Posted on 11/22/2004 4:34:23 PM PST by cpforlife.org
You have to admire the absolute stupidity of the pro-abortion Leftist scum on this point. After all, if a fetus isn't alive, there's not much reason to abort it.
To put it into perspective:
Would you rather see the Declaration cited in federal court opinions, or OLD European law referenced as SCOTUS has recently done?
Go back to the feminist movement. One of their purported aims was court-help in child-support. Instead of holding MEN to higher standards sexually (like forcing part of the responsibility for the production of a child on the male--DNA makes false claims of fatherhood impossible), feminists delightedly sank to the accountability-free sex men "enjoyed." This jump to equality could not have been accomplished without the otherwise unthinkable legalization of abortion--at any time (because, after all, neither love nor child-support payment lasts forever.
Should be required viewing for everyone choosing abortion.
Ping for life!
No question when you phrase it that way. My only point is the Declaration wasn't legislation, wasn't a constitution, or anything other than it purported to be.
In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court has not declared when a human being is a human being.
Instead, the Supreme Court decided, for all practical purposes, to grant pregnant American women the ancient Roman right of Patria Potestas over their own unborn children.
A Roman father had the legal right under Patria Potesta to put his own child, of whatever age, to death. If someone other than the father did so, the killer was guilty of murder.
In Roman times, a father exercising his power of life and death over his own children under Patria Potestas acknowledged and understood perfectly well that he was taking a human life as was his right under Roman law. The modern American woman, on the other hand, would prefer to pretend otherwise. It makes her Inner Child feel better about it.
I think the Dred Scott case is prophetically relevant after the Scott Peterson trial conviction.
The good doctor is too hung up on the term "human being" - it's lawful to kill a fully grown human being under certain circumstances - a fact which anyone who carries a defensive firearm is well aware.
The question of whether a fetus is a "human being" is only tangentially related to the legal issues regarding how and when it is killed.
"Hey! I just heard something amazing! Did you hear about the Scott Dred decision of 1857? It's so clear and relevant as we recall the words of the Declaration of Independence."
Thank you for that link. I praise God I didn't abort my firstborn when I became unexpectedly pregnant nearly 21 years ago. This child has broken our hearts many times over during the last few years, but he is our son and we love him dearly. I can't imagine life without him. His existence brought my husband and I together as a family, and we now have three beautiful children. God indeed works in mysterious ways.
The Supreme Court rarely reverses itself. You can find a handful of cases in our history out of hundreds of cases.
Dred Scott was one of them. I'm less optimistic that Roe will be another, no matter how many conservative judges we appoint to that bench. There's little doubt that Roe was decided on dubious grounds and by an activist court. But there's also little doubt that the court generally reflects public opinion in public policy matters and it's delusional to think that the Court will "take away a constitutional right to an abortion" easily.
The public is divided on the issue, albeit apparently against the practice by a slim majority. But given the Court's reluctance to overturn previous decisions and the public sentiment, I'm not holding my breath.
That website is extremely disturbing.I would not belong to any party that sanctions this slaughter. I could care less if it is repub or democrat. I would vote for a pro-life dem over a pro-choice repub any day of the week.
"Life begins at conception—NOT birth.
Birth is one day in the life of a person who is already nine months old."
[already nine months old.] Sometimes less than nine months and sometimes more than nine months.
...But I understand your point!
And I believe it to be true...Life begins at conception.
.
BTTT
Thank you Polybius,
Everyday I learn something new at FR!
Here you are just plain wrong. The Declaration of Independence is the document that establishes the United States of America as a country. The Federalist Papers are a series of articles written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay under the pen name Publius. The purpose was to gain support for the constitution. The Declaration of Independence is the foundation on which the Constitution stands.
I don't know how you can say that. The Constitution within the four corners of the document says that it's the supreme law of the land. To say I'm plain wrong means that you're passionate, but it's plain silly to pretend that the Declaration is part of the Constitution.
The good doctor is not hung up on the term "human being" Like me the doctor is hung up on how good men can not read simple English. The Declaration of Independence is vary simple and vary clear in the establishment of our inalienable rights. The Declaration forms the government and set forth it's limitations. The foremost being it can not violate the inalienable rights. It also provides a remedy if the government does, and that is the right for the populace to abolish the government and start anew.
The problem here is we have let those in power get away with silly acts like righting a 400 word document just to say no and to search for the meaning of the word "is". The enactment of so many and so complex and convoluted laws that the citizens of this country have no clear meaning of right and wrong.
The original intent was for us to have vary few yet strict laws and those laws were to be interpreted vary liberally.
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.