Congratulations, it's a judge!

[webofevil]

+ =

Our thoughts go out to America, pacing anxiously up and down the delivery room, awaiting the news of the new arrival to its Supreme Court. Anti-abortion, and with the religious right in the wings champing at the bit for someone to finally for God's sake get in there and overturn the whole Roe/Wade thing, Judge Samuel Alito (“if” nominated) will be a weighty enough presence to tip the balance in favour of God and the sanctity of life and all that other great stuff that’s right there in the Constitution.*

(* It’s not in the Constitution.)

Let’s face it, in a situation like this, there can only be one winner—BABIES! So there’s bound to be a million social programmes being planned by conservatives to make sure all these extra mouths have got something to be fed, right? Lots of housing initiatives for all those hot wailing little bodies, hmm? I mean, you wouldn’t go to all that trouble to reclaim the state’s rights over a woman’s body in the name of your vicious God and confirm America's regression to the Dark Ages without making some kind of provision for the sheer jump in numbers that would result, would you? It’s not just the unborn you care about, is it? Course not. Cradle to the grave, that’s conservatism all the way. No Foetus Left Behind, right?

(Still, just in case, we could do worse than investing in American private prisons right now, so long as we’re prepared for the long haul. Around thirty years ought to do it.)

Mazel tov!

---

[Note: This entry is of course written in jest, even a spirit of hopeful optimism. After all, this administration isn't really likely to detonate the whole abortion issue by appointing this man to the Supreme Court, and even if they do, he's surely not likely to bring matters to a head, and even if he does, he's surely not likely to succeed, and if he does... well, is adoption so bad, girls?]

[I'm serious. Prisons. Buy early.]

Comments

[strictlytrue.livejournal.com]

What's more of a concern is that the ultra-right seem convinced he's their boy to bump off Roe v Wade.

Yes, they do. I'm just not sure why. That profile on the BBC doesn't really seem to indicate it. He was involved in a case where he judged that women should notify their husbands if they intended to have an abortion, which raises questions, not to mention an eyebrow or two, but does it mean he'd overturn Roe v. Wade? Some of the decisions the BBC list, whilst having nothing to do with abortion, seem positively - gasp - liberal. Is it possible that after the Miers fiasco, the Right have been placated by a nominee who's
a) actually been a judge and appears to know how to tie his own shoelaces
b) is a Catholic, and therefore going to hell, but at least he probably doesn't like abortion

I've even seen the theory expounded that an attempt to overturn Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court might be the last straw for independent voters and encourage a massive anti-right backlash, although I'm not entirely convinced by this particularly bit of silver-lining prospecting.