It appears that one reason women favored Obama was Romney's position on birth control. Birth control? Did he have one?
Well, yes, he took (or at least did not vigorously deny) the conservative position that the Constitution says nothing about birth control and therefore a state could, if the majority of its representatives wanted it to, ban birth control. But that is not the same thing as being against birth control or even having a position on the issue of birth control itself.
Is there anything in the Constitution that says a state cannot ban automobiles? Surely not. Does that mean that the Constitution is anti-automobile? Does that mean that a politician who says the Constitution says nothing about automobiles is anti-automobile? Isn't that ridiculous? But of course the press always treats the issue of privacy rights and Griswold v. Connecticut as an issue about birth control. How is a meaningful interpretation of the Constitution to survive is silence means opposition, if believe (really, simple recognition) that the Constitution is silent on some matter is taken to mean support for whatever those who support the 'living' Constitution wish to use it to ban, and opposition to whatever they wish to support?
Does anyone think the Constitution prevents states from banning trans-fats or Big Gulps? Does anyone think that this implies being against trans-fats or Big Gulps? (I am not sure what trans-fats are but I am sure that, as in the case of Big Gulps, I consume more than my share.)
We are allowed to vote on less and less. More and more is decided by judicial decree. And the odd thing is, it is precisely the people that evince the most concern about the right of the people to vote who are the same people that deny them the right to vote on more and more. More and more people voting on less and less. More people must be allowed to vote and fewer issues may be put to a vote. You take away a man's right to vote by judicial fiat as surely as you do by poll taxes, literacy tests and voter ID laws.
Well, yes, he took (or at least did not vigorously deny) the conservative position that the Constitution says nothing about birth control and therefore a state could, if the majority of its representatives wanted it to, ban birth control. But that is not the same thing as being against birth control or even having a position on the issue of birth control itself.
Is there anything in the Constitution that says a state cannot ban automobiles? Surely not. Does that mean that the Constitution is anti-automobile? Does that mean that a politician who says the Constitution says nothing about automobiles is anti-automobile? Isn't that ridiculous? But of course the press always treats the issue of privacy rights and Griswold v. Connecticut as an issue about birth control. How is a meaningful interpretation of the Constitution to survive is silence means opposition, if believe (really, simple recognition) that the Constitution is silent on some matter is taken to mean support for whatever those who support the 'living' Constitution wish to use it to ban, and opposition to whatever they wish to support?
Does anyone think the Constitution prevents states from banning trans-fats or Big Gulps? Does anyone think that this implies being against trans-fats or Big Gulps? (I am not sure what trans-fats are but I am sure that, as in the case of Big Gulps, I consume more than my share.)
We are allowed to vote on less and less. More and more is decided by judicial decree. And the odd thing is, it is precisely the people that evince the most concern about the right of the people to vote who are the same people that deny them the right to vote on more and more. More and more people voting on less and less. More people must be allowed to vote and fewer issues may be put to a vote. You take away a man's right to vote by judicial fiat as surely as you do by poll taxes, literacy tests and voter ID laws.
1 comment:
JxrOsn [url=http://dezhoupuke.webnode.cn/]太阳城[/url] NhfWme [url=http://yingchaoliansai.webnode.cn/]英超联赛[/url] VajQzs [url=http://yingchaosaicheng.webnode.cn]英超积分榜[/url] XhiMnd [url=http://zuqiuzhibo.webnode.cn/]足球直播吧[/url] QbqIri [url=http://tianxiazuqiu.webnode.cn]风云足球直播[/url] VjdYmk [url=http://nbazhibobiao.webnode.cn]NBA直播表[/url] [url=http://nbashipin.webnode.cn]新浪体育NBA直播[/url] OicKde [url=http://nbazhibo8.webnode.cn]新浪NBA直播[/url] DzyKfo [url=http://quanxunwang.webnode.cn/]太阳城[/url] WrzNtj [url=http://wuhusihai88.webnode.cn]五湖四海全讯网[/url] LjaWke [url=http://zhijiage.webnode.cn/]百家乐[/url] MgzXki [url=http://ttylc66.webnode.cn/]TT娱乐城[/url] IzhBox [url=http://bocai666.webnode.cn/]博彩通[/url] QrhPoi [url=http://bocai888.webnode.cn/]百家乐[/url] FcxNph [url=http://bocai777.webnode.cn/]德州扑克[/url] AjxShv [url=http://bocai999.webnode.cn/]博彩网[/url] OuyVvh [url=http://baijiale666.webnode.cn/]百家乐[/url] GaqRvm [url=http://taiyangcheng999.webnode.cn/]88娱乐城[/url] QubQab [url=http://qxw666.webnode.cn/]太阳城娱乐城[/url] [url=http://tt5252.com/]博彩网[/url]
[url=http://tt2929.com/]太阳城娱乐城[/url]
NoaBfa [url=http://nba43.webnode.cn]NBA直播视频直播[/url] DpaFfl [url=http://nba44.webnode.cn]天下足球直播[/url] VnlRtx [url=http://nba45.webnode.cn]英超赛程表[/url] QvnSaw [url=http://yule11.webnode.cn]博彩通[/url] ZbtJzp [url=http://yule12.webnode.cn]TT娱乐城[/url] NdxCfw [url=http://yule13.webnode.cn]芝加哥娱乐城[/url] UrzWft [url=http://yule14.webnode.cn]全讯网新2[/url] PtmHad [url=http://yule15.webnode.cn]88娱乐城[/url]
[url=http://tt5252.com/]博彩网[/url]
[url=http://tt2929.com/]全讯网[/url]
NakSsn [url=http://yule161.webnode.cn]新全讯网[/url] PoiHuc [url=http://yule171.webnode.cn]全讯网新2[/url] GwgVar [url=http://yule181.webnode.cn]芝加哥娱乐城[/url] UpjGbg [url=http://yule19.webnode.cn]百家乐[/url] ZwkSvi [url=http://yule20.webnode.cn]博彩通[/url] ZsfMjs [url=http://yule21.webnode.cn]芝加哥娱乐城[/url] KnpKvh [url=http://yule22.webnode.cn/]TT娱乐城[/url] RbvBmc [url=http://yule23.webnode.cn]太阳城娱乐城[/url] UnhVay [url=http://yule24.webnode.cn]百家乐[/url] KlqWhq [url=http://yule25.webnode.cn]太阳城娱乐城[/url]
Post a Comment