Posted on 04/24/2011 11:29:31 AM PDT by Falcon28
Transcript via The Right Scoop:
But when you understood what made the Spartan men strong, it was the Spartan women. Because the Spartan women at the age of nine gave up their male sons. And their male sons went into a training that was called the Agoge and they stayed in that training for the next eleven to twelve years. And when they were finally qualified, when they were finally ready to join the ranks for the Spartan army, it was not their father who gave them their cloak and shield. It was their mother who gave them their shield. And when the Spartan mother gave that young Spartan warrior his shield, she gave him this basic commandment: “Spartan, here is your shield. Come back bearing this shield or being borne upon it!”
When Queen Gorgo, wife of King Leonidas, was questioned by the Persian emissary and she somewhat spoke out of turn to this Persian emissary, he tried to rebuke her. And she looked at him and said “Persian, beware, for it is Spartan women who raise Spartan men.”
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
The paragraph in full:
"You and I have stood together on this forum time and time again, in defense of Reagan signing the 1967 Therapeutic Abortion Act. We both know that law was abused by the California medical community. At the same time, Reagan did say, it was his biggest mistake made as Governor."
That paragraph speaks for itself. Its one FULL statement and had more to do within the context of what happened in the aftermath of Reagan signing the legislation then anything else. That is the defense I was talking about. Maybe it got lost in all the arguing.
Upon reading that, in RE#37 you immediately became indignant with me. I never defended Reagan signing the legislation into law and have posted that on this thread. Again, it was a mistake by Reagan. Why would I take issue with you not defending him in that same context?
There is no doubt in my mind, however, you went after Reagan to make Cong West look bad. That is a cheapshot and more typical of what I expect from malcontents. Not from good conservatives. You didn't need to use Reagan to make your points against West. That is wrong and you know it.
But I'm glad you took the time to cool down.
The line I took immediate exception to was this:
You and I have stood together on this forum time and time again, in defense of Reagan signing the 1967 Therapeutic Abortion Act.
And in response, in two back to back posts, I said:
To: Reagan Man
Bullhockey. I've never defended that. Ever.
And...
I’ve defended Reagan, but certainly NOT his signing of that atrocious legislation.
I’ve defended him because he realized his horrible mistake in creating what for all intents amounted to abortion on demand and became someone who fully understood that the child is a person who MUST be protected under the explicit provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Which he put in the GOP platform in 1984, where it remains, even if it is almost entirely ignored by Republican politicians like Allen West and so many others.
All of which I stand behind.
STILL indignant and self righteous I see. As though you need to ask.
Roe v Wade should be overturned. Abortion on demand should be abolished forever. A personhood amendment should be added to the Constitution. IMO, life begins at conception. happy?
I do agree with Reagan on the one exception for abortion. This comes from one of your news snippets:
“Just as today we recognize the right of self defense, the right of a person to take a human life in self defense, I had to conclude I could agree to the right of a mother to lake the life of her own unborn child in defense of her own life,”.
If you don't like my position, too bad.
Cong West's position is the same position that millions of pro-lifers take. You don't agree with the three exception rule, he does. Right now, Roe v Wade is the law of the land. Is RvW unConstitutional? IMO, yes.
No, it's not. That's a destructive myth. A common one, but a myth nonetheless. Courts don't make law. They decide individual cases, based first on the Constitution, and secondly on the laws made by our representatives in the legislative branch.
Can you point me to where you think the judiciary is granted legislative authority in our Constitution?
I just asked you a couple of simple basic questions. Your knee is jerking harder today than I've ever seen it jerk.
>>>>>>You're still reading it wrong.
No I'm not. If I had said...
"You and I have stood together on this forum time and time again, in defense of Reagan for signing the 1967 Therapeutic Abortion Act."
... then I would agree with you.
I didn't say that. One more time. The post should be taken as a full paragraph, a full statement in context. Not how you're presenting it.
Somewhere along the way, you got lost and maybe I did too. That is the best I can do. If you want to continue arguing, you'll have to argue with yourself.
Section 1.
All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
-- The U.S. Constitution
Does ALL mean ALL or not?
There's no constitutional authority for the courts to veto legislation, either. That's only granted to the Executive.
And they also have NOTHING to do with amending the Constitution.
On principle, I agree with you. However, your sanity has to be questioned at this point. RvW was a constitutional decision handed down by the SCOTUS. You can huff and puff all you want. Not gonna change things. What will change things is a conservative President, along with a conservative Congress and the passage of a personhood amendment to the Constitution. That means 2/3rds passage in Congress and 3/4ers of the states ratifying it. This whole issue is beyond mear rhetoric anymore. Rhetoric alone will not end abortion on demand. Nothing else matters at this point. Get a grip.
I answered you dumbass questions, you nut.
Okay, YOU'RE not happy. I get it. Tough!
Nonsense. It wasn't constitutional in any way, shape, or form. In fact, it violated every clause of the Constitution's own stated purposes.
Even liberal law scholars like Alan Dershowitz and Lawrence Tribe think RvW is unconstitutional.
It doesn't matter what you think, what I think, or what others may think.
Its all about POWER! In order to set aside RvW as the law of the land, 2/3rds of Congress and 3/4ers of the states have to vote for a personhood amendment. 50 million dead since 1973 is an abomination. But abortion remains legal. I don't like it, you don't like it either. But we have to live with it.
No, we don't. All we have to do is demand that those who take the oath make practice line up with principle, and quit compromising.
Yeah, Allen West would have been wiser to not reference such “facts”.
Wise conservative leaders do not hand the MSM ammo.
Its going to take more than that.
Until we get 2/3rds of Congress and 3/4ers of the states to vote for a personhood amendment that is added to the Constitution and states, life begins at conception, abortion will remain legal in America. Very, very sad but very, very true.
We already have a personhood amendment.
Five of them, actually.
Amendments Five, Eight, Nine, Ten and Fourteen. Abortion violates all of them.
If the child-killers don’t like it, tough. Our founding documents already protect innocent human life in detail. Let them have the burden of overturning the Declaration of Independence, the Preamble, and gut the Bill of Rights if they think they can convince the country to do that.
Again, it's not "legal" now.
Sorry, it is legal. Last year in the US there were over a million abortions performed. No one was fined for it, no doctors lost their license for it and no one went to jail for it. Those are the sad facts and the hard reality which you choose to ignore.
As a pro-life conservative I will not vote for any candidate who supports abortion on demand. The best way for conservatives to fight abortion, is to elect more and more pro-lifers to the Congress. Then get Congress and the states to vote an amendment that says life begins at conception. I don't know any other way to end abortion on demand. Its too ingrained within our societal habits. Abortion has become a way of life in America. Stopping Roe v Wade is the biggest challenge we pro-lifers face today.
But, you agreed that the fetus is a person.
And you agreed that the Constitution provides for the equal protection of the innocent life of each and every person.
And, since the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, superior to any court or any positive law, how can killing innocent persons be “legal”?
That doesn’t make sense.
There are other aspects of the Spartan martial tradition which are best forgotten. (They took male camaraderie a little too far...)
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.