Jane Roe vs. Roe vs. Wade

| | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I posted this message on my mailing list tonight...

Here we go again...

From the Chronicle: www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? f=/news/archive/2003/06/17/national1410EDT0606.DTL

The former plaintiff known as "Jane Roe" in the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case that legalized abortion sought to have the case overturned in a motion filed Tuesday that asks the courts to consider new evidence that abortion hurts women.

Norma McCorvey, who joined the anti-abortion fight nearly 10 years ago and says she regrets her role in Roe v. Wade, said the Supreme Court's decision is no longer valid because scientific and anecdotal evidence that has come to light in the last 30 years has shown the negative effects of abortion.

"We're getting our babies back," a jubilant McCorvey said at a news conference while flanked by about 60 women, some who sobbed and held signs that read "I regret my abortion."

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Jane Roe vs. Roe vs. Wade.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://womeninit.net/mt/mt-tb.cgi/159

1 Comments

I'm pro-life. I'm not planning on having any children of my own. I'm adopting, which is what more pro-life couples should be doing.

Leave a comment

Music I Listen To

 

Monthly Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.2-en

Photos

DSCN4807.JPG DSCN4808.JPG DSCN4810.JPG DSCN4812.JPG DSCN4813.JPG DSCN4816.JPG

Books

Widget_logo

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by katherine published on June 17, 2003 5:29 PM.

Thomas Friedman in the Sunday Times was the previous entry in this blog.

Disturbing Destinations... is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.