perfidy

This is one of the more thoughtful bits on Roe v. Wade I've ever run across. This part amused me greatly:

For the record, I’m with Justice Ginsburg on this one: I think ROE was wrongly decided. Indeed, I’m not entirely convinced that the court was right in GRISWOLD. It’s one thing to say that laws against contraception or abortion are foolish and unwise. It’s quite another entirely to say they’re unconstitutional. I mean, look, the state of Texas has a law--and it is still enforced--that says owning 5 marital aids is perfectly legal, but owning 6 is a felony. Stupid? You bet. Constitutional? You bet. And, really, I’ve never come across any situations in which more than 4 were ever needed anyway.

And as an added bonus, this:

And just look what ROE’s done to the process of judicial nominations. It’s the 800 pound gorilla of the judiciary. Jeez, it’s getting to the point where selecting judges is gonna be have to done like picking jurors: You can only get a seat if you’ve never read ROE, never written a Law Review article on the right to privacy, never given a speech about it, never had any friends or family members who’ve eve had abortions, etc., etc. And that’s how you end up with David Souter on the court. If we got rid of ROE entirely we’d have to go back to picking judges on the basis of, I dunno, intellect or experience and stuff.

Thanks to Rocket Jones for the tip.