I lied. I said I would not get into the Supreme Court nominee fight that is about to begin on Capital Hill, but I do feel the need to add something.

I was reading the Washington Post today when I came across this editorial about the high stakes that surround any new nominee to the Supreme Court.

The editorial lists several things, good and bad about Judge Roberts and it is generally a favorable editorial, as editorials go from Liberal newspapers. There is a statement that just aggravates me to no end:

He cannot provide the decisive vote for overturning Roe v. Wade, which is currently protected by a 6-to-3 majority, even if he favors doing so. What he could do is move the court toward tolerating a range of restrictions on abortion, such as the “partial-birth” procedure, that it currently does not permit. That would mean a unwarranted erosion of women’s privacy rights.

No matter how you feel about abortion, you SHOULD be outraged that the Supreme Court, in a direct affront to the American voting public, has ruled that infanticide is a legal right in this country. I am sorry; there is no other way to describe the partial birth procedure. Notice they use the scare quotes which mean “the so called” partial birth abortion. Explain to me how it is “so called”. Have you ever seen how one is performed? Do you know that you can have them performed up to and after 24 weeks? Do you know that at 20 weeks I was able to see all of my children and know their sex? Have you ever seen a baby born at or soon after 24 weeks? They have a surprising ability to live with the help of the wonders of science.

Here is how a partial birth abortion is performed. Here is what a 24 week baby looks like. Here are WunderWife’s and mine former fetuses…now tell me…would you have ripped them from their mother, punctured their skull and sucked out their brains? Really? You are a sick bastard!

And again please tell me how banning this murder is somehow “an unwarranted erosion of women’s privacy rights”? Where is privacy in the Constitution? Where does it say that in order to protect ones privacy rights you are allowed to kill a baby?

We can have debates about when life begins and about early term abortions all day. I think that all abortions are murder. There are many fine people that think early term abortions are ok. All I have to go on is that I have seen all three of my kids at 10 and 12 weeks gestation. They all had a heart beat. They were alive. I also saw my kids moving at 20 weeks when the ultrasound technician pushed on my wife’s belly. They were alive and felt the pressure and did not like being poked and prodded.

Should Roe be overturned? Yes. Let each state decide. Crusader over at The Coalition of the Swilling says this concerning Roe:

They really do need to overturn Roe, and let the states debate and duke it out. A few states would possibly outlaw them, but then you could still just cross state lines to get one if you so wanted. But at least the people would be able to decide, not the folks in black robes. It would have some real interesting effects on the make up of the parties, I would think. But I am just tired of it being an issue. Get the Feds out of it, and let the states decide.

Amen and at the very least end partial birth abortions.