Tuesday, January 16, 2007

What's Up in Virginia?

Howling Latina posts: Del. Robert G. Marshall of Prince William has a political death wish. That's right, boys and girls, should the Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade, Marshall wants to ban abortions.

The Washington Post today reports that Marshall introduced a bill in the House that would ban abortions; you know, just in case the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, all the planets align in a straight line and hell freezes over. With five known pro-choice justices on the Court, this bill is nothing more than pure bullshit and a waste of everyone's time.

Gov. Tim Kaine has also publicly stated he would veto such a bill.
The bill proposes that Virginia revert to pre-1973 abortion laws if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. Under those laws, abortion would be illegal except if the life of the woman or fetus is endangered.
A poll in 2005 showed that 61 percent of Virginians favor abortions in "ALL CASES."

And then tonight NBC, and The Washington Post, reported that Delegate Frank Hargrove (R) ignited a hot exchange in the House of Delegates on Tuesday after criticizing a proposal for the state to issue an apology for slavery. Hargrove said on NBC:
"... blacks should just get over it. What's next? Asking Jews to apologize for killing Christ?"
The Post went on to say:
Hargrove's remarks don't help the GOP's image, said Del. Vincent F. Callahan Jr., a Fairfax County Republican and a 39-year House veteran whose district has been targeted by Democrats for the fall elections.

"People ought to have learned a lesson from this past year's senatorial campaign in Virginia," Callahan said. "We live in a different age as far as sensitivity goes and personal feelings. Particularly in a legislative body, where we operate in a goldfish bowl, we ought to be very careful about what we say in public."
Now notice that Callahan didn't condem what Hargrove said, only that he said it in public!

Geezz ... just a few more reasons why I would never want to live in Virginia.


betmo said...

no idea what happened to the comments on the other post- but regarding the being watched question- i am still torn about this one. i like convenience as much as the next person. i like the idea that different types of law enforcement can use databases to catch criminals and whatnot- along in that vein. where i get stuck is- the folks who have all of the info are not benevolent and they are not neutral. they say that there are safeguards against identity theft-and info being used for political reasons. but i don't believe it. once you have that much unchecked access to personal info that can be damaging to a person's life- there is bound to be a problem. unfortunately, once the genie is out of the bottle, it is hard to put him back. we are in trouble for sure.

BAC said...

Sorry for the problem with the other comments section. I agree this is a mixed bag -- regarding the desire for personal safety and the desire for privacy. I like the cameras at Metro stations, for example, because I think they might be a deterrent to crime. I don't like the president reading my email. To me that is an invasion of my privacy.