If he tried, it would be a one term presidency for his party.
Everyone in the country that got pregnant or does not want more children would be voting for the other party from that day forward..
No, of course not. But getting elected President means that you can appoint Supreme Court Justices who agree with the dissenting opinions in Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965, instead of agreeing with the majority Justices in that case. That Supreme Court choice is the ONLY reason that Santorum has talked about the topic. It is fully APPROPRIATE for Americans to sit down and really read the Griswold v. Connecticut choice, to read all six of the opinions written by members of the Court. I had read them over 15 years ago, and I thought that the two dissenting opinions in that case were much wiser and more persuasive. So Santorum’s greatest contribution to this year’s political debate — no matter how far he gets in his campaign — would be to urge more Americans who are wondering “Why on Earth do you care about laws banning contraception?” to use Google or Yahoo to search for:
Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965.
And read the six different opinions, and choose for themselves which members of the Court, in 1965, did a better job of INTERPETING THE CONSTITUTION!
No and no
No, I don’t reckon so.
Theoretically, it’s possible, I doubt he’d be able to do it.
If he tried, it would be a one term presidency for his party.
Everyone in the country that got pregnant or does not want more children would be voting for the other party from that day forward..
No, of course not. But getting elected President means that you can appoint Supreme Court Justices who agree with the dissenting opinions in Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965, instead of agreeing with the majority Justices in that case. That Supreme Court choice is the ONLY reason that Santorum has talked about the topic. It is fully APPROPRIATE for Americans to sit down and really read the Griswold v. Connecticut choice, to read all six of the opinions written by members of the Court. I had read them over 15 years ago, and I thought that the two dissenting opinions in that case were much wiser and more persuasive. So Santorum’s greatest contribution to this year’s political debate — no matter how far he gets in his campaign — would be to urge more Americans who are wondering “Why on Earth do you care about laws banning contraception?” to use Google or Yahoo to search for:
Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965.
And read the six different opinions, and choose for themselves which members of the Court, in 1965, did a better job of INTERPETING THE CONSTITUTION!
No who rick is I don’t knos him!