||[Nov. 11th, 2004|03:14 pm]
anti-abortion are mad that the Attorney General-designate, as a Texas Supreme Court justice, decided to make decisions consistent with Roe v Wade instead of just making rulings that blatently violate the US Supreme Court's precedent, which would then be appealed to the federal courts and overturned.Whee... |
Here's a hint, morons: the reason he doesn't view abortion as "a heinous crime" is that it isn't, in fact, a crime. At the moment anyway. People are entitled to their opinions about whether abortion should be a crime, but it's not.
Obviously, the last thing we want is an AG who actually understands and follows the rule of law. What fun would that be?