Even as a supporter of Roe v. Wade, I am compelled to acknowledge that the language both sides use on this subject can be unfortunately misleading and unconstructive. . . . Everyone is worse off for it
I long for the day that "Roe v. Wade" is sent to the ash heap of history.
Instead of helping women in Roe v. Wade, I brought destruction to me & millions of women.
This is probably as bad a day as the court has had on social issues since "Roe v Wade. "
The goal of the right is not to stop abortion but to demonize it, punish it and make it as difficult and traumatic as possible. All this it has accomplished fairly well, even without overturning Roe v. Wade.
After 'Roe v. Wade' - when the U. S. Supreme Court legalized abortion in 1973 - I thought the national conversation about abortion and birth control would be over. It was not.
I believe abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I believe that since Roe v Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should sustain and support it. And I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice. We can believe what we want, but will will not force our beliefs on others on that matter. And you will not see me waivering on that.
Not since before Roe v. Wade has a law or court decision had the potential to devastate access to reproductive health care on such a sweeping scale.
I was an avidly pro-life governor; I'm an avidly pro-life individual. As a pro-life Republican, I am in favor of having the Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade.
I feel that at this point in our country's history, it is important that we not reverse marriage equality, that we not reverse Roe v. Wade, that we stand up against Citizens United, we stand up for the rights of people in the workplace, that we stand up and basically say: The Supreme Court should represent all of us. That's how I see the court, and the kind of people that I would be looking to nominate to the court would be in the great tradition of standing up to the powerful, standing up on behalf of our rights as Americans.
But I am pro-life and will intend, if I’m president of the United States, to encourage pro-life policies. [. . . ] And I hope to appoint justices to the Supreme Court that will follow the law and the constitution. And it would be my preference that they reverse Roe v. Wade and therefore they return to the people and their elected representatives the decisions with regards to this important issue.
When a writer develops a story, he is confronted with a poison that is inside him. If you don't have that poison, your story will be boring and uninspired. It's like fugu: The flesh of the pufferfish is extremely tasty, but the roe, the liver, the heart can be lethally toxic.
While Roberts wanted to give the impression he respected the right to privacy and the precedent of Roe vs. Wade, his answers look dangerously similar to the responses (Associate Justice) Clarence Thomas gave senators during his confirmation hearings 14 years ago.
I was the Jane Roe of Roe vs. Wade, but Jane Roe has been laid to rest.
America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation. The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men.
When you represent the state of Washington, we have a tradition of deciding social issues by vote. Washington State passed abortion rights before Roe v. Wade and affirmed it at the ballot box later.
I will appoint men and women to the Federal judiciary who share my view of unborn children as constitutionally protected and who will unhesitatingly vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. If nominated by my party, I will select my running mate from among a list of men and women fully committed to protection of the unborn.
