Posted on 10/28/2007 3:07:40 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
The purpose of Free Republic is to fight for our freedom, for the constitution, for conservatism and for our traditional American heritage. We recognize that the domestic enemy of freedom is liberalism and big government socialism.
We recognize that our unalienable rights come from God not man or government and, no, they are NOT open to debate or subject to negotiation or compromise.
Sorry, RINOS, but the right to Life is our first unalienable right. This is not just a conservative political "principle" that stubborn right wing fringe nuts refuse to give up. It's an UNALIENABLE right granted to all men by GOD and no man or government can deprive us of same! Not without one hell of a fight!! Compromisers be damned!!
Then go into a lawyer's office and tell him what you believe and you want his representation in court. After he laughs you out of the office, get back to me.
Mike Huckabee
John Hawkins: Switching gears again, do you think we should overturn Roe v. Wade?
Mike Huckabee: "It would please me because I think Roe v. Wade is based on a real stretch of Constitutional application -- that somehow there is a greater privacy issue in the abortion concern -- than there is a human life issue -- and that the federal government should be making that decision as opposed to states making that decision.
"So, I've never felt that it was a legitimate manner in which to address this and, first of all, it should be left to the states, the 10th Amendment, but secondly, to somehow believe that the taking of an innocent, unborn human life is about privacy and not about that unborn life is ludicrous." (Interview with RightWingNews)
John McCain
“I don’t think a constitutional amendment is probably going to take place, but I do believe that it’s very likely or possible that the Supreme Court should — could overturn Roe v. Wade, which would then return these decisions to the states, which I support. . . . I’m a federalist. Just as I believe that the issue of gay marriage should be decided by the states, so do I believe that we would be better off by having Roe v. Wade return to the states." - (This Week with George Stephanopoulos, 11-19-06)
Mitt Romney
"My own view is that abortion is not right," said Romney, who said the procedure is only appropriate in cases of rape, incest or to protect a mother's life. "But states should be able to make their own decisions rather than have a single pronouncement by the federal government." (Sacramento Bee, 3-15-2007)
"I believe that each state should be able to make their own choice as to whether they are pro-life or pro-choice." (Hardball with Chris Matthews, 12-12-2005)
Ron Paul
“Once we allow federal control over abortion, we lose the opportunity for states to enact pro-life legislation. Numerous states already have laws that punish the act of murder against a fetus. Our focus should be on overturning Roe and getting the federal government completely out of the business of regulating state matters. All abortion foes must understand that the real battle should be fought at the state level, where grassroots respect for life can influence state legislatures. . . . Our goal must be to restore respect for the Constitution and states' rights.” (Paul press release, 4-30-2001)
Fred Thompson
Senator Thompson has said that the federal government should not be involved in the issue of abortion. He does not believe that early-term abortions should be criminalized. He feels instead that this is a battle that must be won in the hearts and minds of the American people. (from the University of Tennessee Special Collections Library)
Each and every one of these men is at odds with the Declaration of Independence, the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution, the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments, and the Reagan pro-life platform. They threaten to tear out the heart and soul of the Republican Party. They are unmoored from the founding American creed.
Again, that is what this election is about.
And again, that's why I support Alan Keyes. He has never wavered in his support of, and eloquent advocacy for, the primary reasons for our nation's very existence.
"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. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."
EVERY time the republicans comprimise and elect a pro-choicer (pro-abort), it damages the party.
So again I ask, why even bother with the Second Amendment if every state had the power to rescind the right to keep and bear arms and effectively make this right nonexistent except on federal property.
And what purpose did the Fifth Amendment serve in an era where nearly every crime would be prosecuted at the state and not the federal level?
The Tenth Amendment granted the states POWERS to make laws not prohibited, it DID NOT give the states the power to restrict RIGHTS.
Now, I understand that you aren't a fan of the Bill of Rights and that you really don't like the Fourteenth Amendment, but it is the Law of the Land.
Article VI says what it says.
And any commentary by Madison or anyone else later does not change what the Constitution says.
Great going, [as always]. Life is conservative job #1.
One who believes what Jim has stated in this thread.
It's a real short list.
Indeed. Commentary has no weight of law.
BTTT!!!!!!!!!!
Do SCOTUS rulings? Because until the 20th century SCOTUS ruled they didn’t. Never mind, I’ve got better things to do than argue over what I know is standard history and has always been.
Everything a human is or does is an ability enfused by “God”. But we willingly submit to rule by other men. Stupidly. Foolishly. Oddly.
AMEN and AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!
Is the District of Columbia the only place anyone has freedom of speech, freedom to exercise religion, the right to keep and bear arms and so on? I'm sure you can find better things to do than look like a fool.
Amen! Hallelujah! Right on.
Thanks for the touching poem. God bless you.
bb: Do SCOTUS rulings? Because until the 20th century SCOTUS ruled they didn’t.
What didn't? Commentary or SCOTUS rulings? Your answer isn't clear.
If you meant SCOTUS rulings then I am still confused by your answer. On one hand you argue that the BoRs doesn't apply to the states because no one said so until SCOTUS did in the 20th Century. On the other hand you tell me I'm wrong about the legal standing of Article VI because SCOTUS rulings disagree with me.
Give me some help here. What is your criteria when picking and choosing when SCOTUS rulings are valid and when they are not?
Fred Thompson:
"I've always thought that Roe v. Wade was a wrong decision, that they usurped what had been the law in this country for 200 years, that it was a matter that should go back to the states. When you get back to the states, I think the states should have some leeway. I might vote against one approach, but I think the states ought to have it. Essentially, federalism. It's in the Constitution." - Source: Fox News "Hannity & Colmes" interview Jun 6, 2007
Here's what's actually "in the Constitution":
Preamble
"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."
The Fifth Amendment
"No person shall be...deprived of life...without due process of law..."
The Fourteenth Amendment
"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."
I don’t have anything to add and certainly nothing profound to say but do agree wholeheartedly.
“Sorry, RINOS, but the right to Life is our first unalienable right.”
Without which, all other rights are meaningless.
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.