Quote:
Originally posted by DeltAlum
I understand your logic, but I would think that with a "hot button" issue abortion and those issues around it, people would weight that heavily in their vote.
|
Stepping back from this issue a bit... Why in the hell do we consider this single issue a threshold requirement for our approval/disapproval of judicial nominees?
Is it because simple folk need something that they can latch onto when otherwise, most judges have a body of work that resembles a logical clusterfuck? -- I think probably, yes.
Whether a judge is pro-life or pro-choice shouldn't enter into it at all. Most judges have their own personal views on subjects. Most judges also have the sense not to allow personal biases to predicably influence the outcome of their decisions, especially in matters of settled law.
I'd be more interested in his tendancy to overturn existing law, his tendancy to expand the meaning of statutes vs. contracting them, his tendancies (if any) on certain subject matters, his special knowledge and experience that might set him apart from other nominees (like military experience), things of that nature.