sitetest, my husband is TigersEye, and you complimented his post on abortion earlier today. I found you here by your find-in-forum, happily, discussing this issue. TigersEye can defend his solidly pro-life position well. I'm very proud of him for that, and happy when others also acknowledge it.
As far as the "we" in "why would we agree..." I'm glad you don't count yourself in that group! I actually considered a different phrasing, because I'm not a part of that "we" either, truthfully. As you doubtless concluded, I was grouping all conservatives into that "we" category because that is the trend of the majority of conservative politicians, pundits, and FReepers we hear from daily. Or that is what the majority of them have settled upon, as if this solution, this desperate campaign, is the last, best hope of our nation.
Dr. James Dobson is counted among these: I've been struggling with a way to reply to his most recent Focus Family letter in a way that shows my respect for his position and accomplishments but at the same time tells him that I do not agree with his strategy. (If you could only see the notations I made in that letter's margins while I read it!) Since the Senate's recent "upholding of tradition" my guess is that Dr. Dobson has begun to see some former things differently. (I personally can't help but picture Tevia shouting "TRADITION!" in Fiddler whenever I read the word in its current political context! As I recall he could hardly even mumble it by the end of the movie.)
Diva Betsy Ross,
Thank you for the clarification on the original impetus and resulting discussion of Roe v. Wade. I'm happy to count myself alongside you in not "being sold".
The whole party could come "unglued"....
Or is it the whole nation, I wonder?
Or, unlikely event, could Liberals and Conservatives jointly come to fight for the restoration of the Constitution despite the stoking of fires of our differences? And what would that outcome look like?
I came upon a great verse in Lamentations 4:17 completely by accident the other day, but it was just the word of the Lord I'd been searching for to try to describe what Americans - even solidly Christian Americans, who read their Bibles - are doing:
Still our eyes failed us,
Watching vainly for our help;
In our watching we watched
For a nation that could not save us.
I wonder if we are not witnessing the "shaking of all that can be shaken" which will show forth that which can not be shaken?
These are all part of what's been on my mind lately. I appreciate having some good FReepers to talk it over with.
Dear .30Carbine,
"my husband is TigersEye..."
Yes, I remember the post. I like it when folks use statistical information to show that the foolish conventional wisdom is... foolish. Your husband did that nicely with his post.
I recognized that you weren't quite part of the "we;" I don't at all view it as ideal for us to counter their unconstitutional judges with unconstitutional judges of our own.
However, in that Roe is a rather large constitutional rupture, a very serious usurpation by a tyrannical judiciary, I wouldn't consider it just us countering their bad judges with our own if another Supreme Court were to say, "Roe was wrongly decided, there was no constitutional right to abortion, the jackasses made it up out of their da*ned fool heads. Roe is vacated, it's up to the other two branches at the federal and state levels to decide the issues."
I think a non-activist, non-tyrannical Justice could, and in fact, would say that. In some sense, it would a voluntary withdrawal by the court from their previous tyrannical acts, and to a degree, such an action could heal the wounds that the Court has inflicted on our Republic, wounds which may eventually help prove fatal.
sitetest