanne Conway, Jeff Sessions, Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo, Sean Spicer, etc. Simply tweet, “Gorsuch is not pro-life. Choose true pro-lifers…Charles Canady, Judge Elrod or Edith Jones.” You can email the White House here. You can comment on Face Book here. Another option is to send a fax signed by as many people as possible. If people belong to a church or some group, just do a short letter with all the signatures and fax it. Phone calls can be ignored, but a pile of 50,000 faxes can't. Time is of the essence. WH fax: 202-456-7890
Neil Gorsuch is Not Pro-Life
Who is the Federalist Society?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
I think that author is offering opinion and not fact.
There are no replies to Comment # 1. End Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Replies to Comment # 1.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]