Supreme Court ruling

Oregon Suicide Law: "It was the first loss for Chief Justice John Roberts, who joined the court's most conservative members — Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas — in a long but restrained dissent."

John Roberts unfortunately "did not write separately to explain his vote." So he has not explained himself, directing his so-called penetrating mind to demonstrate why Oregon law is illegal. It appears that he is supporting the administration. I fear that the Supreme Court will keep siding with the Executive branch, no matter what Congress does.

In a way, it is good that John Roberts declined to write his own interpretation because it keeps things simple. Having nine judges wanting to preen on themselves with words only increases ambiguity for the federal, state and local courts trying to figure out how the law applies. It is also not an example of judicial restraint that the conservatives pride themselves on.

Scalia admitted that though he dissented, he could sympathize with a position that "assisted suicide is none of the federal government's business." If they overturn Roe vs. Wade (which many legal scholars agree was not well-decided, on the basis of the fact that the right to remove prematurely [with the intent to kill or let die] a fetus from the womb is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution), I hope that the judges will proffer a leeway for states' legislatures to draft their own laws to legalize abortion.

We are all well-aware of the moral ambiguity of allowing the murder of the darlings yet unborn, of the individual rights of women in contrast with the responsibility to society, and of recognizing that the statistics show a correlation between the number of abortion and the number of crimes. Where abortions were performed, crime rate decreased dramatically 20 years later, when the children would have grown up to be drug dealers and gangsters. It shows that abortion is primarily used by mothers already in poverty and mothers who cannot support another child.

On the other hand, if Congress successfully ban abortion, we will not necessarily enter the year 2026 with murders happening on every street in America. Instead, we could see a revival of the Original Progressives in the early 1900s that believed in education, social welfare, and universal healthcare as the best force to change people's lives. Dissociating ourselves from Roe v. Wade may be the best thing we could ever do, because it was the main contentious point that allowed these Republicans to be elected and allowed Bush to be chosen over McCain. Without such an issue brought to the forefront, they would be sadly incompetent (as in Bush), sadly insane (as in Pat Robertson), and sadly destructive to human lives almost everywhere.