Of course it is!
Roe (Norma McCorvey) was never pregnanat nor has she ever had an abortion.... Years later she is one the most active Pro-Life leaders in the nation.
My question to you is.....since the law was built up on a lie, shouldn't it be removed and let someone else take it to court?
Reguardless of your own personal feelings about abortion, don't you find it ODD??? I really wonder who was behind this in the first place. The Lawyers?
For those of you who might be in disbelief, google her!
2007-01-24 03:01:28 · 6 answers · asked by SARA P 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I thought she was pregnant. I heard she had to have the baby because well the trail went on for a few years and of course women are only pregnant for a few months.
I did hear she was pro-life leader though.
But so what? The Federal Supreme Court (the highest court in the land) only hears cases that ask a federal question. They did not hear the case because they cared about Roe per se, they heard it because it was an issue that had national concerns.
It may seem heartless but you learn pretty fast in law school that judges often care more about the issue being discussed than the people involved. It does not matter that Roe was not pregnant or is against abortion or had a bunch of babies, the case gave them the issue and they ruled on that issue, it is binding.
2007-01-24 03:17:14 · answer #1 · answered by The Teacher 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No it should not be removed. She was pregnant at the time (gave birth to a girl), and had two prior to this one. Roe V. Wade became more about state rights than abortion..the Supreme court decision held that the state has the state has the responsibility to uphold individual rights as related to the fetus in later stages..allowing the states to proscribe late term abortions, but allowing individuals to choose early termination as the fetus is not yet capable of living apaart from the womb. Better check your facts again.
2007-01-24 11:20:08 · answer #2 · answered by kerfitz 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Roe never had that abortion,but it was about her right to choose!
And keep government out of personal issue's! The law was made after she had the baby and yes now she wants the goverment to take away a womens right to choose. Maybe through her eyes its not to odd since she had the baby and therefore seen the other side of the argument! I would love to know her views on right to die issue!
2007-01-24 11:33:18 · answer #3 · answered by MaryAnn K 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
She never had an abortion, but sued for the right to have it.
What is the lie you speak of? Nobody said Roe had an abortion. It's the name of the court case that gave woman the right to control their own body and medical procedures.
2007-01-24 11:10:15 · answer #4 · answered by miketorse 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I've never had a breast augmentation, but it is my right to choose whether or not I would want DDD breasts or not. The case was not about one woman getting one abortion, it was about the right to make that choice.
So Ms, McCorvey now chooses to be pro-life....ain't American grand - she has made a CHOICE about what to do. THAT is what the whole damn case was about to begin with!!!
2007-01-24 12:11:18 · answer #5 · answered by Susie D 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
She fought for the right to chose to have an abortion. Doesn't really matter if she personally never had one or not. Whats law is law. Leave it alone.
2007-01-24 11:14:28 · answer #6 · answered by *Cara* 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋