[ad_1]
J The office Ruth Bader Ginsburg seems to be a pleasant human being: a good wife and mother, a good friend of his opposite, the late judge Antonin Scalia, a hard worker, in every way.
But it is not for this reason that millions of liberals are worried about his health, pray every day for his survival, and even write with the offer of one of their kidneys, if the need arises. made it feel. Her concern for her health above all others is of course a special reason: if she dies or retires while the Republicans hold the White House and the Senate, the Liberals would stay on the Supreme Court at the end of a six-year period. -to-three minority. It would be a blow to the pro-abortion agenda that has prevailed in the United States for 40 years.
The responsibility for their panic is entirely theirs. In 1972, when Roe c. Wade was decided by 7-2, the court found that she was talking about an emerging consensus, part of a rights-driven wave that was sweeping everything before her, against morality and the mores . The wave, they thought, only traveled in one direction.
But in this case, it did not happen. A pro-life movement opposed it and 60% of the country refused to choose one or the other party, being content with a reluctant "OK" at the first stage of pregnancy, followed by heavy restrictions and restrictions. 'an absolute ban at the end.
As their dynamism slowed down, the left turned to the courts to declare their triumphs, and the Conservatives followed their example. In the late 1980s, with Ronald Reagan installed as the first pro-life president and movement for abortion rights an arm of Democrats, the defining moment changed the Senate forever. Reagan has appointed Conservative Justice Robert Bork to occupy the seat of retired judge Lewis Powell, a pro-choice member.
Sen. Ted Kennedy rushed to the Senate and delivered a fierce and alarmist anti-Bork rant who removed the painting from the walls. As Steven F. Hayward asserts, "Bork was not the first candidate to fail for political reasons, but the demagogic nature of the campaign against him made it a decisive turning point in American politics, permanently distorting process of appointing the judiciary, with ideological considerations. " battles also extending to lower courts. "
We were all better off when abortion was a matter of conscience and not of politics, and both parties had factions that were supportive of life and health. freedom of choice, but these days were over and the new methods are risky, the first is that the presidential elections are won over issues of war and peace and / or wallet.Each of the parties could lose everything for reasons They are not unique, nor is there any guarantee as to the number of judges that a president may appoint.
In 2016, these two traps closed on the legs of Democrats First, Trump, who lost the grassroots vote to Hillary Clinton, won the election by a sizeable margin, and secondly, appointed two new judges in his first two years in office. , with two of the four remaining Democrats, including Ginsburg, 85 and over. It is rare that opportunism has also turned against those who invented it.
I wish good luck to Ginsburg, but the left has no mercy, it has chosen its own poison so well.
[ad_2]
Source link
