Difference between revisions of "Template:Mainpageright"
(Neil Gorsuch is not pro-life) |
m |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
For starters, Gorsuch has never said or written anything pro-life. Andy Schlafly knew him in law school and afterwards. | For starters, Gorsuch has never said or written anything pro-life. Andy Schlafly knew him in law school and afterwards. | ||
| − | 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 specially 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. | + | 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 specially 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. | 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. | ||
Revision as of 13:41, 24 January 2017
Neil Gorsuch has been announced as the leading contender for Justice Scalia's vacancy. 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 won't be overturned for 40 years if the 49-year-old Gorsuch is picked. That is 40 million more unborn children who will be aborted based on this.
Our 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.
For starters, Gorsuch has never said or written anything pro-life. Andy Schlafly knew him in law school and afterwards.
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 specially 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, with the first President Bush breaking his "read my lips, no new taxes" pledge. It doesn't work for Republican presidents. I spoke last weekend 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 Bill Pryor. Now it is urgent that pro-lifers speak out immediately and veto Neil Gorsuch.
Donald Trump gives special public thanks to Phyllis Schlafly, and then on Friday at noon is sworn in as the 45th President of the United States.
Linda Bean courageously stands up against the anti-Trumpers, and Trump tweets special support and thanks to her and L.L.Bean. [1]
Dem Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer announces that he will vote against conservative Senator Jeff Sessions for Attorney General, but confirmation seems likely anyway. [2]
Saturday, January 14, features a debate in Texas between Publius Huldah -- a constitutional expert on our side -- and Rick Green. Go Publius!
Criticism grows in Nebraska to a reintroduction of the Convention of States resolution, and unlike the original Constitutional Convention the backers indicate that a new Con Con would have intense participation by the media. [3]
See our rebuttal to Tom Coburn's editorial promoting the Con Con.
"Right wing watch" picks up and reports on our advocacy concerning the upcoming filling of the vacancy at the Supreme Court. [4]
The widely read Politico.com cites and discusses our coalition letter on the upcoming nomination to the vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court, to fill Justice's Scalia's seat. [5]
Was Governor John Kasich's line-item veto of the heartbeat bill a violation of the Ohio Constitution? Consider our analysis here.
"Priebus: Trump likely to name Supreme Court pick around inauguration time." [6]
The "horrible idea" of a Constitutional Convention - the Convention of States. Coming to a state near you - see our chart!
- AP reports that the risk of a Con Con increased with GOP majorities in 33 state legislatures due to the election.
- See the top ten reasons to oppose a Con Con.
Trump's imminent decision to fill Justice Scalia's vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court: see the chart of potential nominees here.
Donald Trump's Cabinet is the reportedly the most conservative ever.
BREAKING NEWS: Conservative Rick Perry is the leading candidate for Secretary of Energy. [7]
He spoke at Eagle Council 2015 and withdrew his presidential candidacy during his speech.
