The Lonely Goatherd Blog And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats - Matthew 25:32
Up to the minute notes on the current state of free thinking and free living: Kentucky moonshine - original analysis and reporting from MoreThings, and all round pop culture museum of sight and sound - photo galleries, mp3 and video downloads.
Al Barger and MoreThings - getting people's goats since 1998.
Live free or die!
----
I wouldn't want to ask people to just give me money cause they like my website, but do please take a quick look at Barger's Boutique. You might find yourself a little something-something for 2 or 3 bucks that you just can't resist! Any of the round images you find around MoreThings will get you to an Amazon page to buy my stuff and help ol' Al keep the lights on.
Links
To explicitly state the obvious, these external links go to interesting and provocative websites, but they speak for themselves. I don't necessarily agree with anything they say - especially that no-goodnik Richard Marcus.
*************
All original content on MoreThings.com copyright 2008 Albert Barger or the respective authors
January 02, 2005
Roe v The Constitution George Will published an especially interesting column today carefully distinguishing the difference between the issue of the judicial wisdom of the Roe decision as distinctly different from the issue of legal abortion.
He cast the column in the form of a proposed speech for President Bush. He began the speech with a conciliatory gesture with which I disagree vehemently, and which nicely encapsulates just the main type of way in which I sometimes find myself diverging from Mr Will's usually wise analysis. "On the other hand, the orderly development of constitutional law requires that justices be generally disposed to respect precedents, even dubious ones, if they have been repeatedly reaffirmed for decades." So we should accept bad, injurious and unconstitutional law simply because they've been doing it that way for 20 or 30 years? That is SO wrong.
On the other hand, Will makes a particularly sharp demonstration of the purely legally arbitrary nature of the Roe decision, one of the plainest and most perfect demonstrations of the legal absurdity of Roe ever:
Notice the language of 'trimesters.' How is that demarcation grounded in the text, structure or previous construings of the Constitution? Ask yourself: What would constitutional law pertaining to abortion be if the number of months in the gestation of an infant were a prime number — say, seven or eleven? That the court spun different degrees of abortion rights from the fact that nine is divisible by three reveals that whatever the court was doing was not constitutional reasoning.
In short then, opposing the Roe decision is NOT equivalent to opposing legal abortion. Nor will the inevitable and just overturning of this ridiculous excuse for a legal opinion make abortion illegal. It will just kick the issue back down to the state level where it belongs.
