Comments on: Just Hang On A Little Longer Ginsburg!

By: floor jack

floor jack — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 12:29:26 +0000

It’s the first time I commented here and I must say you share us genuine, and quality information for other bloggers! Great job.
p.s. You have a very good template for your blog. Where have you got it from?

By: Ilike Wood

Ilike Wood — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 20:49:19 +0000

Hey that Wood sounds like a good replacement for Ginsburg – someone for the likes of you to demonize for years….oh I can hear the embryos crying!

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 19:59:34 +0000

As long as we have Matthew Warner’s in this world, overturning Roe v. Wade has hope. You should consider going into politics Matthew.

By: Cindy

Cindy — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 19:27:01 +0000

Points well taken.

By: Matthew Warner

Matthew Warner — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:10:06 +0000

Cindy – i understand your frustration, but your point of view is a very dangerous, slippery slope.

Indeed – murder, stealing, rape are all illegal in our country. Is your argument that since they still happen anyway that the government should just make them legal!? Of course not. Abortion is no different.

If Abraham Lincoln would have taken your abortion point of view and applied it to slavery perhaps slavery would still be legal in our country.

Slavery was legal for much longer than Roe v. Wade has been around but it was still defeated and our country went on to correct itself and do bigger and better things. When Slavery was made illegal did that mean that all of the hearts and mind had changed? Heck no.

Abortion will be no different. But we must fight in the meantime and insist that our laws reflect our morality. And even more deeply than that, our laws must protect the natural, God given rights of every human person.

I do agree though that along with our laws and leadership, the hearts and minds of Americans must change. But they most effectively happen together.

The danger in your point of view is that it is abused by many Catholics to shirk their voting responsibilities to vote for a pro-life politician. And that’s EXACTLY the reason we still have pro-abortion candidates like Obama winning.

Further, we are 1-2 supreme court justices away from over turning Roe v Wade. To say it is impossible or will never happen is a very strange thing to say.

By: Cindy

Cindy — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:47:36 +0000

I understand that it can seem overly simplistic to merely change hearts and minds. My frustration with the pro life movement is that they have been wholly ineffective at overturning Roe and will continue to be ineffective. I don’t believe that we will ever go back to a time when abortion is illegal in the United States of America. We have had “pro life leadership” in the past 30 years and it hasn’t changed anything. Churches and christians and people of faith need to be the leadership in their own communities and not expect this to come from elected officials who serve larger constituencies than believing christians and they will continue to vote with the majority. If we could legislate & enforce morality then we would have no lying, cheating, stealing, murder or rape in our society. Laws and punishments don’t keep it from happening. Good moral instruction and strong families keep those ills in check.

By: Matthew Warner

Matthew Warner — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 05:45:04 +0000

I certainly didn’t mean to be disrespectful of Ginsburg’s life. I wish her all the best in her recovery. But this note was not really about Ginsburg’s life in the end – it’s about praying for a scenario that works to save the millions of unborn people being disrespected by judges like Ginsburg every year in our country.

And it’s true that it will take the changing of hearts and minds of Americans to end abortion. But in order to change those minds it takes leadership to set the example. Our government should absolutely be setting that example and doing the right thing.

With all due respect, to act as if “changing the hearts and minds” is completely separate from what we say in our nation’s courts, our laws, or what we do in the voting booth is a huge mistake. They are all tangled up together.

By: Cindy

Cindy — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 01:41:58 +0000

I wonder whether we shouldn’t show a little bit more respect for the value of Justice Ginsburg’s life and be a little more compassionate about her illness. “Just Hang On A Little Longer Ginsburg,” is disrespectful of someone who has accomplished what she has in life and the Court deserves to be treated with respect whether or not you agree with all of the decisions they make. It was equally appalling to hear some of the name calling of President Bush. I am not being partisan with my civility.
You will never win this fight in the voting booth or in the courts. You will save lives by changing the hearts and minds of men and women who find themselves confronted with unplanned pregnancy.

By: Matthew Warner

Matthew Warner — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 00:38:53 +0000

Alberto – I agree and I certainly wasn’t suggesting that Ginsburg was a friend to the unborn. However, if for some reason she hangs on past Obama’s term then there is hope another president could appoint somebody much better than Obama will.

But I also agree that that isn’t likely considering she knows that now is a “safe” time for her to leave and have Obama replace her with somebody equally as activist and anti-life. But we can always pray for something better.

By: Alberto Gonzalez

Alberto Gonzalez — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 00:23:32 +0000

I understand the concern, but Ginsburg is no friend to the pro-life cause, either. One difference may be that Ginsburg, (as far as I know), is not virulently opposed to pro-life activism the way Wood is. Either way, I think Ginsburg and Stevens will both retire during Obama’s term. Ginsburg is not in good health, and Stevens is very old; they can’t assure themselves of the fact that they will be able to serve past 2012. If they retire now, they can be assured that the president will appoint like-minded cronies to the Court. In fact, it may be in their best interest to leave now, because in two years, the Republicans could potentially take control of Congress again. (So I hope!) In that scenario, it would be much more difficult for Obama to get his way with Court appointments.

By: Matthew Warner

Matthew Warner — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 00:07:36 +0000

That’s true, Terry! But then again, that’s always been the case! :-)