I have not heard that even the New York abortion has done very much in the States where it has been enacted.

So far I go with the Socialists as to think it a pretty general rule that, where monopoly is necessary, it is better in public hands.

Have you ever found any logical reason why mutual promises are sufficient consideration for one another (like the two lean horses of a Calcutta hack who can only just stand together)? I have not.

If you deny that any principles of conduct at all are common to and admitted by all men who try to behave reasonably - well, I don't see how you can have any ethics or any ethical background for law.

Consider the Essay as a political pamphlet on the Revolution side, and the fact that it was the Whig gospel for a century, and you will see its working merit.

The oldest theory of contract is I think negative.

Crabbed and obscure definitions are of no use beyond a narrow circle of students, of whom probably every one has a pet one of his own.

It cannot be assumed that equity was following common law whenever they agreed, any more than the converse.

It is odd how learned persons fail to see that new terms and definitions are apt to mean new doubts and litigation.

I have not heard that even the New York abortion has done very much in the States where it has been enacted.

Medieval justice was a quaint thing.

The practice of the law is a perfectly distinct art.

But it is strange how many rational beings believe the ultimate truths of the universe to be reducible to patterns on a blackboard.

It is strange how little harm bad codes do.

Yet when one suspects that a man knows something about life that one hasn't heard before one is uneasy until one has found out what he has to say.

The lawyer has not reached the height of his vocation who does not find therein... scope for a peculiar but genuine artistic function.

Our lady the Common Law is a very wise old lady though she still has something to learn in telling what she knows.

Not that pleading can be taken as a test, for the forms of action, notably Debt, ignore the fundamental difference between duties imposed by law and duties created by the will of the parties.

I frankly don't care if you agree with my stand on abortion. I take that stand because no other stand is consistent with decent principles, and no other standard is consistent with the will of God.

The media seems to think only abortion and gay marriage are religious issues. Poverty is a moral issue, it's a faith issue, it's a religious issue.

If they are opposed to abortion, they should be for preventing unintended pregnancies.

But I've been very clear in this campaign - I don't believe the party should have a position on abortion.

I don't think there is a good reason for an abortion, but Dr. Jasper made me really realize it was just a racket. He was just doing it for the money. He didn't care about the women.

We have had virtually unlimited access to abortion for nearly twenty years. Yet during that same period, more and more women and children have slipped into poverty.

I really didn't know there was two sides to the abortion issue.

The FDA is redefining birth control as abortion. The FDA is setting the bar higher for this kind of drug.

While the political debate over abortion will continue for a very long time, the federal government can and should be doing more to support programs and services that provide women with better options.

The emphasis must be not on the right to abortion but on the right to privacy and reproductive control.

Advocates of unrestricted abortion do not want the public to focus on these undeniable facts of fetal development, but the facts cannot be ignored.

I do not support abortion rights. Although what I would support in this vexed area is not clear to me.

A vast abortion industry, generating some half a billion dollars annually, sprang into existence in the wake of Roe and Doe.

A majority of Americans oppose partial-birth abortion, and Judge Hamilton's decision flies in the face of Congress passing and President Bush signing legislation banning such horrible acts of violence.

If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.

The issue is not abortion. The issue is whether women can make up their own mind instead of some right-wing pastor, some right-wing politician telling them what to do.

Too many people use abortion as a form of birth control. And that's very wrong. I could never, ever have an abortion.

Every day Catholics prove that you can be a good Catholic and a good Democrat and have a different position from the Church on abortion.

The freedom that women were supposed to have found in the Sixties largely boiled down to easy contraception and abortion; things to make life easier for men, in fact.

The biggest obstacle was mixing abortion with overpopulation. These are two things that have nothing to do with each other.

I could never, ever have an abortion.

That is why I fought against abortion and that is why if I were still in the Senate I would be doing everything I could to defend the sanctity of marriage.

Under Obama, our federal tax dollars can now be used to fund abortion all over the world. With the stroke of a pen, abortion essentially became a U.S. foreign export.

A lot of attention has been going to social values - abortion, gay rights, other divisive issues - but economic values are equally important.

Abortion on demand has, in my judgment, contributed significantly to an environment in our country in which life has become very cheap.

For almost twenty years, abortion policy in America has been controlled by the courts.

Abortion is a question of choice.

Abortion is defended today as a means of ensuring the equality and independence of women, and as a solution to the problems of single parenting, child abuse, and the feminization of poverty.

It's all about the fungibility and money. If Planned Parenthood accesses hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money and they use that for other purposes, then they can use other dollars to fund abortion.

The papers reveal that in several key abortion cases, justices were keenly interested in the perceived public reaction to their rulings - indicating that courts can be influenced by public sentiment.

If your neighbor has a completely different view on abortion, gay marriage, stem cell research, all of those things, you still are both Americans. Neither one of you is necessarily more patriotic than the other. Neither loves their country any more than the other one does.