It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

SCOTUS Nominee Roberts Represented Convicted Clinic Bomber Michael Bray/ Operation Rescue

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 05:54 AM
link   
I won't be throwing misguided stones over this to assert Roberts is pro-violence as our anti-civil liberties friends that persist in the notion the ACLU is pro-pedophilia based on court cases they take, but here's the facts nonetheless.

Let's get this right out of the way first then...

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America: “I want to be very clear that we are not suggesting Mr. Roberts condones or supports clinic violence. I’m sure he finds bombings and murder abhorrent. But still his ideological view of the law compelled him to go out of his way to argue on behalf of someone like Michael Bray, who had already been convicted of a string of bombings.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 8, 2005

NARAL Pro-Choice America Unveils Television Ad Focusing on John Roberts Record of Siding with Violent Anti-Choice Fringe Groups

View the Ad Featuring a Survivor of Operation Rescue's Violence


The ad focuses on Roberts' amicus brief in 1991 on the side of the notorious Operation Rescue, convicted clinic bomber Michael Bray, and others in the Supreme Court case Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic, as well as his 1992 efforts in a U.S. District Court to lift an injunction against Operation Rescue. The defendants in the Bray case included violent anti-choice activists Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue; Michael Bray, who had been convicted for his involvement in 10 bombings at health centers in the 1980s; and Patrick Mahoney, a consultant to Operation Rescue. Roberts argued the case before the Supreme Court and said that Operation Rescue's unlawful behavior did not amount to discrimination against women.


While none of this makes Roberts, a staunch conservative Catholic who's wife actually is heavily involved in these anti-choice groups, an activist in his own right, the guy's no wallflower either. One would have to be voluntarily blind to ignore his history and prior statements that Roe V. Wade should be overturned.


[edit on 9-8-2005 by RANT]




posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 08:44 AM
link   

I won't be throwing misguided stones over this to assert Roberts is pro-violence as our anti-civil liberties friends that persist in the notion the ACLU is pro-pedophilia based on court cases they take, but here's the facts nonetheless.

Emphasis mine.

Right out of the box. Rant, I really believed you were above such a tactic.:shk:



posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

I won't be throwing misguided stones over this to assert Roberts is pro-violence as our anti-civil liberties friends that persist in the notion the ACLU is pro-pedophilia based on court cases they take, but here's the facts nonetheless.

Emphasis mine.

Right out of the box. Rant, I really believed you were above such a tactic.:shk:


Yes, our ANTI civil liberties friends (emphasis mine).


Or were you under the impression those authoritarians that seek to overturn the right to privacy through some fringe bench appointments so they can legislate morality were libertarians?


[edit on 9-8-2005 by RANT]



posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Hell, this are some nice juicy news that We all should know about it.

So . . . I wonder who was the one that pay Mr. Roberts fees for the trial.


So does that means that he will go on favor of any laws that restrics womens reproductives issues?

I got to say . . . the reconstructionist are invading the Republican party in their very nice tailored disguised of "Extremist Conservatives"

Remeber people is all in the name of God and for the "Will of God"



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 02:22 PM
link   
It is certainly possible to want to overturn Roe vs Wade and not be for limiting abortion access as well.

An overturning would revert control back to the states for them to decide, so you could also say that it was perhaps a pro-state move rather than an anti-abortion move.

This guy is pretty tame, and I know that there will be next to nothing to stop him from being put on the Court.

I'd even bet money.




top topics
 
0

log in

join