The constitutional framework assumes the federal government would support states that wish to use the police power against murderers. Seeking a federal assertion of a right to life for the unborn is a legitimate objective in our federalism. But short of that, surely as one who honors the 10th you understand that it is the fed who began interfering and continues now to interfere with many many states seeking to stop the murder of the unborn. But for a man’s popular candidacy, this would not even be controversial on FR. Pro-murder didn’t used to work here. I guess times have changed.
Peace,
SR
"Seeking a federal assertion of a right to life for the unborn is a legitimate objective in our federalism.”
The states not only need to amend the Constitution to expressly protect the right to life of unborn children, but the states also need to get pro-abortion activist judges and justices off of the bench because they’re going to pervert such a protection.
As I’ve ranted in related threads, I think that the 19th Amendment (19A), which effectively gave women the right to vote, has been instrumental in fostering the PC right to have an abortion, therefore helping the corrupt federal government to unconstitutionally expand its powers.
More specifically, and with all due respect to women, actually everybody needs to learn about the federal government’s constitutionally limited powers. This is because it can be argued that the only thing that 19A won for women is to give them a voice in running the US Mail Service (1.8.7) where domestic policy is concerned.
In other words, everybody needs to get a grip on the idea that most federal domestic policy outside the scope of the US Mail Service, the PC right to have an abortion an excellent example, is based on 10th Amendment-proteced state powers which the corrupt feds have stolen from the states.