ROE vs. WADE -- GONE !!
Great new GROWTH FIELD
for LAWYERS ! 1. YEARS LATER, on behalf of the child SUE MEDICAL
PRACTICES that refused to SEE THE WOMAN.
2. YEARS LATER, on behalf of the child SUE MEDICAL
PRACTICES for MEDICAL MALPRACTICE for not
FULLY advising the mother, INCLUDING out-of-state
ABORTION or abortion pills.
3. YEARS LATER, on behalf of the child SUE THE
FATHER, including PUNITIVE DAMAGES, alleging
NON-CONSENSUAL SEX.
Let the father PROVE ... UP TO 20 YEARS LATER
that it WAS consensual AND that the woman
AGREED TO POSSIBLY BECOME PREGNANT. I'm sure they'll think up a bunch more
things--like:
1. The makeup of the Court itself is
UNCONSTITUTIONAL because there
is only ONE Protestant on the Court
although about 43% of the population
is Protestant.
2. Sex discrimination
3. It violates due process and equal
protection because only women's
reproductive rights are infringed.
