In the Roe vs. Wade case of 1973 who exactly is "Wade"?  I know who Roe is.?
541065
It was Henry Wade, the District Attorney of Dallas County, who had charged Roe (actually Norma McCorvey) with violating the Texas law against abortion.
669940
They are legal. The debate about that is over. Roe v. Wade is still the rule of law.\n\nDo I think it is murder? That is a whole other issue. I would never be able to contemplate having an abortion without feeling as though I was killing my child. I know that I would never "get over" having made that choice. I know I would need forgiveness, the question would be==> who would forgive me?  I know there are circumstances where it might be necessary, but pray I am never subject to those circumstances.\n\nIt is a tough, impossible issue. In the end, it probably should be legal, but there should be stricter hoops before it is permitted.
813148
This is a guy who got out of Vietnam by claiming a sore anus. A failure at being a liberal disc jockey named 'rusty', he became a welfare case, then was arrested in 1971 in Pittsburg for soliciting homosexual prostitutes! His 3rd wife complained of a "sexless" marriage, and one of his former boyfriends says that he "guarantees that none of his marriages was consumated"! Later he campaigned to put ronald reagan on Mt. Rushmore, claiming that he voted for him when in fact he never did. He then became a devious drug addict who violated federal drug laws and got off scott free, due his contacts in the republican-led government, for whom he is a loyal parrot. He now calls himself rush limbaugh, his 4th alias! Why people so blindly follow this shameless druggy closet-queer former welfare case hack is WAY beyond me!
820603
Both of these particular cases involve religious conversions on the part of the plaintiffs.  McCorvey converted to Christianity in 1994 and was confirmed as a member in the Roman Catholic Church in 1998.\n\nThe details of the other case, Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962) escape me, but something similar happened.
1146157
Scew Santorum. \n\nVote for Bob Casey!!!\n\nYou should email him.\n\nI emailed him and got back some canned response that some dumb intern in his office obviously did not take the time to read. *sigh*
27427
1970, 3 years before Roe vs. Wade.
429602
A defendant in a sexual assault case.\n\n**Its just a joke, please dont take it seriously people**\n :)
228360
Webster was the attorney general of Missouri\n\nMissouri passed a law stating in its preamble that life begins at conception.  The Supreme Court said that this preamble was not a statute but an expression of the legislature's opinion and therefor had no pertinence to the case.\n\nMissouri chose only to appeal to the Supreme Court the Court of Appeals' invalidation of the public funding provision.  \n\nWebster argued that there was no requirement that a state spend any of its public funds on or to support abortions.  The Supreme Court agreed with this argument.\n\nWebster also argued that physicians were required to perform tests to determine if a fetus was viable and the court agreed that viability of the fetus rather than a bright line "second trimester vs. third trimester test" was a line which could properly be drawn by a state consistent with the Constitution.\n\nThe opinion of the Supreme Court was highly divided and given the change in the Court's personnel cannot be expected to be the same should similar issues come before the Court in the future.\n\nThe Court noted that Roe v Wade was entitled to respect under the doctrine of stare decisis but Justice Rehnquist seemed to indicate that he did not believe that Roe v Wade was by any means engraved in stone as precedent.
727307
Roe vs. Wade.  The issue of legalized abortion.\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade
379708
I think all of that is hogwash. I'm an advocate for abortion if it's for the right reasons. Do you remember anything about being concieved, or do you remember anything about being a fetus, because I sure don't. It's "preventing" life, not killing it. And i'll take that in a second, rather than another crackbaby born into a dysfunctional family with a miserable life ahead of it.
231018
There maybe more than one person with the name but from my source have given you a page where search for the name is listed. I hope this will answer your question.
264556
The hope of the Pro-life camp in South Dakota (and elsewhere) is that it wll be tied up in court long enough for John Paul Stevens to retire (he is 85), and GWB will pick his replacement (who of course will be Pro-Life) giving the Supreme Court a majority of 5 who will overturn Roe v Wade.\n\nSo it isn't a matter of the proponents of the law hoping there will be no legal challenge, quite the contrary: they welcome that legal challenge.
367444
Please be more specific.  \n\nRoe vrs. Wade gave a woman the right to suck a baby into a sink, ripping it from limb to limb.  \n\nThe 19th Amendment gave women the right to vote.\n\nNote to tulaksam: Less than 5% of all abortions are due to rape or the health of the mother.  All other abortions (including those conceived via incest) are abortions of convenience.  If women are so strong why can't they say "no" to sex when they do not want to carry the baby to full term?  If they get pregnant and don't want the baby, why are they not strong enough to give it up for adoption?  Roe v Wade will be overturned, because it is based on an erroneous interpretation of the Constitution. Abortion is an issue for each state to decide.  It is not a federal issue.  That is why it will be overturned.
244062
Spouse \nSusan Deixler (1964 - 1965) (annulled) \n\n\nMy guess is he's gay.
1136471
The truth about what they are and stand for;\n\n•attack American traditions, specifically Christian traditions and the traditional American family\n•engage in "get-even" policies that support discrimination when it benefits historically disadvantaged groups\n•punish and/or discourage achievement through taxation and fiscal policies\n•use the rulings of the Judicial branch of the government as de facto law, irrevocable by anything short of Constitutional amendment or a future court ruling, thus bypassing the legislative process. Roe V. Wade is the most frequently cited example of "judicial activism".\n•weaken the military strength and morale of the country by vilifying the practice of armed combat and hesitating to use force when it appears necessary\n•use regulatory bodies over private enterprise to accomplish social goals and restrict competition (government, education, labor)\n•establish secular and progressive social policy, including support for gay marriage, abortion, liberal drug policy, euthanasia and prostitution legalization.\n•implement a foreign policy supporting the protection of human rights and multiculturalism through activism and social intervention.
150351
According to Roe v. Wade he does
259163
It is not just South Dakota-- Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, Indiana, Tennessee, West Virginia and Kentucky are all considering similar measures.  There is a lot of talk that this will not stop until Roe vs. Wade is overturned.  \n\nTalk to everyone you know.  Write your state officials, encourage everyone you know to do the same.  There are a number of blogs out there; most created by women, but also some by men; that express a similar opinion to yours.\nKeep talking to people...it is only going to get worse if nothing is done.