To: presidio9
We are talking about a institutionalized system of legalized murder. Your point doesn't make any sense.
Your post does not make any sense. The Constitution does not grant any power to the federal government to address any "institutionalized system of legalized murder." And what the Constitution does not specifically allow Congress to do, it is prohibited from doing.
235 posted on
09/12/2007 10:45:48 AM PDT by
Iwo Jima
("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
To: Iwo Jima
Your post does not make any sense. The Constitution does not grant any power to the federal government to address any "institutionalized system of legalized murder." And what the Constitution does not specifically allow Congress to do, it is prohibited from doing. I would say that we agree on that point, except that we have the legal precedent of Row already in place, and it has been used to circumvent numbers state legislatures already. Therefore, the federal government has no choice to stick its nose where it otherwise doesn't belong.
Which represents the greater evil to you: The current status quo, or the federal goverment stepping beyond its designated powers?
302 posted on
09/12/2007 11:40:00 AM PDT by
presidio9
(Islam is as Islam does.)
To: Iwo Jima; SJackson; wagglebee; Coleus; Antoninus; Tax-chick; ArrogantBustard; ninenot; sittnick; ...
S. Jackson's post #52 proposed a constitutional AMENDMENT to MAKE stopping abortion the fedgov's business. You may disagree with the policy resulting from such an amendment but it is rather difficult to imagine how an actual enacted and ratified constitutional amendment might be "unconstitutionsl."
Herod Blackmun is that you????
358 posted on
09/12/2007 1:40:33 PM PDT by
BlackElk
(Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson