Posted on 04/03/2015 7:26:15 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Why is it that the right never bothers to state the obvious?
Those supporting abortion rights lack compassion.
Oh, we don’t want to get the left mad, do we?
They are already mad. …...In both ways.
This one is another one. Why do you want to add more?
And when dealing with Madmen, you use their own tactics against them.
Why must the Right always be absolute? We can use this incrementalism against the left as they do us. We compromised ourselves out of the argument. Why?
It is possible to limit their reach without doing things that are immoral and unconstitutional.
But again, if you have the governmental power to limit their reach, you have the governmental power to cut off the murderous arm.
Could be. But the question is one of prudence, the application of right reason to a particular situation.
Since we don't know that every Christian will mobilize as you have suggested, and, since we are not certain of how effective that might be, is that a risk thats reasonable to take if being wrong results in deaths that could be prevented?
From a moral standpoint to merely tolerate but not intend a lesser evil so that a good can be achieved would be a reasonable effect. The moral act involved in this legislation is not the intent to kill babies but the desire to save some.
We can get a half a loaf now, save millions of lives, though not others, and then try for the whole loaf,
Or, we can refuse to back partial limits now because we want the whole thing or nothing, spend 20 years re-educating the public while twice as many die, and then try for the whole ban.
I recommend the former course.
Moving the ball in the right direction isn’t call surrender, it’s called winning.
I’d love to see the Supreme Court reverse Roe vs. Wade, but that hasn’t happened...yet.
Supreme Court opinions and laws that violate the laws of nature and nature's God are null and void. So said Cicero, and Aquinas, and Blackstone, and Hamilton. And they were right.
Here’s the difference between you and me: you’re making Utilitarian arguments, and I’m making moral and constitutional arguments.
Utilitarianism is a godless ideology. It has an appearance of wisdom on the surface, but it never works out in the long run. Why? Because God decreed at the beginning of the creation that you would reap what you sow. All things reproduce after their kind.
Doing what is right may look likely to be “unsuccessful” in the short term, but it always wins in the end, if prosecuted to the end by men and women of principle and courage.
As for the Utilitarian strategy you, and American politicians like Walker, continue to promote, we already know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it doesn’t work.
But look, if forty years of obvious utter failure won’t convince you of that, most likely nothing I can say in by brief time on this thread is likely to make any difference in your thinking.
>>Here’s the difference between you and me: you’re making Utilitarian arguments, and I’m making moral and constitutional arguments.<<
Here’s another difference. Our arguments are actually making progress and your arguments amount to spitting into the wind.
Before you can make change you first have to get people to listen to you, and when you disparage the people who should be your allies in the fight, you pretty much shut that possibility down at the outset.
Enjoy life up on there on the mountain....alone.
>>most likely nothing I can say in by brief time on this thread is likely to make any difference in your thinking.<<
Yes, you can be pretty certain of that given the insults you’ve cast already, so please don’t bother.
A murder is defined as killing an independent living human being. At 20 weeks gestation, the fetus has survived independently of the mother. So there should not even be a debate about whether it is murder.
All children are dependents of their parents. That dependency creates duty on the part of those parents. Doesn’t matter what stage of development they’re at. The moral obligation is the same.
Your supposed progress is a mirage. Abortion on demand continues unabated. Regulating mass murder has done nothing to stop it. If anything it has made it stronger, in the same way pruning a plant makes that plant more productive. Close a clinic, they open another modern, efficient mega-killing center. Create another minor regulatory requirement, they find more efficient means to kill millions more children via chemical weapons of mass destruction.
You’re never going to stop this holocaust as long as you continue to disregard and discard the principle of God-given, unalienable rights and equal protection under the law. If you think you are, you’re simply fooling yourself.
When progressives progress it is not a mirage, their success shows up in the data.
The only data you can gather that will reflect any true progress toward ending the abortion holocaust in America is by counting the number of elected officials who are truly committed to keeping the primary obligation of their oath to provide equal protection for the right to life of every person within their legitimate jurisdiction.
Fewer/more babies killed does not enter the equation?
Check.
Constitutionality and the obligations of the oath don’t enter the equation?
If every person is not provided the equal protection for their supreme right that the supreme law of our land absolutely requires, your rights, none of them, are secure.
And by the way, the claim that these bills produce fewer abortions is simply not true. It’s a mirage. In fact, these bills assure the continuation of abortion on demand, because they surrender the only moral, constitutional, and legal arguments against any and all abortions.
Those who disarm and surrender are what is known in war as casualties. And casualties do not win wars. The idea that they can or do is absurd.
We live in a country governed by laws and the constitution.
(Regardless of Obama who does not believe in either).
If laws are not changed towards pro-life agenda, what you or I desire is irrelevant. Because without laws on our side, what we desire has no practical value. Abortions on demand, at any stage of pregnancy will continue. We can shout at the top of our voices and it is just hot air. It is irrelevant in the real world. I prefer living in the real world.
To get laws changed, hearts and minds of voters must be won. If majority of voters believed in life at conception, we would already have laws proscribing that. But we don’t. Which means you and I are in the minority. We can blog all we want on FR, but that means nothing unless laws are changed.
What is a realistic method to pass more pro-life laws? Can it be accomplished in one fell swoop? Does not look to me that is possible, with the present congressional constituency. One man can not change the laws. Not even the president. The SCOTUS has to go along. As a first step, I will accept the 20 weeks rule. Every journey starts with one step. It is foolish for a hungry man to reject a partial meal. Sure, it will not fill his belly, but it will enable him to fight on for another day. Governor Walker should be admired for proposing something which has a realistic chance to become a law.
You don’t ever change hearts and minds by abandoning the principle of God-given, unalienable rights and equal protection under the law. All you do is teach the people that you don’t care about those things, and therefore that they don’t matter when it comes to the rule of law.
I never said to give up. In summary, what I said is it can only be accomplished in steps.
Do you have a method to pass a law in congress to ban all abortions immediately? Please tell us how. Wishful thinking is not a realistic method.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.