Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Joseph Farah Questions "Bush and Abortion"
WND.com ^ | 10-30-03 | Farah, Joseph

Posted on 10/30/2003 5:46:38 AM PST by Theodore R.

Bush and abortion

Posted: October 30, 2003 1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

President Bush says the United States is not ready for a total abortion ban.

"I don't think the culture has changed to the extent that the American people or the Congress would totally ban abortions," he explained.

What Bush really means is the political culture in Washington hasn't changed.

Real leadership means doing what's right even at the risk of political rejection. That's not Bush. That's not the U.S. Congress. In fact, there's precious little real leadership like that anywhere in the United States today.

When Bush says the culture isn't ready to ban abortions, he's making excuses for himself.

The culture never was ready to eliminate all laws restricting abortion, but that didn't stop the Supreme Court from forcing that cultural and social change down the throats of an unwilling public.

Slowly but surely the culture has been pushed by the courts, by the media, by academia and by other cultural institutions to accept abortion on demand. Even so, 30 years after Roe v. Wade, the nation is basically still split evenly on the issue.

But morality is not subject to polls. Morality is not dictated by elections. Right and wrong are eternal, immutable truths.

That's why it is impossible that there ever was a constitutional right to an abortion in this country.

No matter what the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Roe v. Wade in 1973 or in subsequent rulings, abortion is illegal and unconstitutional, and I will prove it to you in this column.

To understand why, you must begin by doing something few Americans bother with anymore – reading the preamble to the U.S. Constitution.

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America," it says.

Important words all. But I want you to focus right now on those to whom this document applies. Who are the subjects and beneficiaries of the Constitution, as stated clearly in the preamble?

The answer? "… to ourselves and our posterity. …"

The word "ourselves" in this context refers to those men who wrote it – and to their generation of Americans.

"Posterity," which literally means "descendants" or all succeeding generations, refers, in this context, to all those Americans yet unborn.

Is your great, great, great, great granddaughter your posterity? Absolutely. Is she born yet? Absolutely not. Does the fact that she is not yet born make her any less your posterity? No.

Now, specifically what rights are ascribed by the Constitution to ourselves and our posterity?

"Amendment V: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Clearly, the Fifth Amendment establishes that our posterity – those yet unborn – shall not be deprived of life without due process. Bingo!

This same principle was contained in the Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."

Life is an unalienable right, which means man can't take it away through laws or through Supreme Court decisions. And just so there is no confusion about this being a limitation only on the federal government, check out the 14th Amendment:

"Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Tell me, where is due process for those unborn children sentenced to death while still in the womb?

Some abortion advocates have tried to suggest that Roe v. Wade – an arbitrary and capricious attempt by the Supreme Court to exceed its constitutional limitations and legislate – is itself the due process for unborn babies.

Once again, however, the Constitution trumps that poor excuse for an argument.

"Amendment VI: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense."

Roe v. Wade is, thus, a sham – a house of cards. It was an artificial attempt to make abortion a right by citing a "right of privacy" that is itself nowhere to be found in the Constitution. Roe v. Wade created rights where none existed and abrogated those that were enshrined as unalienable.

I rest my case.

But I will not rest entirely until this nation is awakened to abortion as both a national tragedy as well as a constitutional threat to all of our God-given rights – as well as an endangerment to the lives and liberties of our posterity.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: abortion; amendment14; amendmentv; amendmentvi; bush; catholiclist; constitution; culture; josephfarah; posterity; preamble; roevwade
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 next last
To: MHGinTN; Coleus; nickcarraway; Mr. Silverback; Canticle_of_Deborah; TenthAmendmentChampion; ...
Bush and Abortion - PING
21 posted on 11/01/2003 1:49:18 AM PST by cpforlife.org (The Missing Key of the Pro-Life Movement is at www.CpForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2nd amendment mama; A2J; Alouette; aposiopetic; attagirl; axel f; Balto_Boy; Blue Scourge; ...
ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

22 posted on 11/01/2003 9:09:54 AM PST by Mr. Silverback (Pre-empt the third murder attempt: Pray for Terry Schiavo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
I will not rest entirely until this nation is awakened to abortion as both a national tragedy as well as a constitutional threat to all of our God-given rights – as well as an endangerment to the lives and liberties of our posterity.

AMEN, Same for me.

United States is not ready for a total abortion ban.

The United States wasn't ready to deal with terrorism either, but decided the consequences were to great to ignore it any longer.

The consequences of abortion will be MUCH greater.
23 posted on 11/01/2003 9:44:57 AM PST by Delphinium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Pregant women shall not be deprived of life or liberty.

I bet the Thomas Paine of the time of the Constitution would be smart enough to know that a pregnant woman is carrying another person.

Especially in this day and age, there is no excuse.Only guilt, and unnatural affections.
24 posted on 11/01/2003 9:50:21 AM PST by Delphinium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: 11th Earl of Mar; Mr. Silverback
I was thinking in particular of the conservatives who write the planks for the GOP

I agreed with your comments from post 14, and 16.

They simply move America in that direction each year step by step.

And this year I am extremely worried because of the new stars in the Republican party. Condoleezza, Rudy, and Arnold.
25 posted on 11/01/2003 10:06:05 AM PST by Delphinium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: inquest
This was found on Issues2000.org:

Reagan was not as obsessive about anti-abortion legislation as he often seemed. Early in his California governorship he had signed a permissive abortion bill that has resulted in more than a million abortions. Afterward, he inaccurately blamed this outcome on doctors, saying that they had deliberately misinterpreted the law. When Reagan ran for president, he won backing from pro-life forces by advocating a constitutional amendment that would have prohibited all abortions except when necessary to save the life of the mother. Reagan’s stand was partly a product of political calculation, as was his tactic after he was elected of addressing the annual pro-life rally held in Washington by telephone so that he would not be seen with the leaders of the movement on the evening news. While I do not doubt Reagan’s sincerity in advocating an anti-abortion amendment, he invested few political resources toward obtaining this goal.

Source: The Role of a Lifetime, by Lou Cannon, p. 812 Jul 2, 1991

Perhaps it is not quite fair to hold President Bush to a much higher standard. I admire and respect both President Reagan and President Bush but perhaps they are not quite as different as some would have us believe.

26 posted on 11/01/2003 10:09:11 AM PST by Wait4Truth (Anyone that doesn't support Bush over these morons hates America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Get your head out of the sand Dubyah!

"Consensus is the negation of leadership"...
Margaret Thatcher
27 posted on 11/01/2003 10:16:37 AM PST by Dscott_FR (Right Wing Extremist and proud of it!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dscott_FR
Also, the founder of the Democrat party, Andrew Jackson: "One man with courage makes a majority."
28 posted on 11/01/2003 2:27:41 PM PST by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Wait4Truth
The Reagan attribute is not a fair, or accurate, measure to use. For one thing, he later wholeheartedly regretted he ever signed that legislation when he was a governor of California.

RR wrote a book condemning abortion.
One merely has to read thru Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation to know where RR stood, exactly, on the issue of abortion.

29 posted on 11/01/2003 3:45:16 PM PST by jla (http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Dscott_FR
"Consensus is the negation of leadership"... Margaret Thatcher

Great quote! Thanks for posting that.

30 posted on 11/01/2003 3:46:26 PM PST by jla (http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.; GatorGirl; maryz; *Catholic_list; afraidfortherepublic; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; ...
Ping. Is politics the answer?
31 posted on 11/01/2003 3:47:40 PM PST by narses ("The do-it-yourself Mass is ended. Go in peace" Francis Cardinal Arinze of Nigeria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 11th Earl of Mar
Look how long it took for the PBA to get passed.

Yes, and now it seems it will take almost that long for the President to sign it.

Dear Mr. President,

Please stop procrastinating and sign the ban.
Respectfully,
A frustrated and tired Pro-life Christian

32 posted on 11/01/2003 5:01:49 PM PST by 2timothy3.16
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
While Bush has not led any charges against abortion, neither did Ron Reagan...

But the Bush "behind the scenes" work has been exceptionally positive. His UN ambassador and staff have fought abortion tooth-and-nail, top to bottom in the UN.

You will also note that his Court nominees have been singularly unimpressed by the "reasoning" behind ROEvWade--which is why Teddy & Co have screwed most of them.

It's possible that Bush could do more--but then again, maybe it's not possible. Farah, like all of us, has no patience with DC politics.
33 posted on 11/01/2003 6:46:51 PM PST by ninenot (Democrats make mistakes. RINOs don't correct them.--Chesterton (adapted by Ninenot))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rdb3
I dunno about "dumb."

In front of me is an old saying: "Guile must wear clothes, but truth goes naked." (Scots proverb.)

Conservatives have only the naked truth. The libs have a well-dressed, ah, whore--which is attractive to many.

We can't "dress up" for the game.

OTOH, it is true that conservatives are not go-for-the-throat street-fighters. Perhaps they have too many principles to act in the same fashion as do the Libs.
34 posted on 11/01/2003 6:51:34 PM PST by ninenot (Democrats make mistakes. RINOs don't correct them.--Chesterton (adapted by Ninenot))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Hello!

Your mindless ramblings once again pollute this thread. Go back to DU from whence you came.

Cute how you throw sophistry around as though it were equivalent to real thought.
35 posted on 11/01/2003 6:54:40 PM PST by ninenot (Democrats make mistakes. RINOs don't correct them.--Chesterton (adapted by Ninenot))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Farah, Joseph

Why dont you do something if its so easy..

36 posted on 11/01/2003 6:56:21 PM PST by woofie (I want to die peacefully in my sleep like Grandpa ...not screaming, like the passengers in his car)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 11th Earl of Mar
Innocent lives hang in the balance here on this issue. Bush is politicizing and waffeling on an issue that cannot be ignored any longer. The socialist proponets were more than eager to ram this down the throats of gulliable Americans and now we must rightfully do the right thing with no lost time. Bush is wrong again on this one and Farrah is Right!
37 posted on 11/01/2003 7:10:26 PM PST by winker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
"I don't think the culture has changed to the extent that the American people or the Congress would totally ban abortions," he explained.

This is president Bush. Why would he say something like that, being the chief executive and commander? He must know that if the SC ruled the state laws unconstitutional by using the federal constitution, the any federal law banning abortion would have to be unconstitutional. If not, how not?

But he fights a good war, huh?

38 posted on 11/01/2003 7:26:07 PM PST by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ninenot
OTOH, it is true that conservatives are not go-for-the-throat street-fighters. Perhaps they have too many principles to act in the same fashion as do the Libs.

Now you're making my point. That's why the Right (I won't say "conservatives" because that term is losing meaning) needs people such as myself who don't mind getting down and dirty with the Left.

You mention principles. Okay, then. Fine. But principles have no legs nor arms of their own. They sound good and puff up the chest with pride. Then what?

Worshipping principle is like a near-death starving man admiring a dinner plate. No matter how pretty it is, it won't do him any good unless he takes the action of eating it, correct? Even if he has no eating utensils and will look like a slob while eating!

If your enemy is shooting at you with an AR-15, yet you insist on firing back with a BB gun due to vaguely defined "principle," then you deserve what happens to you for being stupid.

That was a rhetorical "you," so you know.


39 posted on 11/01/2003 7:30:30 PM PST by rdb3 (We're all gonna go, but I hate to go fast. Then again, it won't be fun to stick around and go last.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: rdb3
I understand the 'rhetorical you,' and you will not find me too lightly-armed for most gun battles (although my .50-cal purchases have been delayed for economic reasons...)

Be that as it may, conservatives (the Right) have one major difficulty, and it's really only one: they will not lie like hell (and I hope you don't either.)

The Left constructs "needs"/"Crises" based on lies--and proceeds to attempt solutions which empower the Gummint. The Right sees the "crises" as the ever-growing and stultifying hand of Gummint (in most cases,) and has failed to construct the language necessary to eradicate the problem. For practical purposes, there's only one reason: the "right" on which we rely for solutions are GUMMINT-dependent, too. They rather like being in a position where they are looked upon as Roman pro-consuls, having petitioners and rent-seekers at their doorstep and at their beck and call.

Thus, the problem may, in the end, NOT be soluble, and no amount of street-fighting skills can be applied which will solve it.
40 posted on 11/02/2003 6:33:15 AM PST by ninenot (Democrats make mistakes. RINOs don't correct them.--Chesterton (adapted by Ninenot))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson