Stop Here If You Don't Like Talking Politics

So I was watching Meet The Press right before getting ready for bed, and there was an interesting discussion going on about the Harriet Miers nomination to the SCOTUS that I didn't understand.  A lot of that might have to do with the panelists, who were Richard Lang and Pat Buchanan. (Transcipt can be read here.)

Here's the thing.  Basically they were arguing because Land supports the nomination and Buchanan does not.  But the majority of the debate somehow centered around the fact that all these people really wanted was a justice who would be willing to overturn Roe v. Wade.  And that's it.  Now, I realize these guys are total right wing religious activists, and you know, that's their right to be.  But it doesn't make sense to expect that decision to be overturned ever.  I mean that in all seriousness.  And why would anyone want it overturned?  From what I understand as a person with a very non-legal mind, the decision revolved around a constitutional guarantee of privacy.  It had nothing to do with dismissing religion from the public sphere or determining the stage of fetal development that counts as "life".  It was about every American citizen, in this case a woman, having the right to make a personal decision regarding her own body without the interference of the government.  Who in their right mind would say, "no, I don't believe the Constitution gives me a right to privacy.  Please, Uncle Sam, install your Big Brother security cameras in my house, in my bedroom, bathroom, and wherever else to make sure that I don't do anything immoral."  It's insane.  I think I've wandered into hyperbole territory, but you get my meaning. 

Getting back to the original point, these panelists seem to strictly believe in this litmus test for Harriet Miers, the difference being that Buchanan doubts she passes the test while Land thinks Bush knows what he's doing, as if.  It must be nice to live in a world where appointing people to sit in judgment of an entire country's system of justice comes down to one yes or no question to prove one's qualifications, and in the limited scope of this program that's what Land and Buchanan sound like they believe. 

So here is my advice to people out there who think Roe v. Wade was a bad decision and think abortion is wrong:  Don't have an abortion.  There, wasn't that easy?  Instead of trying to criminalize the act, why not concentrate on teaching people the value of life and the other options available to those who believe, for whatever reason, that they can't have a baby.  Then maybe we can discuss the many other reasons why Harriet Miers might not be a good choice for supreme court justice.