But of course an anti-feminist, anti-women, pro-neoconservative Republican ideology group such as the Independent Women's Forum, would be thrilled to hear of Bush nominating John G. Roberts to fill Sandra Day O'Connor's seat on the Supreme Court. Shocking isn't it--that a group who endorses misogynist neocon-Republican propaganda would support the nomination of an anti-women's-reproductive-rights ideologue?

[...]"Judge John G. Roberts, Jr. is a very well qualified candidate with a reputation of being a strict interpreter of the law rather than someone who legislates from the bench," said Nancy Pfotenhauer, president of the Independent Women’s Forum.[...]

"We look forward to the confirmation process and hope that the Senate will focus on Judge Roberts' record, intellect, and judicial philosophy and not try to apply a 'litmus test' by questioning his views on specific matters that might come before the Court," said Pfotenhauer.

...Anti-women, anti-women's-reproductive-rights (yeah I may seem a little late at this but still). What did you expect out of judge nominated by Bush? Women's reproductive rights truly are endanger. Don't believe me? Take a look at his record...because history repeats itself. (via NARAL Pro-Choice America)

--As Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts argued in a brief before the U.S. Supreme Court (in a case that did not implicate Roe v. Wade) that “[w]e continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled…. [T]he Court’s conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion… finds no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution.”

--In Rust v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court considered whether Department of Health and Human Services regulations limiting the ability of Title X recipients to engage in abortion-related activities violated various constitutional provisions. Roberts, appearing on behalf of HHS as Deputy Solicitor General, argued that this domestic gag rule did not violate constitutional protections.

--Roberts, again as Deputy Solicitor General, filed a “friend of the court brief for the United States supporting Operation Rescue and six other individuals who routinely blocked access to reproductive health care clinics, arguing that the protesters behavior did not amount to discrimination against women even though only women could exercise the right to seek an abortion.

--The Court was so accustomed to the Solicitor General and the Deputy Solicitor General arguing for the overturn of Roe that during John Robertss oral argument before the Supreme Court in Bray, a Justice Asked, Mr. Roberts, in this case are you asking that Roe v. Wade be overruled? He responded,No, your honor, the issue doesnt even come up. To this the justice said, Well, that hasnt prevented the Solicitor General from taking that position in prior cases.

I had [url=http://liberalfeministbias.blogspot.com/2005/03/triple-whammy-for-lesbians-bisexual.html]written this post on the sociocultural discrimination against LBT Women of Color[/url] the other day [url=http://liberalfeministbias.blogspot.com]on my blog[/url]. I thought it was very interesting, as well as disheartening that some LBT Women of Color believed that some of the prejudice directed towards them was perpetrated by members of the White LGBT Community. I also deal with the societal gender roles for women, male validation, and artificial, pornographic Lesbianism the male-dominated entertainment industry presents us with in order to appeal to the male fantasy.

Just my criticism of Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice's [url=http://liberalfeministbias.blogspot.com/2005/03/schizoid-view-on-womens-reproductive.html]"mildly pro-choice" stance[/url]. 'The hell does that mean?