Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
MedPot represents an attempt to expand liberties by fed-countervailing statute, not a narrowing. The "right" to die? Another attempt to expand (although granny might argue with the assertion that this makes her more free.) Homosexual marriage, again, is an expansion. As for the abortion mess, you blame this on Ashcroft? This is a basic tenet of the R party.
|
Wait a minute. If a state wants to define certain activities as liberties that that state's residents shall have, and Ashcroft opposes it, that doesn't make him anti-civil liberties? (And, note my use of the term "right" is not one presuming a constitutional right, just a right provided by a polity). I don't buy that argument. He's opposed to their expansion. THat's not materially different from actively seeking to reduce them--it's directional--he's for the direction of less.
And see my post above about responsibility. I'm not convinced you couldn't find a R AG who would be far less hostile to civil liberties.
