Dred Scott = Roe v. Wade

[LostInAnomie]

When * brought up Dred Scott last night it was purposefully used to confuse us blue staters. Dred Scott is a pro life code for Roe v. Wade. He was cryptically telling all the pro life extremists that he is going to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Check this out: http://fairshot.typepad.com/fairshot/2004/10/dred_scott_roe_.html

Make sure everyone, even the media know this.

[rfkrocks]

1. I think * was so freakin confused about Dred Scott when

he was finished with that answer I thought they were going to have call in Cheney as a lifeline-it may be a prolife code but man if you were a freeper would you trust shrub with a code-hell he can't even deal with plain english

[Gman]

3. Read this:

http://fairshot.typepad.com/fairshot/2004/10/dred_scott_roe_.html

From the above article:

Bush has to describe Dred Scott as about wrongheaded personal beliefs, rather than a (fairly) constricted constitutional interpretation because he needs to paint Roe v. Wade the same way, and he wants "strict constructionists" in the Supreme Court, so he can't really talk about the actual rationale used in Dred Scott.

Read some of the other articles as I'm still digesting it too. But there is definitely something here.

[bluestateguy]

2. He's a dumbshit

If he was a real strict constructionist he would have to support Dred Scott, and oppose Brown v. Board of Education. No wonder his application to UT law school was rejected.

[Nazgul35]

4. No they are right

This is Freeper code for Pro-lifers.

If you have read What's the Matter With Kansas, you will know that todays pro-life supporters see themselves as the spiritual inheritors of John Brown. The stanch anti-slavery leader (and nut case to some) used the Dred Scott case as part of their justification with what was wrong with the US.

So Bush bringing up the Dred Scott case was code worded for the red staters to let them know that he holds their views with regards to the spiritual "rightness" of their cause and that Roe v. Wade (their Dred Scott) will be overturned.

So Bush answered the question more than you know....it was about appointments to the USSC wasn't it?

[DeepModem Mom]

5. kick

[seafan]

6. Yes, Dred-Scott is used in context of overturning Roe v. Wade. See below.

Here are some quotes from a piece on the National Right to Life web site. http://www.nrlc.org

(bold type added)


Though conservative on many of the social issues of the day, Black Americans continue to support Black leaders who in turn fully support the genocidal policies of organizations such as " Planned Parenthood" and other anti-life organizations. That is because the staunchly pro-abortion media have skillfully created the image of the pro-life movement as a bunch of "white, conservative, right-wing, zealots."

That's a powerfully negative perception planted in the minds of Blacks. By contrast, Planned Parenthood and NARAL, whose friends include Jesse Jackson and the Congressional Black Caucus, are represented in the media as benevolent organizations who only want to give poor Black women a "choice."


<snip>

First, we must go around the media blockade on truth and make the case directly to our brothers and sisters that the plight of the preborn today is no different than our historical fight for equal justice and freedom in America. In each instance the principle is to be treated and respected as human beings.

I've often referred to Roe v Wade as Dred Scott II. The 1857 Scott decision said that Blacks could never be citizens, that they are only three-fifths human and therefore not deserving of legal protection. The Roe decision reduced preborn children to a less than fully human status who did not deserve to be protected by law.

In our struggle for respect, Black Americans resisted dehumanizing terms. Today using derogatory terms towards us has dire consequences attached to it. Pre-born children once referred to as a "bundle of joy," "blessed event," and "God's little gifts" are now reduced to a "fetus," or much worse.


<snip>

and this....


In addition Howard University (a historically Black college) released a study showing that Black women are nearly five times more likely to get breast cancer if they had induced abortions than women who didn't.


(Entire piece here...)
http://www.nrlc.org/news/1999/NRL299/regg.html


Here, clearly, the issue of a woman's right to choose is craftily blurred with an unrelated, divisive racial issue that wounds the country to this day.

In the Dred-Scott case, a slave was stripped of his person-hood; therefore, according to the right-to-lifer logic, an aborted zygote/fetus/ or "pre-born", as this piece states, is also stripped of person-hood.

The coupling of the words "Dred-Scott" with "abortion" over the long term laid the foundation for Bush, when he muddled through a tortured explanation of Dred-Scott in the debate last week; his message then becomes to his far-right anti-abortion base that he fully intends to utilize the "litmus" test for Supreme Court justice nominees if he seizes the White House again.


Like President Clinton said, "THEY need for us to be divided. WE don't."

[Liberal_Dog]

7. Excellent Point

I had not realized this.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

8. kick