Posted on 07/07/2016 3:42:10 PM PDT by Steve Schulin
... Our Constitution specifies that no person shall be deprived of their life without due process. So the bill's provisions allowing abortions to be performed without any due process is on its face unconstitutional. The Supreme Court, in Roe opinion, opined that the unborn child is not a person. That's a legal fiction. When Roe opinion was written, it was commonly thought that before you or I became human, we went through various stages of biological development. "Ontogeny recapitulates Phylogeny" was the popular phrase taught to schoolchildren as scientific fact -- that we each start as a tadpole-like creature and progress through various stages before becoming human. That wasn't true then, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a single scientist today who doubts that your DNA, from the very earliest stage of your biological development, is unambiguous proof that you are a human individual. The Roe opinion was always in opposition to the Biblical understanding of when personhood begins, and now it is in opposition to the scientific understanding of when personhood begins...
(Excerpt) Read more at compleatadvocate.com ...
I appreciate the sentiments.
However, this election is crucial. Donald Trump is not a Republican, certainly not as they are today.
If Mr. Trump doesn’t become President Trump, our country is finished and any concerns you have about how this country should be run, will become moot.
I would urge you to use the term “preborn” instead of “unborn”.
Many software applications have and “undo” button to reverse, i.e., undo the last operation. Something cannot be undone if it hasn’t already been done. Thus an “unborn” person would have to be born and then somehow pushed back into the womb.
“Preborn” is a better and more accurate term.
Only if the Republicans decide not to nominate Trump at the convention, otherwise, no can do what you foolish chose to do.
I would also urge you not to use Biblical references in your anti-abortion arguments since that is a losing position.
Many of the people you are trying to convince will take virtually any position as long as it’s in opposition to the teachings of churches.
You’re on the right track to use DNA in your arguments, as I have done on this forum for many years.
As far as voting, I’m voting against Mrs. Bill Clinton.
“...I’m voting for a Freeper for president this year, as I did in 2012...”
-
Yeah, that’ll show ‘em!
Either Hillary or Trump will be President. If she is elected, this madness will escalate. If Trump is elected, he will fill court vacancies with conservatives. If you want four or five more Bsder-Ginsberg or Kagans on SCOTUS, you will preservere with your plans.
Well, the Freeper came in 8th in 2012. Maybe your help would be enough to have him win Electoral College this time. Can you point 5 people a day between now and November to his website? He could get 60 million voters by August if you did so, and they did the same. We don’t want your money. We want you to support candidates who represent your views.
8th place?
HA HA HA
No way that I will pursue a lost cause.
your next president will either be Trump or Clinton.
Make your choice.
I recognized Hillary as a disgrace to our nation during Clinton administration. I wouldn’t have given her a dime even to save my business. If Trump were brilliant in matters that affect us all, he wouldn’t have donated the $100,000 to Clinton Foundation. We must do better than elect Clinton or Trump.
The SC got around this by simple declaring that an unborn child is not a “person” and therefore has no rights.
I’ll think about that, thanks. I often use the phrase “unalienable rights” as used in the Declaration of Independence, and I’m not worried about people misunderstanding that “un”.
When asked who to support for President, Trump endorsed Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton
In the back of Trump’s book titled Think Big and Kick Ass in Business and Life, there’s a section that presents “The best of Donald’s Question and Answer sessions from The Learning Annex Wealth Expos in North America”. Here’s one:
Q: Mr. Trump, since you are not running for president, who do we support and how do we get started?
DT: You have a lot of good people. Rudy Giuliani is a very good person. Hillary Clinton is a very good person. We might not like what’s going on right now, but we live in a very resilient country, and we’ll find a way out of our problems. This country is very, very resilient.
The excerpt wasn’t dated. Giuliani and Clinton were candidates in the 2007-8 campaign.
How long have YOU known that Hillary is a disgrace to the nation? Would you have endorsed her as Trump did in 2008 campaign? If not, why do you think he’s worthy of your vote this time?
This post is mainly about Members of Congress violating their oath of office. The President takes the same oath. Could the executive power of the presidency stop abortion from being performed under color of law? Yes. All of good will are welcome to join in the real town-hall-style calls every Tuesday and Thursday night starting at 9pm eastern:
America's Summit: Restore the Republic
712-432-3566,,,340794#
These calls have been moderated by Freeper Tom Hoefling for the past nine years. Ask him how he would uphold his oath and quickly shut down every abortion facility in the nation.
"Yesterday, in a roll call vote, the U.S. House again affirmed that it’s ok to use tax dollars to fund some abortions, including cases where the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest."
Hmm, a bill for funding abortions. This must be an election year.
From a related thread …
Given the excerpt above, another constitutional problem with the referenced bill is the following. The Founding states had made the 10th Amendment to clarify that the Constitution’s silence about things like healthcare and abortion means that such issues are automatically and uniquely state power issues, not the business of the feds.
In fact, note that a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that Congress is prohibited from appropriating taxes in the name of state power issues, essentially any issue which Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers, the specific powers to regulate, tax and spend for vote-winning abortions in this example not among those powers.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
Also note that the 19th Amendment (19A) has been a major contributor to unconstitutional government funding of abortions imo, that amendment giving women the right to vote in federal and state elections.
More specifically, while it is great that 19A gave women the right to vote in state elections, the states, not the feds, having the lion’s share of constitutional authority to address women’s concerns, the main thing that 19A actually won for women from the feds where domestic policy is concerned is the following.
Note that one of the very few powers that the states have actually delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, to regulate an aspect of domestic policy is to run the US Mail Service (1.8.7). In other words, most other federal social spending programs are based on 10th Amendment-protected state powers, and state revenues uniquely associated with those powers, which the corrupt feds have been stealing from the states with unconstitutional federal taxes as evidenced by the abortion funding bill and the Gibbons excerpt imo.
So basically the main thing that 19A won for women where domestic policy of the constitutionally humbled federal government is concerned is a voice in how the US Mail Service is run.
The problem is that corrupt federal politicians have been exploiting 19A by winning the support of low-information women voters by promising such women federal funding to have abortions, such women evidently not understanding that federal lawmakers don’t have the constitutional authority to appropriate taxes for such a purpose.
Remember in November !
Patriots need to support Trump by also electing a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will work within its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to not only support Trump’s vision to make America great again for everybody, but will also put a stop to unconstitutional federal taxing and spending, including putting a stop to funding for abortions.
Also note that such a Congress will probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.
Because people do make mistakes. She was a Senator, but in reality a peripheral one. He has her pegged now. Why he couldn't see it then I have no clue. In addition she has received a lot more exposure as to her true self since those years. While some saw her for her true self early on, it's likely due to our predisposition to see Democrats as the traitors that they are. Every last one of them. I for one was fooled by many Republicans back then myself. I made my mistakes there. So, why would I not give him the benefit of the doubt now?
I think he will make a good president, and has the real potential to be a great president. Much on par with Ronald Reagan, and I do not say that lightly or even blindly. If I didn't think that I wouldn't be supportive of him. There is a lot of good in Donald Trump, and if you bothered to do some research you would find that is the truth. Is he perfect? Absolutely not. Does he cause me to be concerned? Yes, but a lot less than others concern me, and I am concerned with anyone in positions of power anymore.
The truth of the matter is that the only person I have undying faith in, is our creator. He is the only one that can save this great nation, and quite honestly I doubt he has the desire, because too many in this country don't have the desire and in addition have lost their way spiritually.
It is a good thing Trump is not a today Republican.
We have to get rid of the g-d today republicans. The fuching rino uniparty globalist democrat enablers that got us here.
And i would bet that was your point, too.
Yes, that was my point.
You put it better and more succinctly. Thanks.
I sure agree that we should support candidates who have and will stand firmly against federal government doing things which aren’t within the powers enumerated in the Constitution. Your support of Trump doesn’t seem consistent with that. Do you recall a town hall event on CNN (March 29, 2016) where Trump was asked what the top three functions of federal government are? His top choice was security. He said he’d like to use that for all three choices. But he did give two other choices: health care and education.
As for abortion, you quote somebody asserting that the Constitution is silent on the matter. It is not. Please see the provision that no person shall be deprived of their life without due process. It was in the original Bill of Rights and was extended to the states in the 14th Amendment.
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.